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

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

 

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

The Whore’s Birthday Party

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

I never forget his response. NEVER!

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

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

Wouldn't we all??

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

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

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

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

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

We have to bring love and joy into their lifes.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Nice right?

1 Corinthians 13:4-8

New International Version (NIV)

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

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

Alicia Gray Detachment From Reality

I watched a video of Alicia Gray, a former high school teacher in Mobile, Alabama that was sentenced to jail for Child Rape.

I’m not going to call it a ‘inappropriate relationship’ to make it more palatable for others, but I will call it what it is.

It was a crime of rape against a child of 14 years, and she will have to register as a sexual offender for the rest of her life once she is released from prison.


I realize some feel that direct approach is harsh. Hardly. That’s like saying someone that got caught stealing was borrowing with no intent of giving the item back.  “Borrowing’ isn’t the proper word, and nor is ‘relationship’ in the context you have used.  Its minimizing the crime she is attempting to address.  Ownership is part of this.

Someone (the child) in this circumstance was given a life sentence, and it does no good for anyone to make that reality palatable for others and the criminal.  Her poor husband and child also have a great deal of hurt, and a life sentence as well.

Christian’s being direct about certain sins, and sugar coating others?  It just doesn’t give you the appearance you claim you stand for.  There is no show of firmness when you waffle back and forth like that.  Think about it!

Caught on tape: 5 self-serving responses by sex offenders in the church – Recommended reading

Sinister or Naïve

I have to be honest I don’t know much about Alicia Gray’s church, but what I have found is some churches its plain to see their sinister side. I don’t think that label applies here.

The Tina Anderson story, and CJ Mahaney story are more along the lines of what I feel is sinister. They know the game, and are playing it for their audience well.

I see a more naïve side from this group, and lack of the understanding of the dynamics of the crime involved. To be more specific the dynamics of this type of criminal.

The second group allows themselves this spiritual naïve nature to often at the expense of others. It may not be their intention, but they allow their good nature to override their common sense.

They spiritualize things instead of directly confronting them.  God doesn’t ask us to distance ourselves from our crime, and tell others my OLD person did that in the fashion they presented this.  You see detachment, and not ownership in a healthy fashion.

I honestly don’t have a problem with this church ‘supporting them’ as the pastor mentioned. Jesus would have us support criminals as much as victims. Yet, they so clearly didn’t understand the harm they were doing, and I’m sure still feel they did a good thing in releasing this video.  They wanted to show the world they were showing Grace to her, and yet Grace is not suppose to be at the expense of others.

Here is a quote from the pastor,

"The purpose of the video was simply to say to everybody, there is hope for you. If you have failed, if you have failed God, if you have fallen further than you ever thought you could, the love, grace and healing of God will be able to forgive you," Wyatt, who leads Deeper Life Fellowship in Mobile, Ala., told The Christian Post on Wednesday.

Alicia Gray never mentioned how she had fallen further than she never felt she could – or even went near that in this message.  She excused herself by stating she did this because of insecurity, and a void that was left because Jesus wasn’t in her life.  Yes, among other things.

Honestly?  Grace should have shown a humble and contrite person who fully acknowledges the harm they have done to others.  It would think about the impact this statement from her would have towards her  victim and his family:

Because of that joy he has given me, and the changed identity I no longer have to feel shame about the person I once was.  And I will never be again, and because I know who I am in Jesus.

When you are given grace from God, and FEEL it in your heart, soul and life?  You want to give this sense of grace to others, and not tell a hurting family that you harmed that you have no shame because of some faith transformation.  Discernment was completely absent here.  She admits later on she hasn’t even truly began to feel the brunt of the harm she did either – we will see that later on.

The way she presented this message is she pretty much has detached herself from her crime in a unhealthy fashion, because she truly doesn’t feel the harm she has caused.  I mean the ‘old’ person did that – not the new ME!  Yes, you can show ownership of this crime…and God’s presence can still be there firmly in your heart.   Do they feel Grace can’t be present under those circumstances, or are they in a rush to wash the sin off them? 

That’s the feeling most get – her rush to wash this sin off her.  She used the transformation to distance herself from having to deal with it, and sadly you have to wonder does she realize her uphill battle has just begun?  She has built herself up SO HIGH will she be able to handle things when the down hill parts come?

Sadly, from what I have seen in life?  They get very upset that others don’t accept this ‘new’ person, and still treat them like the old one.  The true test will be after the harsh realities of prison life, and how this crime will impact her from then on.  The detachment I see today won’t work as well later on.  It won’t properly process the harm she has done to her husband and baby.  It won’t understand WHY she will have problems finding a job.  How will she handle things when people question her presence alone with her baby.

You don’t see that preparation in this video at all.  Do they think this is not needed?  That this isn’t part of it?

The Merit Badge of Being A Christian

Some use the label Christian, or their relationship with the criminal as a merit badge that the criminal will have this air of honesty, integrity and character as they walk with them during this crisis.
It’s almost like since they have our merit badge its okay to assume they will deal with us in honestly and truth. It doesn’t matter that their crimes tend to call that into question. You have to wonder if they feel they can’t serve them properly unless they use this naïve mindset.  They also are refusing to face this detachment you can clearly see in her performance.

At this point common sense leaves the building, and we enter the time and space of the spiritual la la land. You witness and hear all the correct keywords and phrases that make Christian’s swoon with joy as the criminal plays it for them.

YES her character and integrity can be called into question due to her crimes. A person that is truly contrite in their repentance isn’t going to get defensive about that. They expect it.

If you read her transcript instead of listening to it with the music, emotion, and watching her smile at her transformation?  Its not the same, because you can clearly catch things that don’t make sense while looking at the words – and not just watching her speak them.

Acknowledging the Dynamics of a Criminal

There are different characteristics of criminals depending on their crime. There are similar characteristics as well for most.

Criminals like Alicia Gray use manipulation to draw her victim in, and they are con artists. Those aspects of their personality didn’t just appear one day, and disappear the next. They couldn’t hook their victims in if they were not GOOD at it. Being good at something takes time and experience.

Now, when you point those ‘realities’ out to some individuals? They tend to do the very thing they accuse the ‘world’ of doing…assume the worse. They state in reference to the convicted criminal, “I hear you saying that there is no hope for a perpetrator!”

Actually, no one is saying that.

Sure, the criminal DID say all the right things! Remember their merit badge. They used their keywords, and phrases…and maybe even wailed in response when they reminded the criminal that God forgives …and loves them.

No one is saying to not do what you feel convicted to do, but do it in a wise way.  In this case admit she wasn’t speaking of Grace that your church showed her, and the place she found herself in.   Remember your purpose of the video?  She didn’t even mention anything regarding that purpose.  She was too busy sailing around with the Jesus Language.

I mean she didn’t even mention how God is going to help her with her struggles in the days forward, and to me that a huge portion to leave out.

She concentrated mostly on the transformation, and then shamed the victim by telling them she hopes they get over the bitterness, and sadly does NOT show she understands the implications of her actions.  

I don't expect that the forgiveness might happen.  I understand the implications of pain and bitterness that I have caused.  Your completely justified to feel that way, but I do pray that each of you be free of the pain and bitterness, anger, anxiety or whatever you feel.  Those are not things that are from God.  God does not want that for you.  He didn't want the situation to happen, but Thank God he uses the hurts of others. He redeemed me.  And he placed it in my heart to just glorify him.   And I pray that he uses this situation to heal all those involved. 

What victim in their right mind wants to her their abuser say that God used the harm that was done to them to redeem their abuser?  How their righteous anger is not of God?  How the abuser is all better now, and I hope you get there too! 

Your keywords and phases are there, but they make NO SENSE under the circumstances!  Its selfish really.

She may have acknowledged the entire REALM of what she did within the presence of her husband, your church, your counselors or whomever.  Although I have to be honest – I doubt it.  Sadly, if she wished to show the Grace she claims God has shown her?  She also would had to have felt the entire impact of what she has done.  She didn’t do that she admits, and then tells people it would be a performance for them if she did.

Its one of those things that peace and rest, which are thrown around alot but...God really gives us overwhelming peace when you know who you are, and you don't have to do something to make God happy with you.   You don't have to perform for other people, because I have had a lot of advice from people:  that they need to see me cry more, and people need to see me fall apart.  And my body makes me think, 'Shouldn't I be a mess right now?  Shouldn't I have to do this?  But God just lets that peace fall, and gives me that security of knowing that I'm just not that person anymore!

Seriously?  She doesn’t have to fall apart knowing what she did, and then allow God to lift her back up again?  She bypasses that all together, and then tries to tell people she understands the implications.  Where does that happen in your bible, because it doesn’t happen in mine!

I just can’t picture Nathan letting David get away with that can you?

Sadly, people get to carried away with this ‘instant’ glorification of being transformed…and don’t realize they get played more than they are willing to admit.

Time, words and actions show the truth!   Time with Action was overlooked here. Pride is holding you back from acknowledging this.  You got caught up in the emotion of it, but time will show us if it is truly real.

Christians are quick to bring up stories they have seen or heard of this INSTANT transformation, and they refuse to face the fact we are all human. It doesn’t happen as often as they want to believe it does.  It also doesn’t change the reality here.  It just shows how willing they are to quickly go into some naïve mindset.

All Christians are in a constant state of repentance after all. All transformations take time, because breaking habits is never easy for anyone. I mean remember someone in your life that has something SMALL they are fighting to overcome…like biting their fingernails! This is MUCH bigger than that. Why is it people think the dangerous stuff is easier to overcome if they put on the proper show for others?

Keep in mind what she did was more than a bad habit, and she will need intense therapy for some time.  She didn’t even acknowledge that, because her old person is gone……Wow.

A Truly Repentant Person Naturally is Contrite

A person that is truly repentant isn’t going to resist all the extras that are required from them, and at times I feel some Christians feel it maybe TOO much for them to handle…and they may flee.

Sadly, that is a sign they are not ready to do what you are wanting from them. You need to figure out a new approach. If you refuse to face this fact? You want a fantasyland, and not the biblical turning you claim you are for.

They shouldn’t resist holding their feet to the fire, because they need it! God wants it! Remember those speeches they gave you, because they told you they wanted it too! If they keep running sometimes prayer is the only thing you can offer.

Choosing to Believe Survivors Or Criminals

Lastly, to those people that are all ready to hand her over your faith in her repentance need to listen to those that have gone down this road before.

You tend to downplay, minimize, and make excuses for why you refuse to take their counsel. You assume the worse – they have been hurt, and are marinating it…so what do they know.

Granted some people are marinating in their hurt, and I don’t deny that. You might be surprised at how many have moved beyond that, and want to save you the pain of what they have learned and experienced. Instead, you treat them like a perpetual wounded animal that just wants to bite you. 

So your okay with taking the word of a person that has bitten others, and willingly ignore the ones that got bit.  Why does this make sense to you?  Honestly, that never made a lick of sense to me!

Think for a moment! You are willing to give your all to someone that has shown they are able to harm others, but you aren’t willing to listen to the ones that have survived this crisis.  That lacks common sense when you distance yourself enough to look at it clearly.

Much to often I see people telling experienced survivors they are speaking from hurt, and that hurt has jaded their outlook. They never consider they themselves are being naïve, and in some ways very arrogant. Instead of dismissing them try listening.

What is it going to hurt? Open your mind and heart as you have with the criminal. Can they NOT be authentic too? Do they not have the right to the same respect? It may give you ideas of how to better approach the next crisis, and actually stop the games that criminals tend to play almost by their very nature.  Sadly, this game is VERY easy to play within the Christian environment.

Sure, criminals will admit certain things at times. They will speak of their struggle, and if you use too much wishful thinking instead of wisdom? They are going to play you like a concert pianist! Some aspects maybe on the purpose, and other aspects are just plain old habits that are hard to break. It is what it is.

Victims that are overlooked

Regarding the church in question? I think they were caught up with showing the world how they offered grace to Alicia Gray. Alicia spent much of the time proselytizing, and her apology was too generic.
Her journey is too premature to have experienced this turn yet. It’s going to be a life long journey for her, and she has some HUGE hills to climb in the future. I do pray she walks the walk as well she talked the talk.

Sadly, this church was so caught up with doing what they felt was right that they missed aspects that no doubt hurt the victim and his family.  I also think they are having a hard time admitting that, and just think their introduction – or purpose – of the video could have been done better.  I mean they didn’t even realize Alicia didn’t even address the question at the beginning of the video, nor the purpose of it that the pastor mentioned.

I think their hearts were in the right place, but they completely missed was really needed. I don’t fault them for supporting a criminal. I do hope they yearn to understand why so many felt their production they made in good faith was so triggering, and tragic to so many others that walked down that path before they did.

Side note from me!
I saw the news casts of her walking into court with her husband. That poor man had agony dripping from his pores, and he needs support completely and absolutely distanced from what you feel his wife needs. Separate from the marriage vows. It should be all about him – the poor man needs it.   He needs more than your keywords, and Christian phrases…that they have sadly turned into more of platitudes at this point.   He has a child to consider as well.

Besides the victim and his family? That husband broke my heart just watching him. Learn about the dynamics of the circumstances you are dealing with, and give him the fruitful grace he needs.  I wouldn’t do another video about it.  No doubt he has enough to deal with.  Guilt by association by people, etc. 

I can understand her NOT mentioning him in her court statement, but she didn’t even give him one syllable in the video either. That’s downright hurtful from my viewpoint – no show of grace regarding his support? Yet another HUGE aspect your good intentions completely missed.

Additional Resources:
IT wasn’t a relationship! By Watch Keep – Amy Smith
Being Married to a Pedophile: A Wife Speaks Out and Offers Hope to Other Wives of Pedophiles
Remorse, Repentance, Recovery

Modesty is more than a dress code!

The Modesty Train has left the station, since we know summertime in the USA is here.  I get so sick and tired of all the speeches on what to wear so you don’t cause men to stumble.  Most of the time you see mature women dressing appropriately in church, or elsewhere.  You also have most men that can handle the visual deal just fine.  Is this the only thing they have to say about modesty?

Sadly, other portions of the modesty definition are completely ignored.  I have a video clip of a pastor showing immodest behavior, and he feels he is justified and entitled to use it.

Pastor Jim Standridge is acting like a teenager – or toddler throwing a hissy fit.  Telling people from his pulpit JUST what he thinks about things in order to humiliate them…and then calls it love.  His conceit is showing, and he tells the world he doesn’t care.  Nice.  No doubt the man thinks he is the clothing police as well.

Modesty is more than a dress code

Modesty also includes attitude.  When you are reading or being taught something, and you know the teacher is using shaming language?  That isn’t modest.  Its very immodest in fact.

When you have a preacher up in the pulpit reminding everyone how important they are, and how they are to be revered?  They are being boastful, and that is also immodest.

Your delivery towards others shows the attitude, and if you have a stinky attitude?  You can be wearing the most modesty attire on earth…and you are still being immodest.

Philippians 2:³ Do nothing from selfish ambition or conceit, but in humility count others more significant than yourselves. ⁴ Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others. ⁵ Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus,^{[a] 6} who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped,⁷ but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant,^[b] being born in the likeness of men.

I remember as a little girl, and going to visit my grandmother.  She would push and push for me to put dresses on.  She felt it was the thing to do if you are to be a proper young lady.  I remember putting on dresses to go to church, and my brother and I were honored guests that week. 

What always bothered me was their speech. 

Consider if your language shows respect for those around you.

They saw nothing right with the world, and matter of fact they loved to nit pick almost every aspect of what people did – right or wrong.  It wasn’t just the ladies that did this either.  You heard it from the pulpit as well. 

They made some good points at times, and other times to me they were just being mean and vicious. They did things better than the world, and their proper attire, proper way of worship, bible study, etc.  I never quite understood HOW they felt they were coming across with humility and humbleness. 

They would dress in the most modest ways, but I’m sorry they were NOT modest!  Lets be honest here – it was conceit!

The proper girl’s dress, or the proper men’s suit and tie wasn’t a show of proper Christlike behavior when you go around with the attitude of ‘Thank GOD we are NOT like THOSE people!’.

When you point this out?  Most of the time you are received with diversion tactics.  How we are to not to be like the ‘world’, and how we are to be obedient, and maybe my biggest problem is I would rather go with my sinful nature than to follow God’s ways!

Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is—his good, pleasing and perfect will” (Romans 12:2).

Key point here is renewing of your mind.  Rules, and ugly attitudes don’t do that.  Being defensive doesn’t do that.  Informing others they are being ‘worldly’ when they don’t agree with something doesn’t do that either.  Matter of fact – its immodest.

Galatians 5:¹³ You, my brothers and sisters, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the flesh^[a]; rather, serve one another humbly in love. ¹⁴ For the entire law is fulfilled in keeping this one command: “Love your neighbor as yourself.”^[b]15 If you bite and devour each other, watch out or you will be destroyed by each other.

1. Galatians 5:13 In contexts like this, the Greek word forflesh (sarx) refers to the sinful state of human beings, often presented as a power in opposition to the Spirit; also in verses 16, 17, 19 and 24; and in 6:8.

(6:⁸ Whoever sows to please their flesh, from the flesh will reap destruction; whoever sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life.)

Modesty is about acknowledgement, humility and grace…

In other words, the attitude a Christian should reflect is one that focuses on the needs and interests of others. Without question, that does not come naturally to us.

You don’t justify your immodest behavior, and then wonder WHY you can’t keep your attendance numbers high…and the youth don’t go to church once they are old enough to say NO! 

Studies have shown they might get new people from other churches, or the children of church members.  Majority of their numbers come from those sources.  That’s not growth, and it should be a red flag!  Their pride refuses to acknowledge their immodest behavior!

Jesus – his way is attractive, welcoming, and loving.  That doesn’t mean you don’t get rebuked, but it is done with the proper attitude.  Sadly, churches today to often do NOT reflect this.  They would rather listen to the ‘amen’ crowd then take the speck out of their own eye.  This also does not reflect a modest stature.

While they give others speeches on how men are visual, and how women cause their brothers to stumble…people are asking them about their attitude and delivery.  People get the response that its more YOUR problem than their CONTENT or DELIVERY!  This also is immodest. 

They know something is wrong, and when you try to point it out?  They won’t receive criticism, rebuke, or even consider that other’s may have point.  They are told ‘they just want to do life by the world’s standard!”  Funny how they never see that response as reflective of them.  This is being defensive…also immodest.

They do not make themselves approachable, and they can be kind if you stay clear of certain subjects or points of views. 

¹⁶ So I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the flesh. ¹⁷ For the flesh desires what is contrary to the Spirit, and the Spirit what is contrary to the flesh. They are in conflict with each other, so that you are not to do whatever^[c] you want. ¹⁸ But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law.
¹⁹ The acts of the flesh are obvious: sexual immorality,impurity and debauchery; ²⁰ idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions ²¹ and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.

Modesty in behavior exists when people act appropriately in specific settings. It includes being polite and respectful to others.  Christians are seen as intolerant, because their behavior or words show that they are not tolerant, polite, nor respectful.  Yes, you can present your opinion without coming across as nasty.  When you can’t do that?  Its immodest.

²² But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, ²³ gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law. ²⁴ Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires. ²⁵ Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit. ²⁶ Let us not become conceited,provoking and envying each other.

Pastor throwing a hissy fit, and shows immodest behavior

Here is a pastor that thinks to much of himself, and his message.  He does NOT follow the proper way of approaching something he feels is sinning (Matt. 18), and decides to humiliate him in front of a crowd.  Once the pastor’s juices get flowing he also moves on to others in the crowd, and points out what he sees as their errors.

He states he did everything right.  Jesus wouldn’t do it this way.  When he is called on his misbehavior (news interview) he justifies himself, and says it is love.  What he can’t grasp is his behavior, attitude is immodest… his dress doesn’t mean a damn thing if the rest of definition isn’t present.

The loving thing to do is call these pastor’s out on their immodest behavior.  Chances are they won’t receive it, because they are the only ones that are suppose to do that.  How due to their position they are above all that, and you should ‘submit’ to them. 

HELLO!  Modesty is more than a dress code!

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. 

 

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.

The Fear of Homosexuality

I get so frustrated with hate at times.  People won’t call it hate, but to me it is hate just the same.

I’m going to start with a story about a time when I was young teenager.  The names will be changed, but I wanted to use names so people could get a better visual.

I had a boyfriend named Jay, and his best friend Alex dated a friend of mine from school.  We did see each other, and did things together quite a bit.

One day we went over to Alex’s house to play cards I think it was.  We walked downstairs to the basement, where his family had the card table, chairs, etc.  Off to the side there was a bedroom, and in there were pictures of ‘girls’ all over the walls.  I remarked to Alex that I surprised he had all those pictures on his wall when he claimed to ‘love’ my friend.  Everyone except me was giggling at this point, and I knew I was missing something.  They told me that this wasn’t Alex’s room in the basement, but his adult sister’s room.  Yes.  Alex’s sister was a lesbian. 

A few weeks later Alex’s parents allowed he and Jay to hold a small party with a few friends down in the basement.  Jay and I along with other friends were sitting around the pit group talking.  Then I heard someone else come down the stairs, and she announced to her brother ‘I brought a man this time!”  It was Alex’s sister, and she introduced the man to him.

The next thing I knew she walked over to get something, and tripped on something laying on the floor.  She landed right in my lap.  My reaction?  I got her up off me so fast it wasn’t even funny.  I think everyone felt my reaction was one of being startled when she fell on me out of no where.  I knew differently, and after that happened I was so ashamed of myself.  How could I react that way?  I would have never reacted that way to someone that was heterosexual.

I allowed the fear, stereotypes, and culture to have me react in ways I hated.  I was so mad and disappointed in myself.  I was acting homophobic, and was prejudiced against someone I didn’t even know.  

I don’t think I had ever met a lesbian up to that point.  WELL at least not that knew of.   I knew I had to learn to change that reaction, because it wasn’t healthy – and it would be unreasonably hurtful to others.  It was MY issue not theirs.  A far cry from a proper Christian response.

I did grow up and grow out of that type of response.  I have worked and dealt with people that were homosexual since that day, and thankfully I have never had that fearful reaction again.  I can’t say I understand the lifestyle, but learning some grace I don’t have to be uncomfortable or fearful now.  I have met some very nice people, and some NOT so nice.  (giggles) just like any other human interaction! 

I realize what the Christian response is to the issue of homosexuality, but I have to admit that is an area I struggle with.  You won’t see me taking a stand in either direction, because I don’t feel right either way.  I do know I will not hate, nor will I react in ways I did as a teenager.    I will not fear homosexuality, because fear brings out the worse in people.  I treat them as I would anyone else.  I am ashamed of some of the Christian responses, because at times they can very vile.

Chuck Phelps now taking credit for conviction

Below is a letter that Chuck Phelps has on his website now.  He is basically attempting to take credit for the conviction that he fought very hard not to help happen in the first place.  The quoted portions are my notes.  His entitlement and diversions is amazing to me.  No humbleness is shown.  Its sad.

A Verdict Reached – Ernie Willis Guilty

The trail of Ernie Willis took place in Concord, NH, from May 23 to 28, 2011.  After a week of hearing witnesses, a jury found Ernie Willis Guilt on all counts placed before them.  There are those who may be curious about my reactions.

I am relieved.  Tina Anderson had a right to seek justice, and she is no doubt thankful that Ernie Willis has been convicted.  Ernie Willis broke the law.  No one has ever denied this.  When Tina made allegations concerning Ernie Willis in 1997, her mother and I reported the matter as a crime to the Concord police department (a fact now affirmed under oath by me, her mother, and the Concord police investigator assigned to the case).  Unfortunately, the Concord police were not diligent to follow-up on the reports given to them.  Further, it was affirmed under oath by me and a Concord police officer that I called the New Hampshire Division of Youth and Family Services and reported Tina’s situation as was required by the law.  Sadly, this report did not bring the immediate follow-up that is expected norm today.

If you note from the trial? 

Chuck Phelps and Christine Leaf both made it clear that Tina made no ‘allegations’ of rape to them – the purpose of the trial.  They both repeatedly reminded everyone she never said she was ‘raped’.  It was a ‘convert dating relationship’, and Phelps even noted on camera that he didn’t consider it rape.  By calling this a ‘covert dating relationship’ does infer that he felt it was ‘consensual’, and not a crime at least in his eyes. 

What Chuck Phelps is leaving out is they do not have record of him contacting the police, but do have a record of him contacting New Hampshire's child services.  The police officer he mentions above contacted him – after children’s services reported to the officer, and Phelps never returned the calls.  Chuck Phelps also needs to realize that he had a ethic and moral obligation – besides his duty lawfully – to follow up if he KNEW for sure Ernie Willis broke the law – as he claims no one denied.  He needs to apologize for his lack of ‘diligent follow-up’ as well, that should have been expected to be ‘norm’ now and at the time. 

At my recommendation Mrs. Leaf took Tina to see a licensed medical professional who examined her in private and never called the police (a fact also established by the medical professional’s testimony in court).

The facts posted on this website since the April 8th 20/20 program aired have now been stated under oath.  On Tuesday, May 24, 2011, the court determined that I could share what had previously been confidential information which I received from Mr. Willis many years ago.  The release of this information no doubt played a very important part in bringing these matters to justice.

They Turned Out Despite THEM!

I sitting here praying this morning for Tina Anderson, and all those that are watching and waiting for the jury to come back.  Will there be justice? 

I think some justice has happened even before this trial started.  Willis will go to jail no matter what the jury comes back with today. 

I pray for a different type of justice – that people will open their eyes and hearts to those families that don’t give their children a chance.

What I saw at this trial – among other things – is adults at the time trying to SHAMEFULLY take ‘credit’ for the awesome adults that Tina and Tom turned out to be.  It amazes me because their ‘safe adults’ in childhood were just as dangerous as their stepfather Daniel Leaf at the time.

These adults – Tina and Tom – turned out despite the outrageous conduct, behavior, and ghastly beliefs the adults in their life's made them endure.

The church’s ignorance is killing children, and if we are lucky enough to have some survive?  It wasn’t due to the adults in their life's – they survived despite them.  Can we get REAL for a moment!  Its shameful that people TRY to take credit where CREDIT isn’t due!

Tina and her brother Tom never had a chance.  It is their faith, and their push to have a life later on that should teach others.  Yet you have people like Christine Leaf – their mother – that use their mostly awful judgment as a parent to say it wasn't all that bad – look at how they turned out!

The truth is they turned out well despite their mother.

When you blame Victims - You Get What You Honor

I have been reading around the Internet covering all the different opinions regarding the Tina Anderson Story that was released on 20/20.

Its quite amazing the different stands that people can come up with.

There was one quote that truly stuck a cord with me:

You Get What You Honor - from one article I read.

Ever since the sexual abuse scandals has come out within the Catholic Church others have loved how they can point fingers at them. They love to act as if it’s only a CATHOLIC problem.

Danni Moss of Because It Matters used to write articles about all the different scandals that broke regarding basically the same ‘root’ issue, but different versions of it. If you read the comments on her blog regarding these scandals you see people sticking up for the accused, and blaming the victim.

It’s a repeated theme on every story she wrote about. How adults shouldn’t be made responsible for the adult’s choice alone, and how the children need to step up and accept their share of the blame.

It’s a matter of convenience for adults. They teach their children they are not ready for adult choices due to their immaturity, and yet when something seriously happens? The opposite seems to be the case.

They are not yet prepared for those choices, and we must not treat them as if they were.

To quote Kevin T. Bauder and his article responding to the Scandal

WELL it seems until your honored hierarchy is involved in some cases.

You can read dozens of rants on how people within the IFB are angry about being broad brushed, and yet again if you read Danni Moss’s blog the response to sexual abuse is very common. No one speaks out about that.  Where is the angry over that?

So what can we conclude?

You Get What You Honor

Charles L. Surrett's twist and turns of the Fallacies of Logic!

Sexual predators, like any other criminal, look for an environment in which they can safely perpetrate their crimes. In an atmosphere where authority figures are viewed as 'anointed' and 'called' by God, where they are looked at as counselors and are privy to secrets in their congregation, where trust does not necessarily have to earned but is granted by the office itself. Women and children are to be submissive, which is often interpreted as subservient. Folks who ask questions are sometimes labeled as gossips and rebels. Stir in the fact that accusations of abuse are usually based solely on the word of a woman or child against The Man of Gawd and well... - you might as well pour Miracle-Gro all over it.

I found this quote on a thread speaking about the Tina Anderson charge against the IFB church.  From what I gather these people are IFB as well.  If we remember from the beginning of the 20/20 show they speak about these views well.

I think we all know there are churches out there that are bit more radical than others.  If you have read around there is a variety of responses about this from IFB members.  To me, the intelligent thing to do is speak out against the parts that have been proven and mishandled.  Responsible organizations would take this example, and reexamine their procedures - then make sure everyone within their church is aware.

Its sad when certain well-known and respected IFB members can't admit they also see mistakes that were made, and instead take a defensive stand to throw others under the bus.

Dr. Chuck Phelps as I mentioned has a website up with difference letters, and explanations to basically cover his butt.  Unfortunately, the more he places up on his website the worse he looks.

Its quite odd that a man of  “God” thinks that it would be acceptable to the world to just ‘do his job’ and report a sexual assault, and then turn around and basically tell everyone he doesn’t believe a sexual assault happened.  Then inform anyone that will listen about how he was ‘kind’ in his response.

Within the 20/20 show they spoke about the ‘old boys network’, and Chuck Phelps has now proved the point.  Dr. Chuck Phelps has placed a letter on his site from one of the boys – Dr. Charles L. Surrett.  In Dr. Surrett’s letter he characterized the show as ‘special pleading’.

Dr. Surrett defined ‘special pleading’ as intentionally presenting favorable evidence to one’s case, while at the same time purposely omitting unfavorable evidence.  He states that this may be acceptable in courtrooms, because the whole truth should come out if both sides do their jobs properly.

I would assume Dr. Surrett’s letter is to show the other side.    The problem I see is I don’t think the man watched the show, nor did he read the other documents on Dr. Chuck Phelps’s site.  He tends to contradict documents on Phelps Site, and his own use of ‘special pleading’ is seen as continuing to twist what happened.

1. He states ABC showed two cases of young ladies who were ‘allegedly’ sexually attacked from members within the IFB churches.  The show actually showed at least three. 
   
   I guess he didn’t count the cases that had convictions.  That would mean the word ‘allegedly’ at this point would be mute in light of them.  He stayed away from that, and didn't acknowledge it at all.  I guess it is because it may make his statements look 'unfavorable'.
   
   I saw that as a play on words myself.  If you are going to make your point you need to 'acknowledge' the conviction of more than one man in that case of sexual molestation that was spoken about on the program.
   
   Don't accuse an organization of 'leaving facts out', and then turn around and do it yourself

Double Standards is the true confusion!

Double Standards isn't confusion

There is a plain double standards in some teachings.

A year or so ago I had posted a video with John Piper addressing domestic violence within a Christian marriage.  The question was, ‘What does submission look like if your spouse is abusive?”

I downloaded that video, and placed it on my youtube account because I didn’t wish to link to Piper’s site.

Recently, it has come to my attention that the video was brought down on the Desiring God website with no explanation at all.  My copy of this teaching on youtube may be the only one left online to access.  I have it on my hard drive in case that one disappears as well.

I have noticed over the years this video has infuriated people, and they use this on their own sites to speak out against the teaching that is not only naïve – but dangerous.

The confusion the CBMW speaks about to me isn’t based in gender, but in double standards.

When I originally wrote about John Piper’s video over submission and abuse?  I was very frustrated at that point, and my post went into a different direction.  I asked the readers to see if their children would write John Piper about their experiences living with an abusive parent.  Why?  I don’t think the spouse is taken seriously, nor are they heard.  I wanted to try a different direction to see if we could wake the sleeping giant in this area.

Here is the removed video I spoke about.

If you can't see video click here.


There is something WRONG with base teachings if you can show proper empathy towards an adult child when they struggle with how to ‘feel’ about abusive parents – and yet use all these different rabbits trails when it’s a spouse.

Here is the video for child of abuse. I have also placed the transcript in a blog post.

If you can't see the video click here

Don’t get me wrong I do appreciate his acknowledgment of the child’s pain, but when you give more meat and potatoes towards the child than you do the spouse?  Please don’t talk to me about how people are gender confused, and how people don’t know how to be a proper biblical man or woman in the proper biblical roles.

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!

This is not a tidy world of tyrannical men and victimized women

Look we exposed a new oppressive layer!

I had been reading some reviews about a book called, 'Half the Sky:  Turning Oppression into Opportunity for Women'.

Christianity Today has a quote that I see as universal in some aspects, but when it comes to our culture it gets blown off.

While women do suffer at the hands of men, the authors point out that it is women who abort their female fetuses, who cut the genitals of their daughters, who favor their sons over their daughters for education and medical treatment, and who often abuse their daughters-in-law. "In short, women themselves absorb and transmit misogynistic values, just as men do. This is not a tidy world of tyrannical men and victimized women, but a messier realm of oppressive social customs adhered to by men and women alike."

All over the world we have social customs, and belief systems that can be oppressive.  It's never a tidy world, but often looks like the layers of an onion.

Once you deal with the top layer, and peel it away?  You normally have different issues to deal with underneath.

Follow The Leader Attitude

The other day I was speaking to the well known author, Jocelyn Andersen.  I remember I was telling her that I was a bit disturbed about the fact when I read articles on major Christian websites about domestic violence - they are genetic.  They generally say the same thing over, and over again.  To me there is no meat and potatoes there at all.

WELL someone upstairs must have been listening to me, because an article was placed in my email box today.  Christian Today had an article called, Towards an effective church response to domestic abuse.

“Restored is driven forward by two questions,” says Peter. “Where is the church and where are the men?”

The resource, Ending Domestic Abuse, is an attempt to answer the first question. It’s still being drafted and the final version is expected to come out sometime in 2011.

The answer to the second question is a new campaign to be launched in the next few months, First Man Standing. As the name suggests, the campaign is challenging men to be the first man to stand up in their church, in their sports clubs, in their workplace, or whatever group setting they may be in, and speak out about domestic violence.

I will be the first one to admit that woman that are outside domestic violence relationships are just plain awful in the viewpoints as well.  All you have to do is go to a forum online, and its clear as day.  It certainly doesn't matter what the gender is either.

The First Man Standing to me means stop 'following the leader'.  Its the group think and banter that is encouraged to be repeated, and the peer pressure to keep it there.

I have noticed if you are talking about a member of the family OUTSIDE of what they consider your 'immediate' family their approach is a bit different.  The article doesn't go into that viewpoint as much, but that isn't the purpose of their introduction so it makes sense why they don't.

For me personally I'm looking forward to hearing more about their program 'First Man Standing'.  Its not because the statistics state that more often women are the victims.  I don't personally look at this issue as gender based one.  It effects everyone and anyone.  The abusive individual - gender aside - effects men and women alike (this includes children).  I was more looking at it, because of the way the church views 'men's roles' within family, society and church.

If we look at how church approaches life for minute?  They concentrate a great deal on the man as the leader, the head, the authority of the family.  Yes, I'm speaking about what some view as the 'biblical roles'.  In a way his attitudes towards things should reflect what his family believes.  The man 'represents' the family type of thinking.  There is alot of peer pressure around this, and you see it in the attitude of men and women alike.

If you look at 'human nature' and not just concentrate on gender / roles for a moment?  Attitudes towards gender wouldn't be acceptable for his family, but would be more palatable towards others.   I'm talking in a general sense here, because we all know there are exceptions.  You read type of principal in loads of articles, books, and commentaries about the family all the time.  I'm talking the 'us against the world' with the examples they present.

I think it would indeed help everyone if we could place those stereotypes to the side, and recognize that we all at times use them.  If there was a way of changing that?  It would indeed help everyone in society overall.

First Man Standing is about challenging the behaviour of peers, modelling good behaviour and speaking up for positive relationships.

Peter continues: “There is a lot of peer group pressure to behave in a certain way. If you look at stag nights, the behaviour on these nights is all about what’s acceptable in a group and you need to be a courageous man to stand up in that group. There are other issues like language and jokes demeaning women. It’s about changing culture and challenging what is acceptable.”

I'm sure some of us can admit there are indeed 'peer pressure attitudes' towards issues within the church.  If you again just look at some discussions online you will see people attacked for coloring outside the lines.  It would be rather naive of others to claim such attitudes are not present within the church, but just online with 'those' people.

Its hard to admit I guess for some that there is a spirit of right and wrong approaches to what they seem to say is clearly written in scripture.  Pointing out such examples seems to be a source of defensiveness instead human nature and reality for some.

Since we hear about the women point of view in that realm a lot I wanted to point out something I saw recently that happened to a man.

I was reading a thread about man speaking of the 'entitled' attitude his wife (whom I believe is deceased at this point).  He believed in supporting his family, but he also spoke about how she should have support role as well.

I'm not talking about the spouse working outside the home, but basically a person that is a sloth.  I guess today we would call a sloth a lazy bum.  The wife in question expected to be served, and the man in question either had to do things within the home or pay someone to do them.  SHE was entitled to be taken care of.  In other words, there was no mutuality within this relationship.

He brought up this example of his wife up in another discussion of a family with two children.  The children were older, and due to the economy they had fallen on very serious hard times.  The husband in question requested that she help for a while, until things changed with their financial circumstance.

She dug in her heels and refused to get a job, because that would be outside her role.  HIS role was to 'provide'.  This the basic idea of the circumstance that I read, but I didn't see the whole discussion.  The second thread was started by the man, because of the 'entitled' attitudes of women charging to her defense of NOT working.

This man got dumped on.  The spirit of what was in scripture was ignored, and defensive responses followed.

• He didn't believe in providing for his family.
• He believed that she needs to provide her own income, and he will provide his - and the two will never meet.
• He doesn't value the job of the Stay at Home mother
• He concentrates to much on his wife that has passed, and not the value of the wife he is married to now.
• He spends to much time feeling sorry for himself.

You notice that none of their points have ANYTHING to do with the principal he was attempting to point out?

The couple he was speaking about wasn't going 'send their children to daycare to raise' since they were old enough to stay home by themselves.  The wife wasn't asked to work a full time career, but due to the scarey times was asked to give some much needed relief to their financial circumstance presently. 

If read between the lines with the responses this man got?  The women would have been more than happy to help if they also were in serious financial hardship (if their husband asked this of them), but due to this 'peer' attitude that women should be at home always?  They followed the banter and group think they are taught to follow.

The people that pointed out they missed the point completely?  They were told 'their points' made sense, but that wasn't what he was saying.  Sigh!

If you look again at what they were saying about the stag party?

Peter continues: “There is a lot of peer group pressure to behave in a certain way. If you look at stag nights, the behaviour on these nights is all about what’s acceptable in a group and you need to be a courageous man to stand up in that group. There are other issues like language and jokes demeaning women. It’s about changing culture and challenging what is acceptable.”

The principal of what the author is stating above is what happened to the man I was writing about.  The language and the jokes in the thread I read were demeaning to this man, and others like him.

He wasn't speaking about a family with a stay at home mom, and a man that was providing financially for the family in the traditional sense.  He was speaking about a woman that was taking advantage of this accepted viewpoint, and using it to her advantage.  She was basically selfish and cruel.

He was attempting to continue to make his point in regards to how his present wife approaches their marriage.  At this point in their lifes both of them decided they wanted to work part time instead of just 'retiring'.  He did mention he wouldn't have an issue with her just being a 'stay at home wife', but she made it very clear she wanted to work part time.

I think like alot of people that have worked all their lifes she felt uncomfortable just staying home, and being 'retired' in the traditional sense.  The man mentioned he had to respect that point of view, because he pretty much felt the same way.  He didn't want to 'retire' in the traditional sense either.

You could tell by how he said this the mutual respect and love they had for each other.  His point was his current wife wouldn't question if they were in a financial crisis about stepping up, and helping to support their family.  It was the attitude - the spirit of his wife and how to biblical handle the circumstance.

I was amazed at how these women were getting defensive, and felt like their 'role' within the family was being attacked.  The shear number of them, and how much they ignored the man's point of view?  It showed you what is seen as 'acceptable' to speak about, and what clearly isn't.  The discussion had nothing to do with their personal family life, but more about the attitude of his deceased wife's attitude towards - well - HERSELF!

It seemed so strange to me how these ladies admitted that they would go back to work, and some of them even had done this under similar circumstances - YET couldn't admit this man had a point.

The church can say what they want, but their 'follow the leader' attitude is clear as day.  It sets up this 'us against them' gender war, and also the treasured 'us against them' world versus church folks as well.

Myself and many others have followed the 'First Man Standing' principal.  I have been tossed aside, accused of things like the man above was, belittled and the rest.  I have noticed though that once those brave few do stand up?  You had additional 'few' that tend to stand along with you.  I have had men and woman come along side of me, and repeat how I had good points.  They would continue to validate that with their additional personal ones.

Its hard not to follow the leader due to the peer pressure you find within the church.  Its not easy to be the First Man Standing either.  The small pockets of brave people will continue to grow when more are brave enough to follow.  Its not about gender and its not about 'world versus the church'.  Its about the poisoning the principals and true spirit of how God would wish to treat others.