India’s Daughter, Difficult to Change Culture

Culture is a very power thing no matter where you live.  It effects your life, and those around you as well.  Changing culture is a very hard thing to do, and people always are afraid of this change.

 

There is never anything truly WRONG with my culture, but it is YOURS that is the problem.

 

We have seen this used against a faith community due to terrorists that claim they represent the faith themselves.  So people condemn them all. 

 

We see the same thing when it comes to same type of generalizations towards race, and gender. 

 

You can condemn things easier when you have removed their humanity.  You then can view them as a group, and that makes your contempt, distain, and hate more palatable.   You can learn to live with that, because you no longer see them as human.

 

They are now just ‘them’.

 

India’s Daughter

 

I had been reading recently about an documentary on BBC about, “India’s Daughter’'.  It is a documentary on the brutal gang-rape of Jyoti Singh in 2012, and speaks of the protests and rioting in that country afterwards. 

 

They wanted to change the culture’s view towards women, and you can feel how HARD that is going to be just by listening to how some of the individuals speak about this horrific crime. 

 

Jyoti Singh is a perfect example of ‘them’ in her culture.

 

(You can try to google the documentary, but I get the impression they are removing it as fast as people can upload it online.  I found it on youtube.)

 

It’s going to be a HUGE uphill battle to change their culture, because their culture has been in place for centuries.  You are brought up from cradle to grave with what they see as acceptable viewpoints towards the female gender.

 

When Jyoti was born her family gave out candies to celebrate her birth, and people didn’t understand WHY they would do this…you only do that for boys.  Her parents told them they celebrate their children. 

 

When she was older she asked that they use her dowry to pay for her schooling, and her parents also sold their ancestral land to pay for her studies. 

 

The culture was astonished that they would throw away all that for this girl.  To her parents she was a good investment, and besides they loved her.

 

She finished her final exams to be a doctor, and she was on break until her 6 months of what we call ‘residency’ started.  She and male friend went to see a movie that night, and on their bus ride home 6 men beat her male friend…and raped, tortured and left her to die on the side of the road. 

 

A man that found her described her as a cow after giving birth.  Her organs were coming out her vagina, and he said he was frustrated because no one was helping.  They just watched.

 

Her mother said her last words were:  Sorry Mummy.  I gave you so much trouble.  I’m sorry.

 

 

At that point the machines flatlined, and her breathing stopped.

 

Jyoti was dead.  Her father’s words about her funeral?  You could feel and hear the heartbreak even though he kept his composure.  I’ll leave the description there, so you may see it for yourself in the documentary.

 

Protests for Change

 

For FAR to many in India? 

 

It was assumed that Jyoti was just one of  ‘them’.

 

Protestors wanted to change that reality for her, and for women in general in India.  They wanted to change people’s minds that she was human, and not a ‘them’. 

 

They want to give females the humanity that they deserve.

 

Like many cultures if you listen to the men (most of them anyway) in this documentary they speak of women as more precious than a gem or diamond.

 

“She should not be put on the streets just like food.  The ‘lady’, on the other hand, you can say the ‘girl’ or ‘woman’, are more precious than a gem, than a diamond.  Its up to you how you want to keep that diamond in your hand.  If you put that diamond on the street, certainly the dogs will carry it out.  You can’t stop it”   - Attorney for Rapists

 

So, in other words the ‘dogs’ (men) see women as food to carry out, because of instinct.  It can’t be stopped.  So, if you don’t show the dogs outside you have food (your women) they can’t carry it out.

 

Problem is their ‘more precious than a gem’ women also are attacked within the house by dogs, and that is also their fault.

 

India Banned The Documentary

 

Now, India is having a problem with this documentary.  They don’t wish for people to discuss the dogs, nor steps on how to stop them.  They claim that the documentary shames their women, and doesn’t represent THEIR India.

 

Let’s be honest here!  We all know its not about how this will shame women, and cause trouble for them.  They just don’t like how their patriarchy on steroids has shamed the dogs.  Their entitled to their place, and their women have theirs.

 

Like I said in the beginning – its hard to change culture.  With progress, education, and changes within their culture?  They will embrace the pride in their country once again.

 

In the meantime?  They better hold on to their hats, because ‘banning’ the film is just causing people to seek it out even more to see it anyway.  They basically gave the film FREE publicity that they were not counting on.

 

I pray that their ‘gems’ receive their humanity back, because no one deserves to be a ‘them’.

 

Additional Resources:

'India's Daughter,' the film banned by India: What did it show?

Indian government remains defiant over ban on BBC rape documentary

Indian Lawyers May Be Reprimanded for Sexist Remarks in Rape Documentary

Stumbling Blocks of the Church

The concept of the stumbling block has been on my heart lately.  The scandals we read about are indeed stumbling blocks to people.  Yet I see so many approaches to Christians that are HUGE stumbling blocks as well.

I think it truly dawned on me when I had been reading more and more about the New Pope Francis.  You know me!  I love history, and he is part of history now.  He is so opposite of what we are used too.  He really draws you in by his love of others.

Compare that to some Christian leaders get so busy pontificating on how people need to view things, and how they live their lifes.  Yet, you wonder if they realize how much they turn OFF people with their approach.  Yes, they are told about this.  They pretty much blow off their critics, and let everyone know they NEED to be told the truth. 

Notice, you were not addressing ‘the truth’.  You were addressing their delivery of the ‘truth’.  They have answers for that as well.  They go onto this speech from Matthew 7 about how most people will take the WIDE path in life, and others that ‘get it’ will take the smaller one. 

Notice that still doesn’t address their delivery.

I guess they don’t wish to face that there is a REAL possibly that their delivery is a real stumbling block for their brother – along with their actions.  Then you compare that to the delivery system of the new Pope?  It startling in differences.

I’m not Catholic, but I have say Pope Francis is extremely refreshing to me.  His humility and care for everyone – not just Catholics – shows me he does indeed have Jesus in his heart.  He has that ‘delivery’ down pretty well, although I can see why he rubs ‘conservatives’ the wrong way.  (giggles) He isn’t stuffy enough for them!

I want to compare approaches, and not so much to get into ‘denominations’, etc.  Lets view the delivery system, and the stumbling block we present to others at times. 

I firmly believe even if you disagree with someone their delivery and attitude can still leave with you a sense of respect for the person.  One approach can be very attractive, an other repels.  The repelling nature of a pastor can be a stumbling block to others when you can’t feel the presence of God within them.

Accountability

Doug Phillip’s is very popular in certain circles, but the man is clearly ‘out there’ with a lot of his beliefs.  Its always left a bad taste in my mouth how churches can attack certain aspects of the ‘world’, and yet leave cultish figures alone and unchecked.   Doug Phillips is a great example of them ignoring.

Doug Phillips, an outspoken proponent of male “dominion” over women and a leading home-schooling activist, has stepped down as president of his Texas-based Vision Forum Ministries after admitting to an inappropriate relationship with a woman

I guess its easier for them to poke at generalities in society than it is for them to point out groups that preach a dark gospel.  The bible clearly – to me anyway – states we are to speak out against false teachings.  Yet, sadly if you pay close attention?  There are many ‘church’ circles that tend to intertwine themselves, and that could be why they won’t speak against the other.

Doug Phillips told the world he was stepping down from some of his responsibilities due to a long, ongoing emotional affair with someone besides his wife.  You will notice a pattern of how they step down for a short period of time, and then their ‘elders’ announce to the world they are all better now – and come back.  They go on with life as if it never happened, and go back to that same nasty, ugly attitude towards anyone that doesn’t agree with them.

One sentence from an article I read about Doug Phillip’s recent fall that seemed to sum it up quite nicely.

His fellow patriarchs will help him in this “restoration” because they have to defend the system they’ve built.

Notice they will remind everyone that we are fallen humans, and are prone to sin.  Sure, there is truth to that statement.  The big difference is how certain fallen humans are treated, compared to the ones in leadership.  You can pretty much guarantee the power ‘pastor’ will be redeemed, but the individual in most cases is still considered stunned and revolting.

Remember the world to them seems to be the real enemy.  The world doesn’t agree with how they view things that they call ‘biblical’, and they are quick to call them names and tear them down.  Then you have the statements about how ‘those’ people don’t appreciate marriage, children, nor God’s word.  A difference of opinion places you automatically in that camp.  Unless you bow down to their way of thinking you will always be ‘one of those’.  Its always this ‘us against them’ game.

Be careful, however, that the exercise of your rights does not become a stumbling block to the weak. - 1 Corinthians 8:9

You hear them say they LOVE everyone, and yet their words and actions do not line up!  No accountability for that either.

Yet, they don’t view that as a stumbling block.


I suppose that is why I have been watching this new Pope.  I have to tell you his approach towards the world is refreshing to me. 

You can almost feel his concern, humility, and care for everyone – not just Catholics.  Again this week he was in the news showing his concern for the lest of these and captivated the world.

He also is calling out its hierarchy to move away from their TONS of small minded rules, and get back to serving as Christ has asked them too.

RULES are very important to some churches, and there is a lot of them – written and unwritten.  Those are the upmost importance to ‘show’ the world their sense biblical ….whatever – fill in the blank.

This is a stumbling block.

Differing Applications of Home and Church - So why is Mary Kassian upset when you write a book about it?

Mary Kassian wrote a review of Rachel Held Evans new book, and it seems she is taking things a bit too personally.  First I want to point out one GREAT comment she wrote, and show you how she sadly doesn’t apply it there after.

I pointed out that though complementarians agree on the principle of complementarity, we often differ as to its application in the home and the church. I emphasized that even those involved in CBMW have a divergence of opinion as to the specifics of how to apply the principles of manhood and womanhood. – Mary Kassian

So why OH why is she getting so upset about Rachel Evans mentioning  the different groups that call themselves complementarian?

Can she not see that maybe it was not her personally that the book represented entirely, but those that use applications differently?  I mean she already admitted even her and Nancy Leigh DeMoss don’t agree on all fronts.  Note:  there is nothing wrong with disagreement, but the way you disagree?  That is where the trouble begins.

She starts by playing games with quotes from the book itself:

A few sentences later, I had my first and best laugh of the whole book. “Evangelical complementarianism,” claims Rachel, “[is] a movement that began as a reaction to second-wave feminism and found some of its first expressions in the writings of Edith Schaeffer (The Hidden Art of Homemaking, 1971) and Elisabeth Elliot (Let Me Be a Woman, 1976).” Rachel goes on to explain that complementarianism rests on the “uncompromising conviction [that] the virtuous woman serves primarily from the home as a submissive wife, diligent homemaker, and loving mother.” (p. xix).

Seriously? “The Hidden Art of Homemaking???!!” I just about fell off my chair. That book was written seventeen years before the inception of CBMW and about twenty years before we adopted the term “complementarian.” I have never even heard of it. I highly doubt whether John Piper and Wayne Grudem—the founders of CBMW—have read it.

Just for a giggle here…The Feminine Mystique by Betty Freidman (1963).  Notice Mary loves to reference this 50 year old book ALL the TIME in her presentations.  What does that say?  Moving on…….

Now Mary Kassian just as Denny Burk both used sections of whole paragraphs out of context to make their point.  We can all admit they are both educated people, and that is why I assume they know what they are doing.  I don’t think they are counting on others to check the entirety of the quotes they write about.  If they did?  They may have a number of comments and questions.

I think they are counting on people NOT checking the sources…lets be honest here!

I don’t view either of them as dumb, so what else can I possibly assume?  Well people that tend to do this – take things out of context – maybe don’t have such a strong point after all.  That is what most people feel when others take on this tactic.

Mary took parts of the introduction in the Rachel Held Evan’s book.  Now, lets look at the statement in its entirety.

Over the next few years, I found myself drawn into more and more of these conversations, especially as my girlfriends and I began getting married and starting families of our own.  Many were influenced by evangelical complementarianism, a movement that began as a reaction to second-wave feminism and found some of its first expressions in the writings of Edith Schaeffer (The Hidden Art of Homemaking, 1971), and Elisabeth Elliot (Let Me Be A Woman, 1976). Hailed as the model wives and homemakers, these women are highly esteemed in the Reformed tradition, where the oft-repeated saying is, 'As many people were brought to the Lord through Mrs. Schaeffer's cinnamon buns as through Dr. Schaeffer's sermons."  But behind the winsome prose lies an uncompromising conviction:  the virtuous woman serves primarily from the home as a submissive wife, diligent homemaker, and loving mother. 

Now, CBMW may not have been started out of the expressions or writings of the author’s (that Mary never heard about) mentioned, but the ‘winsome prose’?  Ahh.  Yeah – its in THERE! I realize she wants to ignore that point.  Anyway…

Pastor or Politician? Strange reviews of Rachel Held Evan's New Book

You can’t have faith and fear, because they don’t go together!  You have to release the fear and embrace the faith! – Long Island Medium

As you can tell at times I like to watch some ‘fluff’ shows.  It helps me relax, and YES giggle at times.  I was flipping around on the television, and caught a small segment of this show.  She was speaking to a young girl who had lost her grandmother, and the grandchild was falling deeper into the pit of depression to the point of attempted suicide.

Anyway, this child was told to go back to her faith.  She couldn’t live with fear and faith at the same time.  The fear was overwhelming her life, and was taking up to much space in her head and in her heart.  She needed to embrace some changes so she could live the life that her grandmother wanted for her.  She told her to go back to her faith, because during this period of her she had left that behind. 

I think we all realize there is so much MORE work to do with this child besides the simplistic advice she was given.  Its good advice, but she may need counseling, etc. as well.  I remember a time when most people just realized this, and it didn’t need to be discussed.  You didn’t have to touch on all the bases, because they were just a given. 

Today you have to be careful, because people will wish to add and subtract to what you are saying just because it seems they don’t like the discussion to begin with.  I’m sure we all do it in some fashion, but today it seems so over the top. 

Its almost as if we live with fear constantly, and different viewpoints are looked upon with fear.

When I saw some reactions to Rachel Held Evan’s new book about ‘biblical womanhood’ I saw some faith circles that need to let go of the fear, and embrace the faith!   They seem so afraid of questions, and people that find doing life a bit different than what they had in mind is a threat.

They remind me of politics and the media twisting and turning facts to encourage viewers/supporters to think as they do, and those that can’t?  WHOOP up your base with all kinds of strange ways of looking at things, and YES its even okay to be downright dishonest about it – to attack the opponent.

Patriarchy: Its not the remedy

The question egalitarians have never satisfactorily answered for me is if you’re raising an eight year old little boy or little girl, you're mom or dad, and that little girl says to mom mommy what does it mean to grown up and be a woman and not a man?  Or the little boy – daddy what does it mean to grow up and be a man and not a woman?  It will not do to just talk in terms of plumbing – biological – cause that's not your personhood.  And it won't do to simply say courage, humility, righteousness, Christ's likeness.  Cause [the] little kid's gonna say no, no I mean a woman and not a man. – John Piper

 

There seems to be loads of debate recently that Patriarchy maybe losing some of glow of the past. 

 

Is patriarchy really God’s dream for the world?

 

It was such a short time ago that those that truly felt lead to uphold Patriarchy would give examples of marriages, families and relationships that were healthy, happy, and they would indeed hint at ‘holy’ as well.

 

These are the example to those families destroyed by the ugly side of the misuse of the power and authority of the father figure (most of the time).  The message tended to be ‘try harder and you too can have this holy family life’. 

 

That’s not a remedy.

 

It reminds me of a family suffering from a raging alcoholic destroying not only THEIR life, but those that they ask to suffer along with them.    The answer being to show them a ‘happy’ family  that has one member that partakes of couple of a beers on Friday night, and all is still well with them.

 

Yes, this example of the remedy is nonsense.  Showing an example of a family living with (loving – ahem) Patriarchy at its core is also a nonsense type of remedy for the family in trouble.

 

Live Life Counter Cultural

 

They are preaching from the rooftops that Patriarchy is the biblical way, and people need to live life ‘counter cultural’. 

 

How many thousands of years, and how many cultures has it been the norm? 

 

How many places is it still the norm, and you will see that it has effected that culture in more negative ways than positive.  Most of the time you have barbaric treatment of not only women, but men and children as well.  Look at the overall poverty that surrounds them, because they want to keep people – especially women – ignorant to put it bluntly.  These factors have HUGE impacts on their society, and you can see it anywhere that ‘power over’ concepts are placed upon others in abusive ways.

 

I would HOPE that we can agree that feminism isn’t the issue in these parts of the world.  The fact is if it showed up at all?  I’m pretty certain that woman – or women would be stoned on the spot.

 

Mob attacks women protesting sexual assault of women in Egypt

 

No Patriarchy group deals with abuse within their movement effectively, and when the remedy is the attitude of if you don’t like this hierarchy GO talk to Paul or GOD ?

 

I say NO!  Answer the questions, and learn to deal in solutions not diversions.  If the Patriarchy crowds wishes us to answer questions along the lines of John Piper’s quote above?  They need to provide answers as well, and stop minimizing the ugly effects this can have on humans, and of course then stop diverting to go ask God if you don’t like their answers.  It should be a clue that something IS NOT WORKING with their counsel.  We are to look deeper, and not just blow it off.

 

That’s not a remedy for the fear and reality of families.  Sadly, it is a show conceit and arrogance. 

 

Victims are against forgiveness as the solution to the problem

I actually call forgiveness the "F" word for the evangelical community, because of how they use forgiveness.  

It's not that victims are against forgiveness. 

Victims are against forgiveness as the solution to the problem.  

Because the problem will go on and on and on as long as every victim continues to give forgiveness.  The organization does not have to address the issues. 

All God’s Children Documentary

As you might have guessed I was watching All God’s Children on Youtube the other night, and the above quote I felt was very profound.  The Video segment above has this quote.

Children of missionaries were placed in boarding schools while their parents served as missionaries – in this case in Africa.  The children were abused badly by the caregivers, and as adult survivors they asked the missionary organization to start dealing with what happened.  The organization threw out the ‘forgiveness’ card, and stonewalled with prevention of this from happening to other children.  They wanted to blow it off as a ‘select few’ that I’m sure they wanted to treat as bad apples, but were overwhelmed with the numbers of survivors that came forward after the story went public.

What happened next was a show of fear towards the missionary alliance’s reputation, and self preservation.  They attempted to ‘deal with it’, but you get the sense they did it more from pressure than from genuine concern.  

Once the heat was removed (somewhat anyway) they were able to go on ‘doing God’s work’.   What they failed to realize or face was helping these victims, and preventing future victims IS God’s work as well.  They pretended their priories were not out of whack.

Sadly, what it shows is if other missionary children are abused?  They have no hope of true support within their community.  They will be set adrift.  I pray that the links I supplied below will be of help to you.

As the men and women within this video documentary spoke of the triggers they deal with to this day?  That doesn’t show a lack of forgiveness, but of struggle. 

They are still struggling to learn to cope with their past, and superhuman type of forgiveness others demand of them is NOT helping them by any stretch of the imagination.

Its true that the faith community does tend to use forgiveness so they don’t have to address the problem or issues.  Once the victim ‘forgives’ they move on as if nothing ever happened.  Victims are left to deal with this on their own, and sharing the burdens that comes from healing is the ‘unforgiveable’ to ask for.

Today forgiveness is a tool that is used, so the church doesn’t have to deal with things that seem to ugly.

Forgiveness is suppose to be for us, and yet it is used as a ‘on demand’ concept for others.  The forgiveness then turns into something for others, and not for the victim at all. 

You see this way to often when dealing with emotional abuse, physical abuse, sexual abuse, and spiritual abuse.  Most of the time people that abuse others in this way?  The victims are asked to forgive their abuser, and then sadly those victims must then find ways of forgiving those that counseled them (on forgiveness) because they would rather wipe the slate clean afterwards – then help them mend other aspects that go along with healing afterwards.

You see those cycle of emotions afterwards are used as ‘points of unforgiveness or bitterness’, and that is the big lie when it comes to support of abuse victims.  Its laziness, unforgiveness towards victims, and fear of how this would impact THEIR circumstance and might bruise THEIR lifes or organization.    It has nothing to do with smearing God in some way, but has everything to do with their fear of facing sin.  Its self perseveration in the ugliest form.

Cycle of Healing – When do you face this?

They say its human to take the path of less resistance.  Victims are easy to steam roll because they are in weaken state anyway, and sadly all too often the faith community takes the ‘secular’ path that is far from biblical.

People that are abused, and are allowed healing tend to have cycles similar to the cycle of grief – loss of a loved one.  I remember when my father died they reminded me of these stages, and how they may not go in order – and you can deal with one cycle again and again at times.

• Denial: “This can’t be happening to me.”
  
• Anger: “Why is this happening? Who is to blame?”
  
• Bargaining: “Make this not happen, and in return I will ____.”
  
• Depression: “I’m too sad to do anything.”
  
• Acceptance: “I’m at peace with what happened.”
  

They tell you these cycles are normal and healthy.  In time you will reach the other side in which you learn to live with what has happened, and are able to go on with life.  That doesn’t mean you forget about the death, and you don’t mourn anymore.  It means that grief no longer overwhelms your life.  Most people have dealt with a death, and you see the genuine support people need as acceptable due to this.

Sadly, that is NOT true for abuse victims most of the time.  That seems especially true if those victims are within the church body – and the abuser is also.

It amazes me that people just ask this superhuman concept of others (instant forgiveness) when abuse happens, without having them process things that they have dealt with.  Then you notice those that counsel this ‘instant forgiveness’ are the ones railing against some pet sin they are against, and then place this aura of how its ‘everywhere around them’.  No, they aren’t ones that do the superhuman concept of instant forgiveness either.   Sadly, they are in so much denial they can’t see it.

Transformation is what is truly amazing!

They say if you beat a dog long enough he will learn to bite you in return after a while.  In softer terms if you torment a cat all the time you may get a good scratch or bite in defense as well.  Most people can ‘grasp’ and understand these concepts, and most are NOT going to blame the animals for their reaction.  If you take that animal and place it in better circumstances people are amazed at the transformation. 

My Siamese cat died in January – he was 17 years old.  He was rescue animal, and you could tell something had happened in the past due to his fear towards things that most cats would not be.  He never lashed out, or would bite.  He was just full of fear.  He was a young cat, and we used plenty of love, patience, and fun to help him come out of his shell.  In time he slowly came out, and he learned that not everyone/everything around him was worth fearing.  Those fears would pop up from time to time, but they lessoned as he enjoyed being spoiled with praise, kisses, rubs and plenty of kitty treats. 

He learned to trust us, and knew we had his best in mind.  When he was older we brought home a puppy, and at that point our cat was strong enough to show him (the puppy) WHOM the top dog was in the house.  Our cat also was secure enough in his position within the family to learn to love the puppy, and in return the puppy had a healthy respect for that ‘old man’.  My Siamese didn’t fear him as he would in the past, and after the patriarchy was established (if you will) he truly cared for his new pup. 

Towards the end of his life I think he sensed my fear of losing him, and he just lovingly endured things as we tried to save him with genuine affection in his eyes.  The day I put him down he was not afraid either, and he almost gave me one last smile as he fell asleep for the last time.    The transformation in that cat was amazing.

I think it is the same with people that are hurt and abused.  They need love, patience, grace and loads of support.  Fear hurts, and is NOT a comfortable state of living. 

Asking victims to forgive is all well and good, but telling them NOT to process their grief, fear, and the other host of emotions?  Its not healthy nor is it normal way of dealing with things.   People are big on saying love is not an emotion, but an action.  Sadly, the actions are not there with most abuse victims.  Using forgiveness as a tool to wipe the slate clean instead of helping them process what happened to them?  That’s not love its fear.

Avoidance is fear – not love!

On the one hand I can understand and empathize with this fear, but on the other hand I can see the terrible effects not facing those fears have on life.  The instant forgiveness crowd may not realize they cement belief systems in victims when they can not do as God would have them do. 

You learn to NOT trust an abuser, and you learn NOT to trust counsel as well when they also aren’t safe to help them process things.  That isn’t being a perpetual ‘victim’, but common sense towards the human nature.   Its like learning to speak ‘cat’, and telling my old pal he didn’t need our love to move past his fear. It’s unrealistic, and spiritual pixie dust to expect it.

When you read Psalms you hear similar cries of pain and anguish, and yet Psalms is NOT used to show you how NOT to deal with injustice, abuse and neglect.  It doesn’t tell others to have this superhuman forgiveness, so others can wipe the slate clean because they are afraid of dealing with reality of circumstances.  Instead it shows the pain and reality of life at times, and does NOT encourage people to stuff things down because those around them are to afraid to help. 

Its sad that people can show MORE compassion towards the death of pet than they do the destruction of a person.

The church sadly is no different than the world when it comes to injustice within the church.  They just have their unique way of NOT dealing with it.   The abuser tells you that its all your fault, and the quote ‘healthy’ ones within the church tend to send the same message once the abuse surfaces.  Telling them to forgive where the church can forget!  Yes, it’s the same as telling victims its their fault all over again.

It’s a sick mindset.  The denial is also very strong, and you could see this within the IFB community when the Tina Anderson story was exposed.  They just were plain unable to to understand WHY people were against Chuck Phelps being a board member afterwards.  They didn’t conceive the reasons that others didn’t accept their ‘authority’ to hound, manipulate and bully those that cried foul.  The organization called, Do Right BJU was started and BJU felt they were right – and they showed the world how sadly they do not have good grasp on reality nor scripture.

We had a person on a faith board that used to be in existence that loved to use manipulative statements of forgiveness towards other hurting people.  He or She would say something along the lines of, “I’m glad MY God forgives me better than you can forgive others!”  Why people think that type of statement is anywhere near helpful towards anyone just boggles the mind.  Yet this statement reassembles the attitude towards victims of abuse completely.

When it seems forgiveness is more for them than for you?  Its okay to cry foul, and please continue to reach out and find those that do understand what God asks from them towards your pain.

Victims are against forgiveness as the solution to the problem.

Forgiveness isn’t the solution to the problem of denial – its just one step of many towards healing.  It’s the scapegoat of the church uses to NOT do what God asks of them.  You can’t share in each other burdens when you pretend those burdens no longer exist.

The church sadly in most cases are more hurtful than secular society when dealing with sin within their own circle.   I’m so thankful for those individuals, organizations, churches and leaders that live out Christ like Love towards victims.  I just pray that some day they aren’t so few and far between.

Please accept the following links if you also need support:

All God’s Children – Documentary website

Missionary Kids Safety Net

Missionary Kids Advocates Forum

MK Planet online community for current MKs and Adult MKs (MK=Missionary kids)

The Hope For Survivors Ministry providing support for victims of clergy sexual abuse

In the links section at the top of my blog is other types of support and missions to help you with your faith towards healing.

My prayers are with you, the faith community, and lastly the abusers themselves.

Slutwalk Myths Encouraged By CBMW

Its sad that Mary Kassian is yet again spreading ‘I believe’ opinions as fact that can be disproven.  I started to speak about this in my part article called, Adventures in Missing The Point.

 

On her site “Girls gone Wise” she has a reprint of the article about the slut walks that I wrote about in the past.  She then responded to a comment left on her article.

 

Mary Kassian says:
April 7, 2012 at 2:12 pm

Daniella, I agree with a lot of what you are saying.

Yes. Rape is rape.
Yes. It’s wrong to blame victims.
Yes. Rape has nothing to do with the way a woman dresses.

Where we differ is this: I believe a culture that promotes sexual promiscuity will have a higher incidence of rape than one that promotes sexual continence. Encouraging women to embrace sluttiness is neither empowering, nor does it help to prevent the problem of rape.

Her last two sentences are falsehoods, and its clear she doesn’t wish to know the ‘true’ facts. 

 

A Culture that Promotes Sexual Promiscuity will have a Higher Incidence of Rape – False

 

I guess that would seem like common sense to those that don’t wish to fact check first.

 

There have been numerous reports in the world about this ‘myth’, and sadly it doesn’t line up. 

 

If you google worse places for women on the globe?  The United States (or Canada since that is where she lives) isn’t topping the list.  The worse places listed have a very high percentage of rape compared to the United States as well.  Imagine that Mary?!  No doubt they aren’t very nice to men either.

 

So Mary Kassian’s ‘I believe’ statement is at best irresponsible.  Dressing up your beliefs as fact in this manner is showing her agenda far to much.

 

Her ‘I believe’ statement is ‘wrong’ because it does blame victims.  She states that rape has nothing to do with dress, and yet in the next breath states that your dress does encourage it. 

 

For an organization that speaks about ‘confusion’ far to much in a accusatory manner towards others?  She seriously needs to take a good look at her own statements.

 

Targeted violence against females, dismal healthcare and desperate poverty make Afghanistan the world's most dangerous country in which to be born a woman, with Congo a close second due to horrific levels of rape. Pakistan, India and Somalia ranked third, fourth and fifth, respectively, in the global survey of perceptions of threats ranging from domestic abuse and economic discrimination to female foeticide (the destruction of a fetus in the uterus), genital mutilation and acid attack. A survey compiled by the Thomson Reuters Foundation to mark the launch of TrustLaw Woman*, puts Afghanistan at the top of the list of the most dangerous places in the world for women. TrustLaw asked 213 gender experts from five contents to rank countries by overall perceptions of danger as well as by six categories of risk. The risks consisted of health threats, sexual violence, non-sexual violence, cultural or religious factors, lack of access to resources and trafficking.

The countries listed above are very patriarchal.   Promiscuity isn’t rampant, and so Mary Kassian’s theory doesn’t seem to work there.  There is nothing wrong with speaking of modesty, but preaching outright falsehood is completely different.  People will not take your opinions seriously anymore.  Mary is so jaded against feminism that she seems to apply things as she goes along.  Sadly, she doesn’t seem to care if they are true or not.

 

Encouraging Women to Embrace Sluttiness is Empowering – False

 

You have to wonder if Mary Kassian even read any material on the slutwalk.   Despite her claims the majority of participates in this protest were not dressed as she portrayed.   If you look closely to the pictures in most places people can coats on.  If the purpose was to encourage being slutty would they NOT wait until it was warm enough to do so?

 

As I have said before, I’m not thrilled with the name of the march.  I understand WHERE they took the name from (Mary doesn’t seem to).  I am able to look past that to grasp the purpose.  It doesn’t bother me that much that I have to be completely blinded to it.

 

Its sadly a bald faced lie to say that the protest had a purpose to show women that dressing like a slut was empowering.

 

Frankly, it’s a regurgitating theme in most of her Mary Kassian’s material.  If you check out enough of her books, articles, blogs material and sermons?  Its something she states time and time again to any characteristic she sees as against her beliefs towards feminism.

 

No doubt there are some women that feels this is empowering, but the majority don’t seem to ‘live it out’ in the extreme manner that Mary describes on a regular basis.

 

Her response was not only contradictory towards facts that have been proven, but ‘confusing’ in content.

 

Does she live under a rock?  Seriously.  Is misrepresenting people a show a ‘true woman’?

Trustlaw.org

Choice.org

Adventures in Missing The Point

Mary Kassian is twisting and turning the truth once again to make her point.  Does she really make it in a honestly and upfront way?  Not so much. 

In fact she completely misses the point, but pretends she knows was the point was.  You don’t have to like all of the presentation of a message in order to ‘grasp’ the concept of the message.  In Mary’s reality unless it is dished up in her flavor she seems to ignore it.  Here is the article. 

Rape is a crime of opportunity or at times even a means of shame (not to say there aren’t other reasons).  Adults and children get sexual assaulted all the time sadly. 

This story started innocently enough on a college campus when a police officer was asked to come and give a talk about rape prevention, risk management, etc.   These things will help you recognize ways to lesson your chances of being attacked, but will not guarantee it.

Dress is cultural myth that society uses to blame others for being raped.  Majority of these cases are NOT people that were dressed in the way that society seems to hint at.  This myth has been proven false, but this culture has a hard accepting it.  Repeating it and using dress encourages the continual use of the myth, instead of dealing with the proven issues.

The police officer in question decided to use this myth during his presentation – even after being taught and instructed not to.  He informed the crowd if they were stop dressing like sluts they wouldn’t get raped.  The after effect of his words started the march all over the globe to bring awareness to others. 

They used the word ‘slut’ because of the police officer using it.  I’m sure many did not like the presentation due to the wording, and the fact that some showed up dressing the part on purpose.  This march started organically as news spread of the officer’s insulting ignorance. 

Keep in mind when you read about sexual assaults on men or women in the news the clothing myth is not prevalent in the facts of the case. That should clue society in, but sadly it doesn’t seem to sink in for whatever reason.  Here is a RAINN article about different types of sexual assault.

Mini-Me Jesus?

I have never watched the Austin Power’s movies, but I have seen clips here and there.

 

I was communicating with Cindy Kunsman, and she was speaking about the huge load that men are handed in terms of scripture at times.  The load she spoke about to me was a misinterpretation of scripture – to Cindy as well I will point out.

 

This is the impression I came away with of certain people’s views on Ephesians 5:

 

You hear at times about how men will be held in account for the actions/sins of their family/wife.  They take that command from Ephesians 5.    This has always boggled my mind, and I never did figure out how they got there.  For some reason Mini Me from Austin Powers popped into my mind.  He is the little person pictured today.

 

²⁵ Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her ²⁶ to make her holy, cleansing^[a] her by the washing with water through the word, ²⁷ and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless.

 

This scripture concentrates more on how Christ loved us, and how he gave himself up for us.  He gave himself up for her (the church) to make her holy.  He did this by washing with the water through the word, and then presents her (the church) to himself as the radiant church without stain, wrinkle, or other blemish.  Jesus makes us holy and Blameless (by the forgiveness of sins).

 

Cindy describes some gentleman’s reactions to her scholarly presentations.  They told her that they will be held responsible for their wife in this way.  To me?  It was as if they were taking on a Mini Me position of Jesus.  They were going to held accountable for their wives, because he was the one to present her without stain, wrinkle, etc.  Ephesians isn’t asking this of the husband.  That’s crazy talk!

 

Men – no matter what their position – are never held responsible for other human’s sin.  We are all held accountable for our own sin.  This scripture doesn’t say that husbands are the mini me of Jesus.  He isn’t saying you are able to do the things that I (Jesus) do for those that believe in me.  We are saved through Jesus, and to me this scripture is speaking more of a comparison.  LOOK at how I love you, and how I show my love for you.  I ask that you show a comparable love for your wife.

 

²⁸ In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. ²⁹ After all, no one ever hated their own body, but they feed and care for their body, just as Christ does the church— ³⁰ for we are members of his body.

 

Husbands are to love their wives as their own bodies (comparing in a way to Jesus love for his body – the church).  We feed and care for our literal body, and it’s the same principal of how Jesus cares of his body (the church).  We care and feed our bodies differently of course, but to me he is more speaking of a principal.   Humans are not able to present anyone – let alone themselves – to Jesus without stain being holy without Jesus.  That would be like stating I can present a person that has been given no food as someone that will not starve.  We can’t do that as humans.

 

Teaching men are accountable for their wives in this way?  Its like saying I gave no food to my wife, but I am the one that is starving (literally speaking).    Jesus could pull that off, but we as humans aren’t able to no matter what.  Jesus does not ask this of husbands.

 

³¹ “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.”^{[b] 32} This is a profound mystery—but I am talking about Christ and the church. ³³ However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband.

 

Now, if you view the husband as some mini me of Jesus?  I guess that is how they get this ‘head of authority’ thinking.  The one flesh in their eyes at this point is – husband is the head of the body, everyone else is the body.  The head being the mini me of Jesus.  He will be in authority since he is responsible for the family, and the covering of his wife’s sin.    I guess they solved the profound mystery.

 

Could be how this ‘biblical role’ thinking started.  The only problem with that is men are not the mini me of Jesus.  The passage was speaking of how Jesus loves us – washing, etc.  He was not saying husband you are to be, and do my role like I do.  It seems to me they are taking the comparison the wrong way.   Humans can never be the mini me of Jesus.  Its not possible. 

 

Doing your biblical roles would be ‘works based’ in order to get salvation.  Women are to treat their husbands as the mini me Jesus.  When you think of yourself as the mini me of Jesus – you would see yourself with power and authority over others.  Then Jesus would be asking wives to respect the mini me – and not the human.  In other words, you need to respect the role – not the person.  Do we do that with Jesus?

 

If husbands truly had the power of the mini me of Jesus?  All this yacking about how wives treat their husbands either make them wimpy, dominating, or Godly?  It places the woman in position of making the Mini me in the family.

 

So we are all given unrealistic burdens that Jesus never asked us to take.  Women can’t respect a person enough to make them a mini me Jesus, and the man –being the mini me Jesus can’t be responsible for the other’s person sin. 

 

I realize they like to use this ‘military’ visual, but heck even solders are held accountable for their actions.  In the past year a soldier is being held for trial due to the fact he got into a fight with fellow military personnel, and then shot them dead.  Do we see the commander and chief being held responsible for the murder or do we see the soldier?

 

According to what I’m reading with this teaching?  The commander and chief of the family would be held responsible for the murder in the eyes of Jesus.  You see these men that love the position of the Mini Me Jesus, but when it comes to being held responsible for others actions?  They don’t want that role so much anymore.    They resent being told if something bad happens in the family – its all their fault.  Heck, I can’t blame them!

 

The problem is you can’t expect people to be ‘literal’ in just one direction to suit the mini me Jesus.  If you are the Mini Me Jesus you take the whole burden to make it light. 

 

Come to me all of you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest.  Take my yoke upon you and learn from me for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls.  For my yoke is easy and my burden is light. Matthew 11:28-30

 

If you look at that scripture?  We realize there can be no mini me Jesus.  Sadly, there are huge burdens of that role that Jesus did not ask men to take.  They can’t take them, because only Jesus can.

 

Just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her ²⁶ to make her holy, cleansing^[a] her by the washing with water through the word, ²⁷ and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless.

 

This portion of scripture is speaking about Christ.  It isn’t NOT asking men to become the Mini Me Jesus.  Jesus loved the church, and this is how he shows his love.  We say that sin separates us from God.  Jesus takes away the sin.  Mini Me can’t do that.  That is something Jesus does for us out of love.  Why would people feel Jesus is asking the husband to do this for his wife?  Its not possible.

Why Women Can't..

“I’m sick of it.  I’m sick of writing about equality for Christian women in our churches and homes,” I emailed a woman equality blogger.
But as long as pastors and bloggers and “Bible scholars” tell the world that women just don’t measure up, I will keep on.

Above is a quote from Shirley Taylor, and she can quoted a pastor’s reasons why women would not be good in certain positions compared to men.

I searched for the article, and I believe I found the one in question.  It was titled, Why women can not be head pastors.  I had to admit I’m getting rather used to silly examples that are said to used to make points that are somehow suppose to make sense to the general public.

To quote one of his comments to his ‘ahem’ points that made me giggle, and also has a sting of truth to it?

“I feel like a mosquito in a nudist colony; I don’t know where to begin!”

To me?  That said it all!

I seriously don’t think people that come from this point of view truly realize how completely racist and bigoted they sound.  I really don’t think they stop long enough to hear themselves at times.  Its truly sad!  

I guess it shouldn’t surprise me because the Christian faith has been fighting bigoted overtones for how long?  Almost since it began?

The pastor in question used a common circumstance we have all giggled about in the past.  Wife hears noise in the house.  Wife wakes up husband, and has him go and investigate.

You are wise because that is what normally happens and is typically, for those of you who have a man in the house, the best move. Why? Because men are better equipped to deal with these sort of situations. There is an aggression that men have, both physical and mental, that is more able to handle situations that might become combative. That is the way we are made.

It also seems to be human nature to pick the biggest and strongest when possibility facing a battle of strength.  If we look at the story of David and Goliath?   It seems to slap the theory the pastor made in the face.  If people didn’t know the story?  WHO would have thought that David would have creamed the bigger, stronger, and more aggressive Goliath?  Can people deny that those at the time felt he would get beaten as well?  I mean seriously, if we didn’t know it came from the bible?  We would SWEAR it was a movie made by Walt Disney!

When humans are faced with dangerous circumstances gender doesn’t always play a role.  The term, ‘momma bear’ for example.  A tough, aggressive, and protective mother. Often going to extreme lengths to protect her children and herself.   We have to admit we have used this term to describe more than the animal.  

Why Women can’t?

God gives everyone the strength needed in combat of different sorts. 


What has that got to do with being pastor?  According to the author the pastor is also better at confronting false teachings.  He feels since men are better at being physically and mentally stronger?  They are in a better position of confronting false doctrine. 

To make matters even MORE confusing?  It was pointed out that Christian faith has been pelleted with false doctrine (again I would say since the beginning), and pastor agreed.  One poster’s ending point was:

I am seeing few men with the characteristics needed for true shepherding. That troubles me.

His response?

I too am troubled by the lack of male leaders. Frankly, think that there are many reasons, but one that is very important, in my opinion, is that men are not taught to be men anymore. They don’t know what it means. They are taught that they don’t have too many essential differences between them and women. They are taught that they don’t have a particular role. They are taught to suppress their masculinity and embrace their “feminine side.” It is confusing. In the end, I think we need more people who are complementarian leading the church and expressing this value with greater confidence and boldness.
Men will still be wimps because we are still sinners. Adam still followed Eve.

I have to wonder if this pastor doesn’t see that he can’t seem to grasp ‘essential differences’!  His examples sure don’t show them.  I mean according to what he says above?  Sinner equals wimps.  Okay then.

Prejudice is Ignorance

Marriage can only have one head.

If it has two heads then it becomes a two-headed monster.

I think I must first warn you that I’m on a soap box today.  I first read Mara’s article, Have you heard this one?  I then moved onto Wartburg Watch, and their article Is Racial Solidary really possible in the SBC?

Prejudice Is Ignorance

I guess I first need to explain.  I will be speaking from the eyes of a small child that watched her parents fight in a southern atmosphere during the civil rights, freedom riders, Martin Luther King, Jr. times.  They both grew up in an atmosphere of bigotry, and they were both lead by the Holy Spirit to stand up for what was right and just on this issue.

From what I have gathered they waited until adulthood, and away from the immediate family pressure to do everything they wished to do.  They did small things prior, but went all out once the restrictions of their family life was removed.  

I remember my own grandfather telling me that he sent his good Christian girl off to Baylor thinking it was a good Christian college – and they ‘ruined her’.  Mom told me later she just felt more free to express their beliefs later in life.  They were always there.

During that time if you did such a thing you were the worse of the worse.  You were the white traitors, and dealt with contempt.  

If you watched any of the Freedom Riders program you would understand how truly UNCOMFORTABLE at the very least this stand would place you in if you were in the South.  Which is where we were. 

My brother and I never saw my parents treat people of color any different than anyone else.  They repeated over and over again, ‘Prejudice is ignorance’.  They showed us what that meant, and I’m truly thankful for that.

My children have friends from just about every background imaginable.  I realize they know history, but their freedom of having those friends with no attitude, comments, and sense of bigotry like I saw in childhood?   That is SO big to me!

Prejudice Is Ignorance

This comment can be applied to so much more than my childhood experiences with seeing direct racism.

Prejudice is about power and authority in the eyes of a bigot.  If you attempt to place the bigot on the same plain with the source of their prejudice?  They see it as taking their power and authority away.  Its almost as if the competition is being handed things that was ‘theirs alone’, and they are being forced to share.

In their own pride, selfish nature they lash back.  The sense of superiority that they had been raised with is seen as being unjustly taken away.

The Prejudice is ignorance comment that I learned from childhood applies here.  Sadly, their response is what is dangerous, damaging and downright hurtful.  They seem to think life would be the Dr. Doolittle's push me pull me animal.

I’m going to ‘pull me’ as hard as I can to keep my authority and superiority, and at times I will violently resist the ‘push me’ source of prejudice to view them any different.  

If you read any of the myths of what would happen to society if blacks were given this position?  You can feel what I’m speaking about.  I remember ONE in particular, black men would rape white women.

Their true fear was/is ignorance.  With ignorance came hate, contempt, name calling, labeling, lies, etc.  Yes, Prejudice is ignorance.

Patriarchy is the ultimate cause of all abuse against women?

Pastor Versus Feminist

Patriarchy is the ultimate cause of all abuse against women.

This one small sentence sure does pack a punch doesn’t it?

Do I buy that 100%?  No.  I do think at times patriarchy can be a contributing factor to abuse towards… WELL anyone!

I have family, and I have known families that tend to live by the ‘father rule’.  If the sentence, ‘patriarchy is the ultimate cause of all abuse against women’ you would see it in every instance of patriarchy.

You don’t find that to be the case, because not all people view patriarchy as authority and power based.

I’m talking a heart and attitude issue here more than anything.  My uncle for example would NEVER use the trump card, ‘I have the last word’ type of thing.  He respected and loved his wife to much to even condone such a stand.  

I realize some people would think their decision making within their household would come to standstill.  Guess what? It didn’t.  Matter of fact I’m sure he would scratch his head, and wonder why that even needs to be factor.

When you have an abusive person I do believe there are many issues at work.  I don’t believe when we get up close and personal that everyone has the same backgrounds and issues involved.  I have mentioned so many times that people are custom, and I do believe when it comes to abusive people?  Its no different.

‘Never the twain shall meet’

Have you ever heard that term before? Its Defined as: something that you say when two things or people are so different that they can never exist together or agree with each other.

A great example of this would be feminists, and complementarians.  Can you imagine?

One group telling the other they are responsible for the fall of society and are man haters.  

Then you have the other side the coined the phrase: Patriarchy is the ultimate cause of all abuse against women.

I mean WHEN have you ever seen them ‘admit’ they agree on anything?!  The extremists in both camps would rather be put to death it seems like.

I guess I seem to get more angry at the complementarians, because of their bull headedness towards being right.  I’m not saying the feminist’s don’t do that, but complementarians should know better.   

Whether or not they like the feminists they are to be Christ like towards them, and they have just as much fun throwing out myths and downright lies about the group overall.

Both groups I have seen use scare tactics, and it personally seems to me Christians are called to be above that.  

Since complementarians love the word ‘worldly’?  Their behavior shows they are projecting it, and please don’t use the excuse ‘we are all sinners’ okay?  Its been going on long enough they should have grasped a clue a while ago and stopped.

There are VOLUMES written on authority and submission – biblical roles for the genders, etc.  When it comes to family violence, or domestic violence very little is mentioned at all.  Have I seen even a small approach to address this?  Yes. 

What is sad is then you see video’s like John Piper and Wife submission, and you sit there wondering if they actually believe what they say.  Why?  It tends to go against the ‘stand on abuse’ that they wrote prior.

Things everyone has to admit

If we look at history, and the treatment of women from the past to the present?  No one can deny the abuse that has gone on, and is still present even today.  The children suffered as well, because they were at the bottom of the totem pole.  I honestly don’t understand why people get defensive about that fact.

We have removed laws that made beating of wives legal, and we have even had past church leaders such as Augustine blame the women if they were being beat.  The extremes of the past?  We all know there were abuses.  

Extreme form today?  Look at the middle east.  The misogynist attitude has always been around, and its amazing that people wish to deny it.

In the Christian context?  How often do we hear if women would do their part properly:  Submission, modesty, roles, etc. they wouldn’t get raped, abused and mistreated.

Too often you hear pastors, and female mouth pieces telling women they are to take it with humility.  On the other hand, excuses about how people can only take it so long before they lash out with justification.

Steven Tracy, author of Mending the Soul reminds us that:

So for many abusive men, in order to maintain their fragile sense of masculinity, they use physical force to keep their wives in their “proper place” and to squelch all threats to their limited male potency. This dynamic of insecure, powerless men using force to control their wives helps to explain why assault and homicide rates are highest when a woman separates or threatens to separate from an abusive husband or boyfriend. In other words, abusive men must be in control, and threats to their control of the relationship must be dealt with by force if necessary. Physical abusers also tend to employ many other forms of control (verbal threats, control of the finances, control of her relationships, etc.) to dominate and subjugate their
wives.

The fragile sense of self isn’t just based in gender, because women can be dangerous as well when they feel powerless.

No More Justifications

You often read about how its selfish to proclaim your ‘rights’, etc.  I firmly believe that is a diversion, because everyone needs a healthy sense of self.  Normally, those that are quick to call you selfish are also quick to remind you of others ‘God Ordained’ role, position, etc.  It’s a spiritual pixie dust way of proclaiming their ‘rights’.

There is no doubt in my mind that faith in Jesus Christ has moved men and women to be more kind, compassionate, grace filled, and in short transformed their lifes!  My uncle I mentioned above was a missionary, and it was clear how Jesus was a primary role in how he lived and treated others.

What seems to be lost on the complementarians is that certain men will use their teachings as justification of power and enforcement.  I have seen too many use the excuse that God will transform them, and all will be well with the world!  Sadly, after that they encourage their family members to act in ways that would enable the sinful behavior. 

I was truly taken back when Shirley Taylor quoted Dorothy Patterson:

Dr. Dorothy Patterson said “Whenever my husband tells me to do something, and even though I know it is wrong, I just have to do it, and he stands accountable before God.” (used by permission Christianity Today 1998)

It seems to me that complementarians have a real problem noting the limits of what they see as men’s authority, and headship.  Jesus noted:

Matthew 20:25-28 ISV  But Jesus called the disciples and said, "You know that the rulers of the gentiles lord it over them and their superiors act like tyrants over them.  (26)  That's not the way it should be among you. Instead, whoever wants to be great among you must be your servant,  (27)  and whoever wants to be first among you must be your slave.  (28)  That's the way it is with the Son of Man. He did not come to be served, but to serve and to give his life as a ransom for many people."


The above scripture doesn’t say that no one can have authority, but it does place limits or boundaries upon the role – even a biblical role.

How often do we hear that truly abusive circumstances are few and far between?  Phyllis Schlafly decided since she has never dealt with domestic violence, or know someone involved with domestic violence?  If you run into a friend like that – get new FRIENDS!

John Piper attempted to deal with submission and domestic violence, and his example of it?  Group sex. 
Now how to apply realistic forms of domestic violence in the church when well known pastors aren’t even comfortable talking about it?  Seriously. How.

Learn to deal properly with the least of these

It is much more realistic that a wife will face the dilemma of how to respond to a husband’s verbal abuse, harsh punishment of the children, or demeaning treatment.  Its all well and good to say you should NOT submit to sin, but at what point does biblical submission allow a wife to go against her husband’s decisions?

John Piper encourages you to come to the church for help, but his ‘example’ using group sex to show how he understands domestic violence in the church?  It shows he doesn’t, and people will be afraid to come to the church.

Bruce Ware got into a lot of hot water with his comment:

and their husbands on their part, because they are sinners, now respond to that threat to their authority either by being abusive, which is, of course, one of the ways men can respond when their authority is challenged,

Now if you look at the above quote?  Does it show the boundaries of authority, headship, or his biblical role?  No.  It puts men in a box as well.  Bruce Ware decided that if you don’t treat men in the fashion he sees as biblical he will either get abusive or act feminine (laid back).

Keep in mind some complementarians are softer in their beliefs.  There are men that truly understand the serving of others. 

When you look at history that shows the domination, control, and abuse towards women and children JUST due to gender or position?  Then you have silly examples of how the church claims they understand domestic violence in the church by using things like:  Group Sex, men get aggressive when a threat to their authority is present, get new friends if know victims, etc?

Why they can’t grasp that the impression that their form of patriarchy can encourage abusive men to take their teachings and run with it?  Back off the hatred of feminists, and think about it.

While I don’t agree with, ‘Patriarchy is the ultimate cause of all abuse against women.’ I can certainly understand WHY they get that impression.

They need to point out the boundaries clearly, and speak against those with a low sense of self – that take the teachings and use them as competition.  It doesn’t mean I’m on top and you are below me.  I’m in control and you are to follow me.  You are to do as I say, when I say and how I say – or else I have the biblical justification as HEAD to make you remember WHO is in charge!



If complementarians can’t admit that happens?  Which sadly, they seem to think NOT so much – the fear will remain towards them as NOT being safe.

Formulating lies and scare tactics towards feminism is just going to cement that fear even more firmly.

The bible does state how to deal with the ‘least of these’, and so far?  They have completely missed the target.

Jack Schaap Transcript - response to 20/20 broadcast

Jack Schaap arrogant response to the 20/20 program, and his enabling Elders snickering in the background

The picture of Jack Schaap preaching to his church after segments of him appeared on the 20/20 show about Tina Anderson and Independent Fundamental Baptist Church.  It seems his congregation was a bit alarmed that they used him as an example of what some circles teach.

Schaap states with pride that he was quoting the word of God, and yet if you listen to what he said during the program?  None of it came from the bible at all.

You see I'm don't take my theology from a woman ISN'T in the bible.  Telling women they better look like they did when they got married, and don't allow themselves to get fat?  Its not in the bible either.

His response to the 20/20 program is defensiveness, and something the program pointed out.  You don't question nor criticize your pastor.  He can't throw 20/20 out of the church, and so instead Schaap decided to proudly rage in church instead. 

He basically proved the point of the show, and I don't think he even realized it.  The attitude they spoke of is right there for the world to see.

He was so comfortable with what he say - he told video locations throughout the internet to pull down his response due to copyright infringements.  lol okay then!

You don't take down videos of you justifying yourself to your congregation if you sleep well at night with what you said.  You don't take down videos of yourself saying, "Hallelujah God's word is getting out!" of you really MEAN IT!

You notice the elders in the background with smiles and grins on their faces?  It shows to the world their acceptance of the venom he throws at others, and their pandering to his hatred.  He admits he is arrogant, and basically tells others if you don't like OH WELL!

I have recently seen the Jack Schaap video up again on the internet.  You can search for it, but I decided to post his transcript of the video response to 20/20.

Jack Schaap Transcript - response to 20/20 broadcast:

ABC news called me this week and said "We heard that you believe that men should be in charge of their wives"

I said, "No sir, I didn't say that. I said God said that. He said husbands are the head of the wife."

I said, "You got a problem with what I said when I'm quoting the Bible, then maybe you should take it up with God."

He said, "Do you think that's appropriate?"

I said, "Son, anything God says is appropriate. I think you better get that straight right now."

I never apologise for standing where God stands. I never worry standing where God stands. Somebody says, "You know what they are going to say about you?"

Pffft, who cares?

Stand in line, pick a number, slob!

Get you little squirt gun out and squirt away.

Benevolent leadership headship authority...what?

The Big Cheese Shows Benevolence

Does anyone else get the impression when you READ some author's explanations of 'headship' it more reads as 'top dog'?  Does TOP DOG mean benevolence?

Wayne Grudem to me is a great example when attempting to explain away why Egalitarianism is 'bad'. He begins a chapter in his book about how for 19 centuries people clearly understood WITHOUT confusion Ephesians 5:22-24, and of course he also noted other passages.

If we look at those past 19 centuries the human race truly struggled with respect and dignity towards those 'lower' on the hierarchy chain of command.  Notice how he didn't bring up that point!  We can't ignore this lack of benevolence, but we do when we 'glorify' the past without those facts.

They seem to truly struggle with WHY people started to search, because something JUST didn't line up!  It could be due to claims of 'how God intended' things to be were NOT lining up with a sense of benevolence they claim to represent.

• We have all heard about the schools or organizations that took care of children or women that found themselves in abusive circumstances. 
• If you look today at articles that 'announce' pastors or church leaders that were found guilty of crimes against someone else in the church?  You find excuses as to WHY they fell, and how it was the person that the crime was committed against was at fault.  Check out just about ANY sexual abuse conviction!
• When "Christians" came to America did that they treat the Indians with this type of benevolence?
  
• Did "Christians" NOT use scripture as a weapon to keep slaves? They can chant all they wish about how you are to show benevolence towards your slaves, but we also can see from history words were cheap!
  
• Lets look at the benevolence shown towards unmarried women that had babies. The boy or man could walk away, but the woman and child were gifted so much benevolence it wasn't even funny right?

We can come up with tons of examples of how supposedly 'benevolent' leaders were far from the example they claim. Even to this day MOST won't acknowledge it unless their backs are against the wall.

Does that look like we 'understand' with no 'confusion' what passages within the bible truly mean?  PLEASE!  Give me a break!  Actions speak louder than words!