Showing posts with label Doctrine. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Doctrine. Show all posts

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? 




  • 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:

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

Sunday, June 23, 2013

The Church Hurt ME! Should we say that?

2 comments Posted by Hannah at 9:19 PM

Should we be saying, “The Church Hurt Me”?  This was a title of a rebuke article over at the Gospel Coalition this last week. 


I thought to myself – WOW talk about bad taste to bring up such a thing after some pretty ugly opinions in the light of the ‘alleged’ victims of C.J. Mahaney’s network of churches.  Remember this was just a week PRIOR!


Are they seriously that out of touch?


Remember this tends to be a figure of speech.  Most of the time people are referring to a principal of hurt they experienced at a church.  The author went the literal route.  As in every Christian on earth, and every Christian Organization HURT me. 


I guess if it wasn’t published so quickly after the SGM Scandal I might not have such a bad taste in my mouth.  I would still think it was a bad approach being so literal, but it wouldn’t seem so ugly if the circumstances were NOT as they are!


Timing is key at times, and under the circumstances the author seems to be speaking of some petty things in comparison to the ‘alleged’ lawbreakers at Sovereign Grace Ministries they supported just a week prior.  When you think the of heat they took after their statements?  It looks really bad.


Here are some items the article brought up for discussion.

  • Failure to hear the person's feedback on controversial issue.
    Refusal of certain type of service.
    Church member offending you in some way

Now, under normal circumstances I can see addressing these items.  Yes, some people do get very hurt or dismayed at church.  Heck I suppose even as ‘literally’ as the author wrote to be as well. 

Although since we aren’t under normal circumstances?  Taking a phrase that people use – when you are under criticism of enabling ‘alleged’ lawbreakers? 

Timing of this type of rebuke is just distasteful.


The Universal Church

The person could mean the big-C Church has hurt them–all Christians everywhere. That sounds ridiculous, doesn’t it? But think about it. When a person says “The church has hurt me” and they’re refusing to visit or join any local congregation of believers they have practically projected their hurt onto the entire universal body of Christ! They have assigned their offense to every possible Christian and Christian congregation imaginable. Practically, their distrust has reached universal proportions. In every case this is false. We might provide some of our best care by helping our friends recognize the practical universalism in some of their reactions. Hopefully we can get them to dial it down to the next possible  level.


The person could also mean Sovereign Grace Ministries under C.J Mahaney’s authority, and the brotherhood of pastors that stood by him due to friendship.  OH YES, as they also threw the victims under the bus! 


Again most of the time people are talking about a ‘circumstance’, and to try to make your point by being ‘literal’?  Universalism maybe?


Some have every reason for the mistrust, and not everyone that gets ‘hurt by the church’ means EVERY universal aspect of Christianity.  Your application is ridiculous!


Maybe we need to, “Check to see if someone is referring to a principal of a circumstance – and not literal’. 


Sounds a little silly to ask people to ‘dial it down’, because honestly?  He used the same extremes he accuses others of. 


I realize the author most likely wasn’t addressing this group of individuals, but more along the types of circumstances he mentioned.  I get that.  Problem is when the wounds are fresh like they are?  You need to at least mention something to them.  You should understand that some of them have said the very same things, and for good reasons.


You don’t write an article to rebuke people over petty items compared to the here and now circumstances his own ministry is dealing with (Rebukes of their support).  Can we get real here for a moment?


Sadly, they are showing how completely insulated they are from the world their audience lives in.  Honestly?  All it would have taken is a short disclaimer.  I have no doubt he doesn’t even grasp how ugly this sounds.


Shall we look at his points?


1. Take your pain to the Lord who bore your pain and bore the sin of those who offended. In His arms are 10,000 charms.

2. Take your heart to the ones who actually offended you and seek reconciliation–and if necessary take godly, impartial help.


When I see this type of instruction it is rather patronizing to those that are mourning families involved with the Sovereign Grace Ministries scandal.  People that have ‘allegedly’ been harmed by forms of ‘spiritual abuse’, and manipulating scripture to fit an ideology.


If we glance at some of the family stories you will find a small child right out of ‘toddlerhood’ being asked to come to a meeting with their pedophile for ‘reconciliation’, and to show forgiveness.  The leadership of the church called this meeting – not the wounded family. When the leadership was called out on this type of thing?  They ignored the rebuke, and a lawsuit followed.  I hope you asked them to dial down their ‘universalism.


This family was ‘hurt by the church’.  Figure of speech – not literal!


What seems to be a pattern with some churches to never use ‘traumatic’ events like this, and it is what most think of when others speak of being hurt by the church.  After what happened recently?  Why wouldn’t they?


When you are writing an article like this on the coat tails of your followers being highly offended by using ‘friendship’ as a basis for ignoring this type of pain?  It would be common sense to view the article being presented in bad taste – and even offensive.  Did you acknowledge those comments under your article?


You see the brotherhood of pastors refused to acknowledge those they ‘offended’, and cut off the paths to reconciliation.  Remember the removing of their statement off Facebook when they didn’t like the comments?  Placing it on another website, and closing the comments completely?  Its sad that they don’t see how tacky that is – at the very least!


3. Stop saying, “The church hurt me.” It’s affecting your heart toward an entire congregation, many of whom are likely unaware and uninvolved in your hurt, and possibly affecting your heart toward all Christians everywhere. Don’t blame “the church.” Don’t spread your “hurt” over a wider area. If you do, it will dominate you. But if you target your pain and your reconciliation efforts–making it as small and specific as you can–you’ll experience greater control over and freedom from the hurt.


Stop taking a general term that most can realize the meaning of, and hinting that your definition only is appropriate one under the circumstances.


Most people can ‘discern’ what people are driving at by talking to them when they use this term.  In most circumstances a validation with a pure heart and intent could move mountains, and will crush the domination you see.


If you can’t reach people where they are?  Those very TRUE statements you do mention will be completely loss in the translation by most.  You should know that by now.  Please.  THINK!


4. Do realize that not every church hurt you and people are not “all the same.” Find a local church you can join. Start slow if you need to. But let the Lord’s manifold grace come to you in the fellowship of His people. That’s normally how He comforts us in our trouble and pain (2 cor. 1).


Do you realize when people say this term that their definition does not always align your all compassing one. You see most adults realize that people are not ‘all the same’, and if I were guessing figured that out in childhood.  Please tell us that wasn’t lost on you!


OH!  Can you clue the preacher boys in that people that don’t agree with their interruptions of scripture aren’t all evil feminists, or emasculated males?   You see they do give the strong impression that those that don’t agree are ‘all the same’ in that manner.  Matter of fact they make some very strong statements to that effect. 


5. Live in hope. Your Lord is also Lord of the Church. He cares for your brokenness but also the brokenness of the Church. And guess what? Your pain is the means He will use to teach the church to grow in love and their love will be the means of your healing. The church needs your hurt and you need the church’s love.


That would start if people would speak out against the authoritarian nature of some churches or Christian Organizations, and acknowledge humans tend to use their positions within the hierarchy to ignore the hurt.  Yes, its just that important!


The ‘church’ is good at giving you examples all the time on ways to show your love for them, but sadly are NOT very receptive to rebuke when their own ‘authority’ it gets out of hand.   Sadly, it’s a part of human nature that makes them extremely uncomfortable to admit.  Placing the words like:  Biblical or Godly in front of their statements, names, etc. doesn’t always make it so.  People are noticing!


Just so I’m clear – most realize that churches aren’t ‘all the same’ in that realm.  Too many are, and it would help if people like yourself dropped the spiritual spin on things and spoke out against them.  Just think of the healing that could take place, and the reconciliation that could start upon that acknowledgement!


Lead by Example!


Tell the preacher boys that claim the lawsuit, and charges against CJ Mahaney were NOT about ‘founding a ministry’.  How they are intelligent enough to know that, and instead of just deleting that sentence in their statement?  It would look a bit more transparent if they acknowledged the statement was foolish, defensive, and an outright untruth!


Remind them that YES friendship can be strong at times, and they can still be friends in private.  BUT when it comes to professionalism within a ministry under such terrible circumstances?  Its not a ‘biblical’ basis of innocence, and their opinions of his character don’t change that.


As hard as it is for them they MUST acknowledge that a statue of limitations doesn’t mean there is no grounds for suspicion or lack of guilt.  They wrote this statement from their own emotional state at this time, and their attempt at diversion out of loyalty was sin.


Your article asked:  ‘Should we be saying, The Church Hurt ME?’  Yes, unless you have an audience that tends to take things too literally. 


There are times to take the literal approach, but sadly in this circumstance?  No.  HECK even if your audience DID say it under the circumstances that you listed?  You tend to look as silly as they do.

Friday, June 07, 2013

Together For Mahaney at Southern Baptist Convention!

2 comments Posted by Hannah at 5:54 PM

Together for The Gospel
Well it seems the Brotherhood of Mega Pastor’s feel its okey dokey to dig their hole just a little bit deeper!  I honestly don’t understand WHERE their logic is!  If you remember Together for the Gospel, and the Gospel Coalition wrote letters of support to a partner in their old boys club, CJ Mahaney.

Sadly, their bad behavior is continuing.  What they seem to be doing is trying to scare others into NOT coming forward for help.  They seem to have forgotten their ‘biblical role’, because it should be the opposite.  They know this as well. 

Keep in mind the lawsuit is still going on, and everything is still ‘alleged’ at this point.

Changes to letters of Support of CJ Mahaney

Together for the Gospel wrote their letter of support on Facebook, and it was taken down after over 100 negative responses were received.  They moved the letter to their website where it can safety stay with NO comments from anyone.

In line with how they tend to control their environments it didn’t surprise me to find that they also decided to change their letter around a bit.  Wartsburg Watch and Spiritual Sounding Board is who I noticed sounding the charge! 

When first posted on May 23, 2013, the statement included this paragraph:
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 …”
Checked on the morning of June 6, it was discovered that two sentences — “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” — had been removed from the statement. This is how the new version reads: “A Christian leader, charged with any credible, serious, and direct wrongdoing, would usually be well advised to step down from public ministry. We believe this lawsuit failed that test.
However, the date on the statement remained May 23. No reference to an update was included on the changed statement.

Shh!  I don’t think we were suppose to notice!  You have to admit the second is a better cleaned up version.  I mean their martyrhood was showing a bit to much on the original.  I guess they figured ‘charged with founding a ministry’, and teaching its doctrines and principals was a bit over the top – even for those that respected them.

What they never did mention was the fact that CJ Mahaney was the lead pastor at the churches (or one of them) while the covering up of the abuse was happening.  How he was allegedly part of the encouragement of the church members NOT to involve the authorities when this was happening.  THAT was why he was mentioned in the lawsuit, and that’s a far cry from ‘founding a ministry’.  Habitual cover up of abuse is what he is accused of after all!

Boz Tchividjian serves as Executive Director of GRACE (Godly Response to Abuse in the Christian Environment), which he helped found.  The purpose of GRACE is "to educate and equip the faith community to correctly respond to sexual abuse disclosures, while also providing practical guidance to churches on how to protect children."  In addition to this position, he serves as a law professor at Liberty University School of Law.  Boz Tchividjian is the third eldest grandchild of Billy Graham.

He was interviewed by Janet Mefferd:
In case you missed the interview, you can listen to it here (starting at the 20:30 mark).  Janet Mefferd explained that there have been cries from a lot of ordinary Christians who are calling on evangelical leaders to address what she describes as "American evangelicalism's biggest sex scandal to date".

Documents and Audio Surface

Sadly, since all of this started Wartsburg Watch also got to listen to an audio for Sovereign Grace Ministries discussing how they as the church need to handle these cases of abuse as they come up.  The church’s policy is also on a 17 page document.  Sigh!

It was sadly much the same type of garbage that has got so many other organizations in trouble.

The church leaders feel they need to decide if its abuse FIRST OFF.  They will approach the other party – the perp I guess to get their side of the story.  They call their lawyer to see how to protect the church.  They get all their ducks in a row, and then if they feel the case has merit?  They tell the family to go to the police, because after all the authorities don’t like getting information ‘second hand’.  They will not notify anyone else in the church, because I guess they feel its none of their business.  Encourage the family to hush as well.  Then the perp and the victim get handed two different pastors to ‘counsel’ with. 

There is more to it of course, and that is my nutshell version!

Problem is they are mandatory reporters, and the reputation of the church SHOULD be the last thing on their mind!  The lawsuit happened, because they decided ‘it wasn’t abuse’ and buried it allegedly.  Sadly, of course cries for help were ignored.

SBC getting Ready for Convention, and they REALLY would rather deal with the Boy Scouts!

Another interesting part to this story is that the Southern Baptist Convention is coming up again.  The mega pastors didn’t get the ‘support’ they were looking for, and no doubt they want to put this to bed.  It’s not going to happen, because people are crying out! 

They want to discuss the Boy Scouts agreement to allow homosexual scouts into their troops, and NOT sexual abuse within the church!  Notice how they don’t want to take that darn SPECK from their eye, but rather deal with the LOG in the Boy Scouts?  How biblical right?!

 David Clohessy, national director of SNAP -- the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests – said May 28 that religious leaders voicing support for embattled Pastor C.J. Mahaney, named in a lawsuit recently thrown out of a Maryland court for legal reasons, ought to be ashamed. (Keep in mind it was the Status of Limitations that had run out, but amended lawsuit has been filed)

Peter Lumpkins  has a Resolution on Sexual Abuse of Children - Proposed to the 2013 Southern Baptist Convention meeting in Houston, Texas.  I don’t honestly know if they will even acknowledge him under the circumstances.

Meanwhile, Amy and her husband are Houston leaders for (Snap) Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests (and other clergy).   They belong to the Houston First Baptist Church.   She was planning on attending the Southern Baptist Convention, and holding up a picture of a sexual abuse survivor to being awareness of victims within the Baptist’s churches.    They already has sent a letter to the convention asking for time on this issue (letter is attached on her site).  They get a phone call from their pastor, and have a meeting with the pastor of their large church that they never spoke to prior.  Part of her transcript is below, and she also get a call from the police department concerned about her 'protest':
I saw your blog.
I'm confused. You don't see it as a problem? [speaking out about child sexual abuse by Baptist clergy, about Baptist churches that cover up such abuse, about silence from SBC leaders about this abuse, about the vocal support of another evangelical pastor C.J. Mahaney accused in a lawsuit by 11 plaintiffs of covering up child sex abuse, and planning an awareness event next week at the Southern Baptist Convention annual meeting in Houston]
What good is it going to do, you standing outside the SBC?
What good will it do if the SBC president did issue a statement on abuse?
We're not like the Methodists. [each Baptist church is locally autonomous]
How can you say that? [that child sexual abuse within Baptist churches is a systemic problem]
You may be seen as fringe.
A comment from the article:

At the meeting with my husband the next day, Doug brought up the subject of me stepping down (from her role within the youth ministry), and he told my husband that I had told him I was stepping down but that he had said to think about it. Doug told my husband that after thinking about it overnight, he thought me stepping down "is for the best."
My husband asked him, "Why?" Doug replied, "You don't see it as a problem?"
My husband said "No."

Sadly, it seems her pastor feels towing the line with "Together for Maheney".   Another quote:

They agree with us that child sexual abuse is bad, and they don't want me to stop what I'm doing, but the church doesn't support me raising awareness by pointing out the problem within SBC churches and pastors that cover abuse up by failing to report,” she wrote. “It's not a problem for me to point out these issues with Catholic churches or Penn State, just don't point the finger at my own Southern Baptist Convention.”

Here we go again with this ‘autonomous’ church stuff.  If you remember the Tina Anderson and Chuck Phelps story?  Their Independent Fundamental Baptist churches also use the ‘autonomous’ aspect to NOT deal directly with this sin as well. 

Did they NOT figure out that just isn’t going to HAPPEN? Why is it these preacher boys want everyone to face their sin, and decide where the sin sniffing needs to begin – yet can’t face it themselves?

No, Its not easy to have a friend of yours facing these awful charges.  Common sense needs to be used in these types of circumstances, and yet Chicago type Gangster stuff does instead!  Where is the benevolent leadership?

They are so WORRIED that the darn feminists were going to take them down, and RUIN life as we know it … and look who is doing it all by themselves?  Is this the ‘MANHOOD’ we have been hearing about?

Seriously.  SHAME ON YOU!


*Post as been edited to add more detail.

Friday, March 01, 2013

Biblical Roles could cause Division

3 comments Posted by Hannah at 12:41 PM

What can I do, if anything,about this?
I have my role, I don't want his too!!!!
If I keep submitting to my husband,is there a chance that he might come to see what his role is??
Please pray for us!!!!

I read the above about the ‘biblical roles’ all the time.  Instead of certain churches teaching to appreciate the individual’s gifts?  You see the division starting because these gifts don’t mold into their version of ‘God Given’ biblical roles.

Don’t get me wrong I see it the other way around as well.  The men stating that the women aren’t doing what they were taught women should be doing as well.

I have to wonder if people don’t seem to understand that its causing division more than the unity that the Lord had in mind for all of us.  You read all the time about the wife or husband complaining about how they aren’t doing their role, and how they are forced to do both.  WHEN will they step up??

In turns into people feeling resentment towards their spouse, and they start to ignore the true gifts their spouse brings to the table for their relationship.  I don’t believe that is what God wanted.  You see he made that person, and they are wonderfully made!  Although according to doctrine in certain circles of faith it makes you question things that may not even be there.

If their gifts aren’t in the uniform style of what the preacher is teaching you?  It causes all kinds of issues within the relationship.  The woman I quoted above sadly doesn’t recognize the awesome aspects of her relationship, because her husband doesn’t ‘lead’ the way she was taught.  She doesn’t even see the ways he does lead, because she has a checklist that she was given.  You see the check list doesn’t line up how she is taught he SHOULD be.  Teachings should show her to appreciate what he is instead, or he may not be.  What could be an awesome relationship is being torn apart.  Why would this be good?

Let me give you an example of what I feel is God given gifts:

My daughter loves drawing.  She is darn good at it too.  One area she loves to draw is Anime.  I personally don’t understand the draw for the Japanese programs for Anime, and they really do nothing for me.  The art style in the drawing of the characters can be very complex.  I will admit it is very beautiful.  So I may not enjoy the programs with Anime characters, but I can appreciate the style of the art.

It’s quite amazing to watch her with her pencil and paper as she breezes along, and creates normally her friends in the Anime style.  Its funny to watch each of them step up, and tell her they want to be NEXT!  She gives these drawings away as gifts, and they are truly treasured.  She makes them feel great about themselves, and are proud of this drawing.  Not in a conceit type of way, but a normal healthy self image way.

Her drawing started as a young child, and her style of course was different.  It was awesome to see her get better as the years went on.  She was always good, but as she cultivated her gift her craft grew more complex.

She will always have this gift, and even if you took away the pencil and paper the gift would still be there.  The way she sees the world, and how she would create it in her own style will always be present.  It just IS... with her.

This is a gift that God blessed her with, and its something that no one can take from her.  Everyone has their own gifts that the Lord has blessed them with, and they don’t always align with the boxes I read about, or hear preached about.

When people have God given gifts?  To me it just is, and you can’t take it from someone.  It will always be present.  Telling her she must not use it, or must rid her self of it is just not possible for us humans – we all have our own gifts. God blessed us with them, and they will always be there.

I truly believe these ‘biblical roles’ according to gender at times does cause division due to my view of personal gifts.  You either have the gift or you don’t.  If you have the gift of course it can be cultivated, and improved.  It will always be there, and nothing can take it from you.  Its the way God made you.  Sadly, we don’t always learn to appreciate them, because of biblical roles we are taught we are use those instead.

The way you use that gift shows how you can honor or dishonor your relationship with Christ.  My Daughter for example, could ‘teach’ drawing to others if she wanted too.  She doesn’t usurp anyone by showing them certain skills she learned along the way.  People in general could learn from her, and its true even if they never learn to draw with excellence like she does.  She could also do things with her gift that would dishonor her relationship with the Lord by using this gift to demonize things.

When people claim that others should NOT use gifts because it dishonors the other gender?  They never stop to think about the fact these gifts are used to honor God, and he gave them to this person for his purpose.  The ‘dishonor’ crowd may not get anything from the gift, because their nose is too out joint to handle it.  Those with an open mind can appreciate it, because they realize the Lord gave it to them to use for HIM!

People will never always fit into the checklists of the gender roles, because God may never have intended us to live that way.  He may have created them totally opposite in fact.  He has a purpose for this, and it amazes me that people would question him in this manner.

Our world has enough issues as it is without us dreaming up issues that we seem to want to see there due to some silly checklist.  We won’t always see what God has intended us too, and we may miss out on wonderful things.

If we see a women  that is good at business?  We may think feminist, and how she elevates this skill above family.  When we see a man that children LOVE to play with?  We may think emasculated, and a product of this feminized world.  She shows a strength that only men are to have, and he shows nurturing that should be a trait for women. 

In the end you learn to resent these people instead of appreciating the gifts that the Lord has given them.  We dishonor God when we refuse to fellowship with them, because they don’t fit into some box our teaching has in mind.   We see a grab for power, leadership, etc. with her, and a man that folded in his masculinity for him. 

Most are able to discern if those characteristics are indeed present (power grab, emasculating), but we don’t use those discernment skills anymore.  We use our checklist instead.

This is why I see biblical roles to the point of legalism causing disunity within marriages and the church.  This should not be.

Monday, February 11, 2013

The Gospel Coalition, and Biblically Correct Crowd

2 comments Posted by Hannah at 1:22 PM

polically correct Ben Carson
I saw an incredibly inspiring video this week.  The speaker’s name as Dr. Benjamin Carson.

It spoke on the current culture of today, and goodness yes it could even be applied within the faith culture as well.

Yes, he brings up his opinions on the political atmosphere, but I agreed with him on the Political Correctness.  We see people police EVERYTHING to death, and attach motive when it doesn’t need to be there.

The silliest example I can come up with recently was when Brent Musburger commented that the quarterback’s girlfriend Katherine Webb was a beautiful woman.  Everyone was having a hissie fit over this comment, and honestly there wasn’t anything wrong with it.  It was a compliment, and there was no ‘dirty old man’ motive behind it.  He was being complementary.  Then ESPN was pressured to have him apologize for the compliment.  It’s stupid.  Now we can’t compliment people nicely anymore?  She is beautiful…and??  Katherine herself commented that no apology was needed, because it wasn’t a ‘sexist’ thing to say.

Today in the faith community we see similar types of attacks – just as you seen the secular realm.  If you are comp, egal, liberal thinking, conservative thinking, etc.    Watch the debates, and you will see the similar tactics you see in the news media and secular politics today.  I guess we have our own brand of ‘biblically correct’ now.  How nice.  Sigh.

They take one thought or sentence and get all bent out of shape over it, and completely dismiss the overall message.  OR lets say you wish to speak about a debit in a line of thinking.  Do they stop to think about the debit?  No, they tell their readers what they REALLY meant.  Yes, most of the time it has NOTHING to do with what the principal of discussion or point they were trying to make.  How Christian of us.

We can’t debate anymore, because we are too busy demonizing.  If you are on THIS side then you automatically believe X, Y and Z.    We as a culture have completely lost the respect factor for fellow human beings.  It’s more popular to tear them down so we can hate them instead.  It breaks my heart.  Now we see to much of it within the church….of all places.  Shame on US!

Dr. Carson states:
Now, it’s not my intention to offend anyone. I have discovered, however, in recent years that it’s very difficult to speak to a large group of people these days and not offend someone. [laughter]
And people walk away with their feelings on their shoulders waiting for you to say something, ah, did you hear that? The pc police are out in force at all times. I remember once I was talking about the difference between a human brain and a dog’s grain, and a man — and a dog’s brain, and a man got offended. You can’t talk about dogs like that. [laughter] People focus in on that, completely miss the point of what you’re saying. [laughter] And we’ve reached reach the point where people are afraid to actually talk about what they want to say because somebody might be offended. People are afraid to say Merry Christmas at Christmas time. Doesn’t matter whether the person you’re talking to is Jewish or, you know, whether they’re any religion. That’s a salutation, a greeting of goodwill. We’ve got to get over this sensitivity. You know, and it keeps people from saying what they really believe.
And you have to wonder if that maybe the point of all this ugliness. Keeping people from saying what they really believe. We can’t point out nonsense anymore, because you get attacked with motive attached automatically.  It’s the popular thing to do! 

Sadly, this game is damaging to the fabric of our world.  Our Politian's do it, the media does it, and sadly the church also has used this craft as well.  The church sadly just spiritualizes it to justify themselves.

Dr. Carson starts out with some scripture verses:

Proverbs 11:9 With his mouth the Godless destroys his neighbor, but through knowledge the righteous escapes.
Proverbs 11:12 A man who lacks judgement derides his neighbor, but a man of understanding holds his tongue
Proverbs 11:25 A generous man will prosper. He who refreshes others will himself, be refreshed.
2nd Chronicles 7:14 If my people who are called by my name will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sins and heal their land.

I had this video sitting on my computer for some days, and I didn’t know what I was going to do with it.  Then Mara From Bitter Waters to Sweet dropped a perfect example of what Dr. Carson was speaking about in the quote I mentioned above RIGHT in my lap!  The principal of the ‘biblically correct’ crowd that refuses to listen to what others have to say, but instead tells you they said something that wasn’t there at all.

Elizabeth Esther, among other bloggers started to speak about the ‘purity’ movement, and how some of its views can do more harm than good. 

On the surface the purity movement does have some decent ideals on the surface.  Here is a quote from their website:
The Father Daughter Purity Ball is a memorable ceremony for fathers to sign commitments to be responsible men of integrity in all areas of purity. The commitment also includes their vow to protect their daughters in their choices for purity. The daughters silently commit to live pure lives before God through the symbol of laying down a white rose at the cross. Because we cherish our daughters as regal princesses—for 1 Peter 3:4 says they are “precious in the sight of God”—we want to treat them as royalty.
One of the most memorable highlights of the ball is when the fathers stand in the middle of the ballroom and form a circle around their daughters standing all aglow in their lovely ball gowns. The fathers place their hands on their daughters, and together we pray for purity of mind, body, and soul for generations to come.
Now one item they do talk about is the role of father within their daughter's life.  They wish for them to feel treasured, because they feel if they do not they may stray to someone else’s arms and be hurt in the end.  There isn’t anything on the surface that is wrong with that premise!  A man of integrity is a treasure to anyone he encounters is my belief! 

What about the problematic parts that tend to hurt the fathers and the daughters?  It seems according to the Gospel Coalition you aren’t suppose to talk about that.  If you do you are questioning God’s plan for marriage, and you want a commitment free LOVE zone.  Problem is if you don’t talk about it YOU don’t SOLVE anything!

For example, when the girl fails when it comes to her virginity.  If we look at part of their mission statement above?  Her father doesn’t value her, or will no longer value her.  When you tend to overcompensate on one aspect, and you FAIL at that aspect….you start to question your worth.  The young girls at times are given the impression that their worth as a human has been lessoned in God’s eyes due to their sin.    If you listen to the documentary on this movement?  They are told this one failure will cause insurmountable damage to their husband and marriage.

Mr. Wilson – a founder of the movement – acknowledged ‘that 88 percent of girls who take a purity pledge would fail to keep the pledge until marriage, but placed the blame squarely on the shoulders of fathers who neglect to guide their daughters in decisions about relationships.’   So now you have girls that feel like damaged good, not valued by Daddy, and Daddy is to take on the entire responsibility because HE failed as well.  He not doubt will on some level, because the young man has to get his permission to court his daughter to begin with.

Isn’t there are more Christ like approach to this QUOTE failure – if and when it happens?  It’s okay to deal with what happened, and find a healthy way of moving on.  Christ will forgive us, and we shouldn’t  act like our world have just STOPPED and will be plagued from then on.  We can admit our guilt to God, but he doesn’t wish us to hold on to it as a badge of disgrace.  Consequences may follow of course, but we always need to remember his love, forgiveness and grace.  We can balance these things.  We can!

In the documentary, “The Virgin Daughters” a young lady named Jessica is very different. When she became 19 years old a young man asked her parents for permission to court her.  She intended to remain a virgin until marriage, and a result of not having any sex-education, she became pregnant .  Her story starts about the 18 minute mark in the documentary that I linked too.  The circumstance that she fell into – the guilt, shame, etc. was one aspect bloggers were wanted to start the discussion about.  You also need to talk about the guilt trip they are laying their Father’s as well!  Talking about this DOESN’T mean they endorse ‘sleeping around’ for goodness sakes.  Yet, for some reason the Gospel Coalition seems to say it does MEAN this.  So they had to ‘apply motive’.

So what does this all have to do with the Gospel Coalition? Well, check this title out for a discussion starter: Commitment-Free Critics and the 'Christian Virginity CultNice right?  They are loading their guns!

How I do know this?  Well they introduced Elizabeth by a description of: Former fundamentalist and current feminist
So we know right away they need to find something wrong with what she has said, and those that tend to agree with her opinion (Remember keyword FEMINIST here).  Although at the beginning they wanted to make you think they ‘somewhat’ agree with a feminist:
They all have a point. Too often in an over-sexualized culture, Christians engage in what Elizabeth Esther calls "reverse objectification." Purity policing leads to a strange objectivism—a surrender to the sexual message of the age. Christians risk ceding the argument that a woman is a purely sexual object when it comes to her visible physical nature. So in response, her body must be hidden or else made ugly to keep the spirit clean and pure. In the end, much unjust suffering comes down upon girls and the rest of society because of various abuses.
Then you realize they are coming from the Definition of feminist that Mary Kassian proclaims as truth!  How?  Look at their title of the first section of debate:  
‘Individualism Gone Wild’  Remember Mary Kassian’s website is called, Girls Gone Wise.  Her definitions of feminism is like a broken record that just keeps playing over and over and over again!  You take any aspect of life, and the feminist have GONE WILD with it, and of course they (Mary Kassian, or Gospel Coalition) have GONE ‘wise’ instead.  We have all heard the stereotypes about how feminism gets to define everyone, and whatever her definition of words/concepts are just IS!  Everything is individualist, and of course against what God had in mind.
Mary Kassian is the one that tends to remind us that feminist live the ‘sex in the city’ type of lifestyle, and if Elizabeth Esther and the others actually went down that road? They may have a point, but they didn’t! Just like in politics today, or the slanted media they decided to inform their readers what they were ‘really’ saying instead of what they actually DID say.   Just as a reminder – lets look again at one of Mary Kassian’s descriptions of the feminist:
We changed the rules of male-female relationships. We became loud, demanding, and aggressive. We boldly pushed back against traditional definitions of gender and sexuality. We claimed our freedoms. We traded in the “Leave it to Beaver” model of womanhood for the “Sex in the City” one. We bought into the feminist promise that woman would find happiness and fulfillment when she defined her own identity and decided for herself what life as a woman was all about. – Mary Kassian
Lets start with Gospel Coalition’s critique, and possible comprehension issues.
At the same time, all is not well with these virginity critiques. The underlying complaint seems to demand that we accept different decisions without critique or even regret. But sin—especially sexual sin—affects the entire community. Likewise, fornication (as with any other sin) interrupts communion between God and man and thus must be reconciled through Christ.
The sin of fornication is not minimized by "mutual consent." Contrary to popular belief, the Old Testament is not chauvinistically patriarchal, and the Scriptures are clear on sexual mores. The most honest skeptics intimate sexual standards based in an old book should be thrown out altogether. Couples "really committed" to each other, we hear, should be able to do as they please outside the bounds of traditional matrimony.
What a strange understanding of commitment! This new standard eliminates the risk of love. The traditional understanding of the marriage covenant requires trust, especially in the sexual realm. A couple is taking a plunge into the world of family life because they love each other. Couples who abstain until marriage tell one another, "I love you so much that I will surrender my body to you. I have denied the pleasures of a moment for a life tied to only yours in this dangerous world, from this point on."
Frankly, the definition of anyone they feel is a feminist seems to jade their comprehension of what was being said.  It’s almost as if they didn’t read the material AT ALL!  Shall we look at some of what was said by Elizabeth Esther?
Like other Christians, I talked about the “sacrifice” of abstinence. There were princess-themed books about saving our first kiss. Some of us wore purity rings and made pledges to our Daddies not to have sex until we’re married.
Ultimately, we implied that a woman’s inherent worth and dignity could be measured by whether or not a man has touched her.
I understand why we do this. Christians are alarmed by what we see as a sexually permissive society. America no longer seems to share our values. This scares us. The less sacred sex seems to the broader culture, the more sacred we insist on making it among fellow Christians.
The intention might be good but over-emphasizing the specialness of virginity has unintended, harmful consequences.
We start by making ridiculous promises to our daughters. We tell them that “sexual purity” is a guarantor of a more intimate married sex life. We tell them that if they “lose” their purity, they will never really get it back. Oh, yes. They can be forgiven. But. You know. They’re damaged goods.
Christians say that the world objectifies women through immodest dress and a permissive sexual ethic. However, by idolizing sexual purity and preoccupying ourselves with female modesty and an emphasis on hyper-purity, Christians actually engage in reverse objectivization.
Notice that Elizabeth Esther mentions that America no longer seems to share our values – and she is speaking about abstinence.  She acknowledges the ‘sexually permissive society’.  So how they get the ‘do as they please outside the bounds of traditional matrimony’?  Seems to be a VERY popular tactic in the  ‘we must attach a motive even if it isn’t there’ train of thinking.  OR – as I said before a serious ‘comprehension’ issue!  Take your choice!

They seem to accusing people that want to have this discussion that ‘losing your virginity’ is no big deal.  That’s NOT what they are saying.  They want to discuss how we handle it if people do.  BIG DIFFERENCE! 

Then the others I have read about state they bring this up so people don’t ‘feel bad’ about losing their virginity.  Yet, that was never addressed either.  Talking about what to do with those feelings, doesn’t mean not having them.  Hello!

The point was the term they acknowledged as: reverse objectification.  Sadly, it seems the Gospel Coalition has to much “Sex in the City” type of viewpoint towards her and others.  They have bent it so badly out of shape they honestly can’t seem to grasp what was being said.

People focus in on that, completely miss the point of what you’re saying.  - Dr. Benjamin Carson
For Heaven’s sake TAKE OFF the ‘Sex in the City’ glasses, and READ what was said!  There was no ‘commitment free’ comment there, and if there was?  No doubt you would have quoted it!  You didn’t though!  Why?  It wasn’t the point of the articles you linked too!

It’s bad enough that our Politian's and our media have to twist facts, quotes, and leave out the context of what is being said!   For an organization called, “The Gospel Coalition” to do the same?  Seriously?!  What happened to honesty, integrity?   Is this your example of ‘Godly Leadership’?  These beliefs are hurting the fathers, mothers, and children. 

If you watch the documentary they glorify relations to the point most virgin daughters are going to be surprised on the first night.   They don’t talk about the pain.  They don’t go down roads that need to discussed in other areas either within the marriage bed that happen.

They build up these poor fathers to be something quite honestly only CHRIST can be for them!  Father’s are important, but we need to find our value in Christ…no? 

If you listen to what they were saying?  They don’t get that part.  No doubt Christ is part of their life, but we seem to be placing loads to heavy on the fathers and children.  We can teach, guide, love etc. our children.  We can’t always hide the pain from life from them.  We may be successful in certain areas of pain, but life as a way of showing you other ones.  They seem to teach the men in their lifes will FIX that, and he just can’t do that.  It’s not possible, and they are setting up a train wreck.  Did you not notice that? 

My prospective on this, and the ones that are speaking out against this movement… and then we have the Gospel Coalition that is so tied up in their ‘sex it the city’ vision they can’t even acknowledge the issues!  It’s almost as if they go searching for that ‘sex in the city’ attitude, because it has to be there…I mean she is FEMINIST…RIGHT?!  How biblically correct of them.

No one said you shouldn’t save yourself for marriage.  They asked for discussion on how to handle things if you didn’t.   How would Jesus have us handle it?  What would he ask us to do with the guilt?  The shame? 
For generations, this model of marriage has proven remarkably resilient. In this context, love can be truly maddening—people do crazy things like have children together, stick together through debilitating diseases, and mutually endure declining health. On the other hand, what reason do the "really committed" have not to jump from one sex partner to the next? One could conclude that such "commitment" is merely strong emotion—a passion of the moment—that has little to do with true resolve.
Thankfully, healing is possible for couples who do not abstain. The gospel of Jesus Christ can overcome any sin! Still, pastors who counsel couples tell me the process of restoring trust is long and painful. Virginity does not make someone "better," but young Christians deny themselves the fullness of romantic love by fornication. They will only make things worse by lying to themselves about it.
For the longing singles among us, we have heard it said that love is patient. So go out there, date, and maybe get married. Just do not make allowance for the lustful flesh.
Guess what?  If you read the articles you linked to?  They were not asking people to LIE to themselves about it, but learn to move past it.  Big Difference. 

They were not tearing down the aspect of abstinence, or telling people to go for a commitment free relationship.  Hello!  Take off the sex it in the city glasses, and read what was SAID!  You might learn that even feminist’s don’t live the life Mary Kassian has been telling you about.  Shocking that it is – it can happen!

It’s okay to talk about this.  We MUST talk about this.  What they are scared of?  Talking about it doesn’t endorse it.  No doubt it started to happen after Adam and Eve…don’t you think its time to start?   I have to wonder if that isn’t the point of the silly commentary.  They feel people might think they are endorsing something that they can’t in good conscience.  Do they doubt their power of communication, or fear that others may put words or motives in their mouths?

What?  They don’t want the biblically correct crowd doing the same to them?

This article just SCREAMED we need to use our stereotypes about feminist’s, and wrap it around what was said so we can have the proper BIBLICAL aspect.  Did anyone else see the connection?  I saw it right away, and bugs me.

We’ve got to get over this sensitivity. You know, and it keeps people from saying what they really believe.  - Dr. Benjamin Carson

Other Articles of Interest

The Purity Conversation - My Two Cents
Sex, Marriage, and Evangelical Purity Culture

Tuesday, January 01, 2013

Christian Manhood Illustrated

4 comments Posted by Hannah at 12:57 PM

teach your son to respect women.  He's waiting, He's watching, He'll listen.  (picture of billboard)I came across an article called, The Truth about Men.  The author seems to feel that Christian Manhood can be Illustrated with this list of behaviors from women.
It’s articles like this that make me feel angry for the way some portray men.   It seems to follow the opinion that being a man of God depends on Women to make them so.  Everything women do, say, believe, act, etc. is responsible for how men become men.  For some reason men – they seem to hint – they are unable to handle the journey themselves with God’s help. God can’t transform them, but it is dependent on women to treat them just so.  This belief system is so childish.  GROW UP ALREADY!
A man NEEDS to be the man God has created him to be. Since the beginning of time, God has instructed man to tend, guard and care for all that was on the earth. It is only natural that he will have that very same desire to do the same for the woman he loves, so please let him. Scripture tells us that after God formed man, He fashioned woman and presented her to him as one of God's most precious gifts. Allow him to see you as the gift you were fashioned to be.
Being a man of God is dependent on the man, and their efforts toward being what God wishes them to be.  He can SEE the gift if he views women through the lenses God asks him to.  Its that simple!  The bible is very clear how we are to treat others EVEN if we don’t care for them.  Its not dependent on them at all.  We would never get anything done in God’s name if it were.  That’s just plain common sense!  This belief system is full of entitlement and narcissism.  Its not a biblical role!  It’s man made doctrine, and it will fail people because you don’t depend on God but others.

I’m not saying that as humans we can’t have others help us in life’s journey.  God placed people in our path for a reason – his reason.  We will all have people in our life's that are a source of encouragement among other things.  We will also have some that are a source of dread.  We can't use those people that bring hurt into our life's as an excuse NOT to be what God ‘fashioned’ us to be.  Our spiritual journey would halt before it even got started if we did!

THINK about that for a moment!  Do we need others to be a certain way to be proper Christian?  To be the way Jesus asks us to be?  That is what this author is saying.  Its not true for ANYONE!  For all the speeches on the ‘weaker vessel’, and the stereotypes they place out there about women?  Lets be honest and say if man were depend on woman?  IGNORING the fact that man teaches women are to be dependent on THEM (among stereotypes in the other direction)….we are all screwed!   The gender deal can’t do it for US!  Why is this so hard to wrap their heads around?

Notice how they left God out completely!  His word means nothing.  It becomes a tool for an agenda instead.

To me this type of thinking is considered tunnel vision.  I can only tend, guard and care for things IF they are as I need them to be. He is basically stating that others are responsible for his actions.  THEY MADE ME!  People in general tend to use this type of excuse all the time.  Its not just men.  Its been a popular way of thinking for ages – if not forever!  I can only treat people the way they need to be treated if they can be x, y and z.  In other words, our behavior is not dependent on what God asks of us but of our perceived treatment from others.  People in general will always be disappointed I have to admit.  Poor things.

Notice how Jesus treated those that were looked down upon in the society he was in at the time.  He saw them as God’s children WITHOUT the list of rules to ‘allow’ him to see them this way.  Jesus came because MAN is not capable of caring, guarding, and tending to this world the way it should be.  We need him.  The human race has a bad track record – YES even within the church – and the fault lays in sin. 

When Paul was jailed, and it was written that he converted his jailers.  Was it dependent on their treatment of him?  Did David become what God was leading him towards due to the treatment from Saul?  I would assume the jailers at one time, and YES Saul was beyond acting ugly.  If you apply this author’s way of thinking – it’s a wonder they got anything accomplished!

Can you imagine some poor man’s reaction to God once he reaches Heaven, and gives God the excuse that he didn’t treat women as you asked me too BECAUSE they didn’t let me FEEL my position as a MAN!  I need Christian Manhood Illustrated!  They didn’t HELP ME GOD!

I’m sorry but it reminds me of a whiner.  Doesn’t it?

This type of tunnel vision makes people weak and wimpy.  It makes us dependent on others to be the person God had in mind.  Humans will always fail us, so why concentrate on this dependency?  Let just say it…it’s a bigoted view, and helps no one.

Remember God makes ‘Godly’ men – not women!  The same principal applies the other way around.

God please help me see what you have in mind for me, and help me do as you wish me to do.  Help me pull off my own lenses of dependency on things that should not be.  In Jesus name…AMEN!

Monday, November 05, 2012

Women In Ministry: The Feminine Feel..and the World of Church

0 comments Posted by Hannah at 7:24 AM

I read an interesting article this morning about women in ministry.  To me it could also be women in leadership.  When you run a ministry – that is leadership.  It could be Sunday School teacher right over to Top Coffee Server!  Preacher to Janitor!  The leadership is in the serving of God and others.

A well rounded couple decided to take on their youth ministry together.  They trained together, studied together, and worked together.  He took the high school students, and she took the junior high.  Together it was THEIR ministry. 

In the world of ‘church’ its more like his ministry, and she helps…as a proper ‘help meet’ should.  Yes, she does the same job in a different age group.  She is a woman in ministry, and lets face facts here…in leadership as well.  I know.  I know.  How usurping of me huh?!

Why is that so hard to admit?  I’m sorry but it seems so childish to me.  Her husband is okay with it, but the ‘world of church’ doesn’t seem to be.

What stuck me was the paragraph:
I was also raised as a missionary kid, and had a front-row seat to the full-throttle partnership missionary couples brought to their ministry.
Yes, it was usually the man’s name on the paycheck. But the women worked too, often at great cost. Until recently, it was not uncommon for mission agencies to require children to be sent to boarding school, freeing the women up for full-time service. It was/is a crappy policy. But those women? They got the job done, paycheck, title, status, or not.
So I get a little prickly when people criticize, belittle, or get affectionately patronizing about the contributions of the "helpers": the hyper-involved homeschooling moms, the "controlling" church matrons, the ministry wives who seem to live at the church. I mean, I’d like to see a church try to run without those powerhouse women, women who have dedicated their whole lives to the service of God and others.
I’ll see your hot-shot pastor and raise you my grandma.
No kidding!
She made this comment after she told of a story of an encounter with one of the youth’s fathers.  He wanted to know basically what she does.  This was after she mentioned all that THEY have done.  Her husband appeared, and it seemed all was well with the world.  The father was able to speak with someone in ‘guard’ finally.
For some reason it seems women should be okay with a concept that is familiar in the business world.  We have all hear about it.  The lower status person comes up with a great idea, or does a great job at something.  The boss or the one in charge takes the credit.  The person responsible for the achievement is to be okay with basically keeping their mouth shut.  It’s a game in business, but it shouldn’t be the same game in our places of worship.  God sees the truth, and do we forget that matters? 
This type of ‘ouch’ approach is what hinders the church’s image, and makes women feel stepped on.   Its is seen as sexist, and lets face facts here – it is.  Preachers can parrot that women are equal in the eyes of God, but have differing roles all they wish.  How that statement should satisfy everyone.  When they see this attitude that is prevalent in the ‘world of church’…clue one that is why they don’t take you seriously!   Its not because they a feminist.  Men wouldn’t appreciate this attitude either.  This attitude is why you have to constantly back up and justify your beliefs.  The spin you place on how it isn’t wrong…isn’t working.  Your attitude – not beliefs – doesn’t line up with common sense and rational thinking.  It just doesn’t.   I mean lets face facts here if it was done in reverse?  It wouldn’t feel very honoring would it?  Would it help you ‘feel’ your role?
Yes, God is proud of the women that seem to take the backseat.  He knows.  Its not the back seat to him, and he sees the selfishness in it.  They know they will get the reward later on when it really counts.  If you mention appreciation of same sort towards these women of God presently?  Well, lets just say I’m glad SOME men and women know the real truth and don’t project this ‘religious’ brand of politically correct junk to heart.  If acknowledgement of sorts is somewhat pride for women – it’s the same for the male gender as well.  Yet we all know its not….

Saturday, May 05, 2012

Masculine versus Macho – real men or culture?

4 comments Posted by Hannah at 3:18 PM

macho masculineWhen I read ugly articles like the one Doug Wilson wrote about Effeminate Worship? I also tend to think about all their opinions on culture. We all know the speeches about how culture is bad, and church people are better.

Funny how they use ‘cultural’ aspects to have people agree with their point of view.

Culture and their definition of masculine

Extremes don’t represent culture in the majority, but it sure does seem to get the attention. In my opinion, only using the extremes is a sign that your points can’t be all that valid. If you can’t use an example that most can truly relate to in their real lifes, and not some imaginary most extreme model that people can come up with? You lost me, and honestly you lose others as well. People just can’t relate.

Eric M. Pazdziora has written an article called, ‘The Truth about “Effeminate Worship”’.

If we want to know the reason men are staying away from church, maybe we just found it. Maybe they see church people as bullies. When somebody tells me I’m not a real man, I don’t want to hang out with them. I had enough of that in the locker room in sixth grade, thanks. If that’s what I’ll find in church, I’ll pass—and so will every other man who doesn’t meet that narrow, culture-blinded, anti-biblical ideal of masculinity.

Enough is enough. This whole tired clichéd pointless insulting emasculating graceless sanctimonious frippery of bellicose machismo should have been laid to rest a hundred years ago.

As with most worship wars, the problem isn’t worship. The problem is lack of worship. We’re looking at culture, not at Christ. We’re preoccupied with effeminacy, not having faith. We’re teaching gender, not the Gospel. We’re talking about manliness, not the Son of Man.
It’s a wonder that preachers that preach the cultural definition of masculinity don’t realize this.  Here is Doug Wilson follow up to the criticisms.

Wednesday, March 28, 2012

Is this the model of manhood?

4 comments Posted by Hannah at 2:56 PM

insecure-decision-makerWhat is it about decision making that makes people so insecure?


Recently on Equality Central there was a discussion about a men’s conference in which part of the focus was the outright contempt for feminism.  The author mentioned that the speaker, Voddie Baucham had geared up this popular target of contempt to the point that SOME men actually acted out against it.  (Or did they actually act out what Voddie was preaching?) Due to the fact it was a men’s conference, and it sounded like had a huge audience they also opened up the women’s bathrooms for breaks for the men in attendance.   Paul  Doshe, the blogger in question not only wrote online about had huge issues with the doctrine that was being taught, but the fact that some men felt the need to urinate all over the women’s restroom after hearing about the dreaded ‘man haters’.  We are not talking normal misses that happen – especially with older men – but puddles.  Keep in mind the author was speaking about his own personal observations. 


Unfortunately, Paul was asked to meet with some of the church leaders about his article on the conference.  It ended up resulting in a phone call to the pastor, and the author issued an apology for not submitting his views on the conference to that pastor prior to publication.   Paul also made the decision to remove his opinion piece, but at that point I had already saved a copy for today’s discussion and have preserved it online.  Personally?  We don’t need a pastor’s permission slip for opinions and personal observations.  When a pastor wants to play the ‘forgiveness’ game, and manipulate it in a way that you may question your salvation?  Its insecurity talking – not decision making.  It’s a common tactic.   The old:  You must ask my forgiveness for the offense, and I will forgive you (on my terms). 


The pastor missed the bigger picture.


The pastor would discuss the small part of Paul’s article speaking about the ‘puddles’, but refused to speak about the problematic distortions of doctrine Paul was taking issue with.   Paul mentioned the pastor forgave him after he asked for his forgiveness over the conflict of his opinion of the conference. 


The first thought I had was if this was a glowing review there would have been no phone call, no asking and receiving of forgiveness.  No permission slip needed. 


Church Image or Doctrine


church-imageDr. Voddie Baucham spoke at the conference about culture wars – a popular topic – and yet it seems the culture of ‘church image’ never entered this pastor’s mind and heart.  The church and the conference had an image to uphold, and that sadly was first and foremost in this pastor’s mind.


The pride issue came to mind also, because it seems since this pastor made the author feel in some way the need to apologize for his observations.  The man’s overall take of the conference – and the bigger issues at hand – were not worth spending time on.   Yes, the thought of the author caving also crossed my mind.


Paul recently put up a final opinion piece in which he felt he did the right thing by removing his views, and how he feels ‘caving’ wasn’t the issue.  It does sound like he felt convicted to remove the original piece, but the way his addendum was replaced shortly after removal concerned me.  After some time dwelling on this I figured he placed addendum up before truly thinking it out completely and clearly.  Sigh – I can relate to that myself!


The actions of the pastor shows the contradictions that this doctrine pushes a person to conclude. 


We hear all the time on how people should approach men with a aspect of respect and honor.  I guess that part is only reserved for wives and children.  Men on Men doesn’t count.  I wonder if they asked themselves if Jesus would agree with that?!  Voddie stated in his sermon at the conference to model behavior for others, but again that must only be for ‘certain’ others.


Compassion towards Paul doesn’t seem to register with this pastor either.  Clearly, Paul’s doctrinal issues were more important than certain men acting in a immature way in the women’s bathroom.  The image of these men, the bathroom, the church, Voddie and the conference were much more important to the pastor.  Remember these types are the first to remind people that people allow their ‘emotions’ to run this lives, and are quick to remind you that ‘feelings’ in this sense are unreliable.  Is that only for women and children?  I mean the pastor that hosted the event’s emotions clearly overtook him.


The thought of the Shepherd leaving his flock to find the one lost sheep comes to mind. The pastor seems to be telling the world, ‘Hey!  We fed him didn’t we!”


It seems that not only do women have a hard time getting answers from these types, but men do also.  That is not surprising to me, but it seems to contradict their entire message of the conference they led.  Is this a good example of their Discipleship & Education?  I guess it wouldn’t be the first time a pastor held a conference of this type, but decided he didn’t need to heed the message of the conference his own church is marketing.  Pretty sad state of affairs.


It reminds of the dynamic that Al Miles speaks about when it comes to him speaking at churches about domestic violence.  He is invited all over the country to give presentations of domestic violence, but sadly it was the pastors of those churches that wouldn’t be in attendance.  He made a future policy that he would only lead the conference if they – the pastors of the church - agreed to be there.  Sounds like Voddie needs to do the same thing.


Voddie’s Culture Wars – Always a popular Topic!


culture-warVoddie had some good things to say, but he also had some rather far out opinions as well. 


For example, he would speak about how husbands and fathers need to truly be involved with family life.  They have to be more than ‘airport dads’.  An airport dad is a man that comes home from work, and sits on the sofa to watch television or read his paper.  Mom is running around pretty much doing everything else in life.  His paycheck is nearly his entire contribution to his family.  He states later that some men more identify themselves by their job titles.  He gave an example of how ‘work life’ had to take a back seat to his home life.  He then showed how most families do the opposite.  For instance, if work needs something family must take a second seat, and how it should be the opposite.


Whether it be mom or dad I will agree the above to be true.


Most of Voddie’s views on feminism are not based in fact.  He used Gloria Steinem as an example of a ‘man hater’, and later mentioned how women just a notch up the food change to the serpent in the Garden of Eden.  I doubt very much he watched the documentary of Gloria (click the link to watch it) – in her own words as it was called recently on HBO.  They showed clips from her past, and also more recent interviews.  They actually address the ‘man hater’ and ‘gender sameness’ junk we hear about all the time.  Sadly, it seems Dr. Baucham was misinformed in a number of areas.


There is a myth that we believe.
There is a myth that we promote, and this myth is that feminism grew because men stepped away from their roles.

Man stopped being who and what they were supposed to be, and so feminism grew as a result of that.  Folks that is so incredibly naïve!

Feminism is actually a a reaction to strong manhood. It's not a reaction to weak manhood. Feminism is rebellion against strong manhood.

The feminist movement did not….when you talk about modern feminist movement most people do not realize the feminist movement goes way back to the 1800s.  When you talk about the modern feminist movement you talk about people like Gloria Steinem and people like this from the 1960s.

BUT even then these people were not saying men are stepping up and being men. No! They are saying we hate men!

- statement from Voddie Baucham at the conference in question


I guess for some the cliché is true about if you repeat myths enough times its truth to some.  Strange practice coming from a Pastor I must say.  The Bible states how we are to love our enemies, and pray for them.  I don’t understand how this campaign of contempt against feminism can EVER come across as anything but contempt when they use generalizations, myths and dare I say lies against others.  When common sense is used actions speak louder than words, and I pray that most don’t model that behavior.  I will add that even if it WERE true, the contempt still would NOT be justified.


The mocking of men and women isn’t uplifting, and using that to shepherd others (which Voddie taught at the Conference) is far from encouraging.  YES, I did listen to his message to understand where Paul was coming from (i.e.: harsh aspects of the message). 


In one example, Dr. Baucham spoke about an example of man that came to him because he didn’t approve of his daughter's choice for a future spouse.   Dr. Baucham asked him what his daughter said when he spoke to her about this, and the man replied that he and his daughter didn’t have much of a relationship.  You then got to hear about how this man expected Baucham to ‘fix this’ for him.    I doubt that is what the man said, but that is what the Dr. took from the conversation.  Dr. Baucham continued on what he must have felt was a humorous rant about how this man was an awful father, and what the heck did he expect HIM to do about his circumstance.

Pastor I need your help!


Well because my daughter came back with a really really really bad candidate, and I have no idea what to do!

Well sit down and talk to your daughter.

I really don't have a relationship with my daughter.
So I was hoping that maybe you could - I don't know - maybe you as a minster 's could help?

Really what did you prepare your daughter to look for?

Yeah well we really didn't talk about that.

Okay, let me see if I get this right:
You don't have a relationship with your daughter.
You didn't prepare her for what to look for.
She came back with somebody you disapprove of, and now you want somebody else to fix the mess that you made!
In other words you just said to me:

Pastor I just planted in Apple tree in my backyard now apples are starting to grow on it. Can you help me with that?


You can't say amen you can only say OUCH!


-Transcript from  Voddie at conference

Ouch if Voddie Baucham feels this shows strong manhood! I hope his story was hot air, and he did offer the man more than what he mentioned.  He came to him for advice, and not a list of cut downs.  Jesus would have us be honest but showed compassion as well.  In a broken world this broken man needed something besides being the brunt of jokes for his presentation.


Dr. Baucham does very well with his presentation skills, but the message at times was far from edifying.   It creates a ‘us against them’ mentality.  Yes, the bible does say in Romans 12:2:

Don't copy the behavior and customs of this world, but let God transform you into a new person by changing the way you think. Then you will learn to know God's will for you, which is good and pleasing and perfect.


No offense but ridicule is of the world, and we see it all the time in books, articles, television, radio, politics, power struggles etc.  We can speak of broken people, and their broken relationships without being cruel about it.  Although he did have some good things to say he also came across as the school yard bully in other ways.    This culture loves to use ridicule, and seeing a pastor use it also takes so much away from anything good he may want to convey.  Its not a hard jump to mention NOT good modeling behavior.  He could do so much better.


Don’t be insecure in your decision making


The audios from the conference are online.   I have downloaded some of them so they don’t disappear online after a while as well.  I will post them soon.


The blogger Paul mentioned Romans 16:17

And now I make one more appeal, my dear brothers and sisters. Watch out for people who cause divisions and upset people's faith by teaching things contrary to what you have been taught. Stay away from them.


God isn’t asking for the ‘us against them’ attitude from his people.  That does not show his love for this world, and for his creation.   Awful Fathers, Dreadful Feminists, men that leave puddles of urine in bathrooms for others to clean up, and YES even the pastor of the church and Dr. Bauchman himself are all sinners and in need of grace.  We would be nothing if it were not for Jesus.  The thought of that should humble us all.


Audio Programs like this conference tend to disappear due to insecurity.  Manipulating, and asking for a public apology from a blogger that is not warranted is as well.  The pastor from this church modeled that behavior for us – showing he is more concerned with image then he was about the hard edge of the teachings at the conference.  No, I don’t think that was what you (men who attended) should have gleamed from the conference.  Your not suppose to talk about that though, but most especially DON’T talk about the urine puddles.


Additional Articles I found regarding this conference:


Complementarianism, Scapegoats, and New Meaning to the “Fountain” at Bellefontaine

Pulpit condoning

Complementarian men symbolically urinate on women

Complementarian men symbolically urinate on women

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

Blog Archive



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 |