Tags
blogging, faith, fiction, humor, insanitybytes, life, marriage, opinion, submission, women
*****Thankfully Kate is a totally fictional character,the subject of much speculation, a figment of someone’s imagination, as is my response to her letter. Sadly she does represent the caricature of many women I know who have been a harmed by false teachings on submission.
Dearest Kate,
Whatever possessed you to write to Pastor Wilson about being a miserable wife? As you well know, the man’s entire women’s ministry consists of only two words, “wives submit.” It should come as no surprise that you, my precious one, are nothing more to him than his daily dose of confirmation bias and his cure for what ails you is of course going to be, “wives submit.”
Hope rears its ugly head once again, doesn’t it? We all do that, insist on seeing the good in people, in men especially, our eyes easily deceived as we weave and spin elaborate excuses for them, he loves me, he loves me not. Women are wonderfully and fearfully made, don’t apologize for it, not once. There is no sin in hope, even misplaced hope, but one must learn how to protect themselves.
Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar and what you see in front of you is just as appalling and horrific as your feelings have led you to believe.
I am grieved Kate, that you have allowed yourself to be abused, spiritually, psychologically, emotionally, and that these things have now been reinforced, by a pastor no less. There is a kind of sin in forgetting you are the precious daughter of a King and allowing yourself to be trampled upon. You are a child Kate, His precious child, and to set yourself up for mistreatment or to accept that being miserable is just your lot in life, is to disrespect and fail to love His own child. Yourself. Our Father, who died to know you, who laid down His very life to protect you, would not take kindly to seeing one of His own mistreated.
“Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.” The good pastor’s letter is spoken with the tongues of angels and so the lack of charity, the words devoid of empathy, the deeply ingrained disrespect for you may not be apparent at first glance. I almost wish it was, because the abuse of the velvet glove is so much harder to see and so it worms its way into your psyche like a slug or a parasite. Those things are like tiny rose thorns that embed themselves in our flesh and must be dug out least they fester.
Let me begin by saying you mentioned you were unhappy in your marriage. You own your own feelings Kate, they are yours and your perceptions are valid. I notice the first thing the good pastor did was to go have lunch with your husband to, “get his take on everything.” There was no accusation in your words Kate, there is no reason to go and find 3 witnesses who will testify to the fact that you are indeed having “unhappy feelings.” For the pastor to believe he needed to go check with your husband to verify if there is any truth to what you say about your own internal, emotional life, and feelings, is disrespectful towards you, to say the least. It just screams out the pastor’s own fears and insecurities, as if to say, her perceptions are probably wrong, her feelings are probably hysterical, most likely she is being irrational. She is female, after all.
This is utter rubbish Kate. Imagine if that doctor who prescribed you antidepressants had decided he needed to call your husband in order to ascertain whether or not you had permission to be suffering from depression.
In case the pastor’s complete disrespect for your own ability to know thyself is not yet apparent, he does proceed to declare that your feelings are liars, they have no authority, and that you should consult with Jon if you need to know what to believe about your own self.
Gaslighting, Kate. Ingrid Bergman, 1944. Gaslighting means “to manipulate (someone) by psychological means into questioning their own sanity.” Our own perceptions, feelings, knowledge, thoughts about the reality we are experiencing are messengers, they are tools designed to help us find our way in the world. To deny, devalue, disrespect someone’s feelings, to declare them unworthy to perceive their own reality is a form of psychological abuse designed to manipulate and control you.
You feel unloved in your marriage, because you are unloved, Kate. Most likely Jon has never learned how to love properly and the burden, the frustration of that truth has been leaving you feeling unhappy, depressed. Not only are you yourself not receiving the love you crave, you now feel compelled to somehow teach, explain, bring it out in Jon, what you were deceived into believing you had all along. You are like an empty cup with the weight of two souls on your shoulders.
Of course you are depressed, and like many women you have gone and swallowed your anger over the injustice of it all. I prescribe anger Kate, the healthy, non sinful kind, the kind that acknowledges itself and finds healthy outlets for its expression. Some women run, some write, some go to the recycling center and smash glass.
Even Pastor Wilson says it, Jon doesn’t know how to love. What a tragedy that he does not then apply the biblical principle, “husbands love your wives.” Jon desperately needs a man to teach him how to love. Marriage is an equation, husband’s love, wives’ submit is a dance, a beautiful tango. You are trying to dance with a partner who sums up his entire biblical requirement to love his wife as, “I go to work, I come home most nights. I’ve fulfilled my obligations.” You are trying to dance with a lifeless partner, a corpse really.
That is not our Lord’s way, “I come that you may have life and life abundant.”
Sadly the good pastor has not yet finished erasing your very essence Kate, nor laying waste to your self-confidence, nor rendering you completely invisible, because in a lecture about identity he must drive the last nail in your coffin, totally annihilate your femininity and sexuality with a most opportune quote from the Hideous Strength, “No one has ever told you that obedience—humility—is an erotic necessity.”
It’s almost comedic in its tragedy Kate, the final slug to finish you off. God Himself Kate, wants you to submit yourself, your entire being, to a man, to your full role in marriage, that of simply being an “erotic necessity.” Resented, hated, feared, a force of nature, but sadly necessary. Perhaps a creature once foisted on men by a wrathful God.
My dear, submission will not solve this inherent disrespect, this deeply suppressed resentment towards you, the spiritual blindness of those around you. One simply cannot make themselves small enough, submissive enough, powerless enough to lift up someone incapable of even seeing their own hatred and disrespect. That is because it isn’t about you at all, it is about them. What they project upon you is what they are saying about their own selves. In the process you are erased, rendered invisible, reduced to nothing more than an “erotic necessity” of marriage.
Of course they do not understand, they cannot see it, it is not personal and their intentions are good. Of that I have no doubt. They honestly believe they are being helpful, there is a stunted kind of love behind their words, a genuine concern for your well-being. It is not as if they are orcs swinging in a monkey tree or something, they are just too willfully blind and sexually confused to even see your heart. They can’t even see their own, and it is right there within their own chest thumping.
You very much want to be seen and known and delighted in, don’t you? To be loved for who and what you are. Intimacy. That is a desire we all have, to be seen and known by men, first our earthly fathers, later our husbands and our heavenly Father. To be loved, to be known, to be seen and delighted in, it is your birthright, your inheritance. Sadly we live in a broken world. Kate, your pastor is deeply flawed, your husband is deeply flawed, and submission is being used against you in a game of sexual politics you may not even understand.
My dearest Kate, submission simply means to yield. It is to yield to and receive love. Love Kate, not abuse, not authority, not fear, not control, but love, the way “perfect love casts out fear.” We soften our heart, soften our countenance, and render ourselves vulnerable to simply receive love, grace, and mercy. We drink in every drop with gratitude.
Submit yourself to your heavenly Father Kate, receive the abundant love He has for you, allow Him to fill you with His grace, to delight in you, to cherish you so powerfully that your cup runneth over, that rather than sadness and despair you will begin to feel abundance, a well of love so vast it spills forth from you. Get into His word, believe His promises about you, surrender all to Him, and allow Him to clothe you in the elegance of His white raiment.
“When the mood is upon you,” when you are caught up in the storm, you do not need to fear. You my darling, in all your glorious rage, are the storm, the force of nature your heavenly Father made you to be. Embrace it, relish it, take up space with a whirling fury that declares and proclaims the glory of God and the truth of a daughter well-loved.
God is not afraid of you Kate, He made you, every hair on your head, just the way you are. What a blessing it is when men are unafraid, too. Come have a cup of tea with me, we’ll laugh about the orcs and how very small one must curl themselves up so as not to frighten them. I suspect God Himself will delight in our antics, not unlike earthly fathers often do.
Till we meet again, Kate.
Katharina said:
Please help me, I am confused. What do you refer to? What letter do you write about? Who is Pastor Wilson?
Warm regards,
Katharina (Kate)
LikeLiked by 1 person
insanitybytes22 said:
Well,if you click in the highlighted words “fictional character” in the first sentence of this post, it will take you to the link.
LikeLiked by 2 people
JDF said:
I know of one family that would be shattered right now had this advice been taken. Mine. Doug Wilson could have written his post nearly verbatim about my wife and I, and had she decided to take your advice, or even have this attitude, our kids would have a broken home and miserable parents living in different places. ‘Glorious rage’?! When her wonderful ‘whirling fury’ came on she was a violent, vengeful, rollercoaster of emotions, with not a speck of spirit fruit — love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, and so little self-control she would claim she didn’t remember it. Throwing various objects at me and screaming in front of our young children because she didn’t feel affirmed enough is not glorious, biblical, Christian, or anything good.
This is a dangerous, dangerous mindset to give support to given the numbers of women in the world who, like my wife, have never known their father, or had any positive male figure around, while having a non-Christian mother they have (legitimate) issues with as well. (Shockingly, my wife’s twin sister has somehow had the same complaints and issues in her marriage.) Read your ‘mood’ paragraph again and imagine that storm has nothing to with a Christian walk, and is actually an expression of sin somewhere between birth and death, but quite mature. Do you really think there is no such thing as a contentious woman?
LikeLiked by 1 person
insanitybytes22 said:
I have seen one too many women abused, driven away from the church, driven away from faith itself, because of the ugliness poured on them by false teachings.
We aren’t all tempermental children who grew up without fathers, many of us are actual human beings, women of faith, people who deserve to be treated with kindness and respect.
LikeLiked by 1 person
JDF said:
1) Sure, but what does that have to do with the original post?
2) a- How can you write this post being so confirming and supportive of Kate and then call my wife, who used to be a near match to the fictitious person, a temperamental child?
b- Women in the right or wrong in their marriages are all actual human beings deserving kindness and respect. Why would you delineate differences?
LikeLiked by 1 person
OKRickety said:
“We aren’t all tempermental children who grew up without fathers, many of us are actual human beings, women of faith, people who deserve to be treated with kindness and respect.”
IB, one could read this uncharitably to mean that people who grew up apart from their fathers are not humans. I don’t believe this was your intention. However, I do not “regret having to object at all, but the fact of the matter” is that all women (and men and children, too) deserve to be treated with kindness and respect.
LikeLiked by 1 person
OKRickety said:
JDF, I am thankful that your marriage and family survived the emotional abuse of your wife. Unfortunately, there are many who seem to be only able to focus on abuse by men towards women. May God help them to recognize their blindness.
LikeLike
JDF said:
Thank you. It was a chapter that amazingly and thankfully seems so far away, even though it was only a few years ago. Reading Doug’s article brought it all back, and reminded me how many times I questioned myself, and would ask any trusted Christian friend or counselor I could, “what could I be doing wrong?” I received a lot of advice that frankly was cliche’ and not too helpful, and most counselors were in my opinion hesitant to a fault to diagnose any issue. The one who told me I needed to stand up to her wanted to get my wife on medication, which she vehemently opposed and then never went back. I didn’t blame her for wanting to avoid meds, but the fact that she couldn’t just say so and respect that (female) counselor still was another sign she was fighting self-reflection at that point.
I still view it as a miracle that we are doing so well and have such an improved relationship today considering how crazy, frustrating, and plain weird it had gotten. I’ve changed a bit, sure, and try to not be passive, and not take her (much less frequent) down moods so personally as I did before, but the strides she has made to control her emotions, and her general day-to-day happiness with life is unbelievably better. Basically, for the first time she decided to start respecting me as a husband, I started to do a better job of leading, and we have only grown together since.
LikeLiked by 2 people
pamelaparizo said:
I don’t recall seeing in this article that Kate threw anything or went into a rage as you describe. Instead the woman is depressed, which is essentially self-loathing. Yes, in your position, taking a stand for the safety of your family seems necessitated. it sounds like your wife had some serious damaging behavior which needed to be addressed for the safety of your family. That doesn’t appear to be the case here. There is no mention of Kate being out of control, which the men in this thread seem to assume. SELF-CONTROL doesn’t appear to be the issue.
If Doug Wilson had clarified exactly the issue he seems to be implying, i.e., feminist quest for fulfillment outside of her marriage and dissatisfaction with her womanly role, that would’ve made it more clear. However his methodology leaves something to be desired. And he did not prove sufficiently that Jon fulfilled the command to love his wife as Christ loves the Church.
LikeLiked by 1 person
John F. Martin said:
Greetings IB! I offer the following as a thought experiment.
Hi IB, this is Kate. Thank you so much for sharing your thoughts regarding the correspondence I’ve had with Pastor Wilson. I truly believe Proverbs 11:14, but also know that ultimately the success or failure of my marriage is up to Jon and I and our reliance on God. Thanks again for pointing me to Him, one can never hear that enough!
Based on your comments regarding Pastor Wilson, I feel I must explain why I wrote to him, and honestly have no issue with Jon talking to him. We are connected by family, and every time we see him and his wife – truly since our wedding on – Jon and I comment that we want what they have. As a family, the Wilson’s are encouraging, joyful, loyal, God-fearing people. Though I know he’s a pastor, I wrote to him because he among many stood up at our wedding, committing to support us. I want his help!
I’ll admit to not reading his blog too much, so I hope the broad brush with which you paint his women’s ministry is not true. His wife and daughter certainly don’t need to protect themselves from him and I trust that I don’t either.
But specifically to your letter – I will claim no abuse; not spiritual, psychological, or emotional. I do blame Jon for not meeting my needs. I have told him so myself, and wrote the same to Pastor Wilson and now to you. Jon has signed us up for counseling a few times; and generally they start with these communication drills and “checks for understanding” that make me feel like I’m in elementary school. I want more for my life, is that so bad?
Anyhow, Pastor Wilson wasted his time talking about abusive situations. I’m not in one. On the other hand I’ve never thought that Jon was afraid of me in any way either…but Pastor Wilson’s comment that Jon is afraid of dealing with some of my negative feelings has a ring of truth to it.
I know it seems counter-intuitive to know I’m loved, both by Jon and God, and yet feel so unloved. I don’t know how to resolve that disparity, but thank you so much for all your encouragement…to receive love, to read the Word and remember the promises…to be the daughter of the One-True-King that I was made to be. In the end I know that neither Jon, nor even Pastor Wilson are conspiring against me, but principalities, powers and rulers of darkness that I cannot see. Again, thanks for pointing me towards Him. I know that one letter won’t solve anything, but I do have faith that the work He has begun in me will be completed. God Bless you!
IB, I know in your replies on Mablog, and especially here on your blog that you have certain ideas that deserve consideration and discussion. When internet dialog starts to digress, I want to be in the peace-maker camp, but I really don’t have that kind of pull. Somehow you get people a little riled up…and for that I continually applaud you. You make me think, you stretch me – and because I’ve done so spectacularly awful in relationships – I know I have something to learn from you! Be blessed IB!
LikeLike
insanitybytes22 said:
Let’s try another thought experiment, do you think I’m a heretic? A Jezebel? In rebellion, a disgrace to God Himself, a liar, irrational, someone who shouldn’t be allowed to vote, insane? Because I have been called all those names and worse in Pastor Wilson’s threads many times. That is flat out verbal abuse and disrespect.
Verbal abuse and disrespect that is allowed to stand, worse declared justified and condoned. Not one speaks against it.
If they believe it is acceptable to attack me in that way, that is how they perceive all women, as having so little worth and value they are free to dole out abuse anytime they wish. I’m a mom and a grandma and woman of faith, I’ll not condone such things.
LikeLike
John F. Martin said:
I don’t think you are any of those things. I will say you have made statements that have made me say; “What exactly did she mean by that?”, but I chalk that up to language and style, not heresy. I don’t keep score, but you have been brusque and abrasive as well. I do think that verbal abuse and disrespect are magnified on the internet and agree that you have been treated poorly, yet even in the post in question, Pastor Wilson tried to clarify and ask questions about your comments. That’s more interaction than I’ve seen anyone else get, and I’m fairly certain that you have sparked post ideas because of your participation on the blog.
Your last paragraph seems an overstatement to me, but I also believe there is always some truth in perception.
The reason I wrote the reply letter was to see if I truly believed there was a way that Kate could take no offense at Pastor Wilson’s conversation with Jon, nor at his reference to Abigail and David. I’m certain from a guy’s perspective, I want Kate to do all she can to improve the relationship. I hope that a letter to Jon will follow shortly, and that he would want to as well.
I can see now that my post was ‘piling on’ and for that I apologize. I’ll stay out of the relationship posts and just stick to the recovery and freedom from addiction area in which God has graced me with some experience. I know you know this…But you are loved! Be Blessed and Go Under the Mercy! jfm
LikeLiked by 2 people
pamelaparizo said:
Despicable. But then, this is what we get from most of these men blogs, including pastors who should know better. If I want to vomit when seeing them, think of how God feels about it. I was reading this morning on a Judaic site, because I wanted to get a real feel for what the word “ahavah” means. Ahavah is love in Hebrew, but can mean everything from our love for God to sexual love, so when you try to interpret it, it can become tricky. So, I thought I would go back to the Hebrews to get a feel for Hebrew. 🙂 This can be very enlightening. What I found was, to say the least. While the Jewish writer certainly recognized that sexual intimacy has a physical component, and that yes, we should enjoy the physical part of it, he also emphasized that a spouse should never be objectified because this strips them of their humanity. When you become intimate, it’s with the whole person, not just with what lies on the surface. It gets to the very heart and soul of who a person is, and yes, includes affection. We get joy from carnal pleasure, but it becomes very superficial unless you also get joy from the very sacredness of our life and the people in it. What in the hades is wrong with telling a woman you love and appreciate her as more than a sex object? ***steam coming out of ears***
LikeLiked by 2 people
OKRickety said:
I don’t think there is any reason to think that Wilson’s blog is part of what you call “men blogs”. In fact, there are a large number of women who comment there, and I see no evidence that they are treated less well than the men. IB is indeed an exception, but this is not surprising to those who have read her comments there over any reasonable length of time.
I also think you misunderstand the context and intent of Wilson’s usage of the quote “No one has ever told you that obedience—humility—is an erotic necessity.”. That’s even more likely if you did not read Wilson’s post for yourself, but instead accepted that IB’s interpretation was almost certainly correct. It seems the herd mentality is difficult for many to break away from.
LikeLike
insanitybytes22 said:
Pam,quite a few of the men (and some women) at Pastor Wilson’s are often all over Dalrock ‘s, Vox’s, and Tomassi’s red pill sites, too.
OkRickety included.
LikeLiked by 1 person
pamelaparizo said:
Got it. 😉 Thanks for clarifying that. I also saw that Pastor Wilson is not without his controversies when it comes to women. IB, I believe in submission, as you know, but I am also a huge believe that it has to be accomplished through agape love, which the red pill does not understand. You also understand my objections to the red pill vis-a-vis Christianity. Light and darkness.
LikeLiked by 1 person
OKRickety said:
“Pam,quite a few of the men (and some women) at Pastor Wilson’s are often all over Dalrock ‘s, Vox’s, and Tomassi’s red pill sites, too. OkRickety included.”
Pam, IB used to be all over Dalrock’s red pill site, too. Does that prove she is “red pill”? Of course not. (Note: She no longer comments at Dalrock’s site because she was banned [after months or years?] of her participation. By the way, she was not banned because she is anti-“red pill”. In fact, Dalrock recently banned “Artisanal Toad”, a commenter and WordPress blogger who is a vocal advocate for polygyny [multiple wives] as well as other unusual behaviors.)
For what it’s worth, I recognize that IB considers me “red pill”. It is true that I do often read Dalrock and sometimes comment there. However, I have seldom even read Vox’s or Tomassi’s blogs, much less commented there.
LikeLike
pamelaparizo said:
I do not know if you are or not. I do know the red pill is not compatible with Christianity. If you think it is, and you think Dalrock has something to offer then you are mistaken. The red pill is rooted in evolutionary pscyhology which has nothing to do with the Bible or the Holy Spirit. I’m sorry, but pseudo-science has incompatible with the truth. Dalrock’s response to a woman feeling unloved is more sex. Erotic love is not what the Bible commands of a husband. He ties himself to Rollo Tomassi, who feels at liberty to rewrite the Bible with his rationalism. What hath light to do with darkness. I’m sure that IB was there, not to learn, but to confront their vile teachings.
LikeLiked by 1 person
OKRickety said:
Pam,
“I also saw that Pastor Wilson is not without his controversies when it comes to women.”
God’s truth often results in controversy today. This has been true for a long time. If I remember correctly, Jesus was also “not without his controversies when it comes to women”.
Did you read Wilson’s post, or are you accepting IB’s interpretation and analysis to be correct?
LikeLike
pamelaparizo said:
OK, when I saw controversies, I’m talking about true controversy. What I believe is controversial. I believe in absolute submission, and yes Kate does need to ensure she is fully submitted, but unless Wilson filled the holes in, his advice comes across as one-sided.
When I say controversies, I’m talking about blaming a girl for being raped by one of HIS seminary students. I’m talking about views on slavery that could be considered racist. I also do not adhere to his patriarchal view of society, which I do not see in the NT.
LikeLike
pamelaparizo said:
I already stated that I read the original article TWICE.
LikeLike
pamelaparizo said:
IB, is Doug Wilson red pill? The only reason I ask is that his response that Jon needs to take the upper hand in overcoming her emotional state seems very much a red pill response. I don’t know why they think a man standing up to a woman is the answer. I do know–they think women’s emotions is a “game” that they need to call her on. In my 38 years of marriage, I can’t ever remember playing emotional games. If there is anything I loathe more it’s guile and dishonesty and game-playing.
LikeLiked by 1 person
insanitybytes22 said:
He looks like it, Pam, and the red pills are drawn to him because he’s certainly speaking their language. But formally, no, I don’t think so.
LikeLiked by 1 person
OKRickety said:
pamelaparizo,
“I don’t know why they think a man standing up to a woman is the answer.”
That lack of understanding is likely one of the reasons that Wilson writes that post. Did you read that post? If you do, you might find that Wilson is saying that the husband should be leading his wife spiritually (yes, I believe emotions have a spiritual component to them). I think IB herself would agree that men are called to lead their wives.
LikeLike
pamelaparizo said:
Men are also to dwell with women with knowledge. His words on “leading” came across more heavy-handed than you are indicating. One cannot just simply toss emotions aside IF there is grounds for them. Until Wilson clarifies that it is just her dissatisfaction and not a lack on his part, then his article comes across as one-sided. I agree men are called to lead their wives. I’ve read a lot on the men’s blogs to see their ideas about a man standing up to their wives. They think women are using emotions to play men, and that’s where I object. Not all women’s emotions are ungrounded, btw.
LikeLike
pamelaparizo said:
What I didn’t see in his post was how Jon was responding to her emotional needs. I’m sorry, women do need to feel value, which is different than validation. Women should run from leaders who tell her erotic necessity is all she was created for. One very well-known “Christian” men’s blogger (I think you know who I mean) described his final solution to his wife feeling unloved. He started sexting her and treating her like a sex object and he claims now they couldn’t be closer. I guess if a woman is taught her value is SMV she would be satisfied with that. Most women aren’t.
LikeLiked by 1 person
ColorStorm said:
Yikes msb.
Curiosity got the better of me, and I popped over to that site.
So you are ‘rebellious,’ and in ‘error?’ Geez, the comment thread has you painted as making Jezebel look like Betty Crocker.
What a crock.
Lot’s and lot’s of fog over there, and you are a better person than I for tip toeing through the mud. If they only knew you…..
I know colors, and I know what lousy paint looks like, that facade of smelly perfume and pretended righteousness. I like the observation of someone who said you bring a storm of sorts, (to paraphrase,) made me laugh. But some storms need a causin, and others need defending. Of course your whirlwind is a nice little package of truth. 😉
LikeLiked by 2 people
OKRickety said:
“Geez, the comment thread has you painted as making Jezebel look like Betty Crocker…. If they only knew you…..”
Many who see what IB says on other blogs know her much better than you think they do. I know. I am one of them. I have seen what IB has said. And it is sometimes quite ugly. Of course, you won’t accept this as even a remote possibility. Denial is one of the easiest ways to avoid the truth.
LikeLike
ColorStorm said:
Tkx ricks,
but you have inadvertently proved my point. Truth doesn’t always come wrapped in a gift box with pretty bows………sometimes truth stings.
I have seen your observations in times past, and it’s safe to say the ruling on the field stands:
You are offsides. 😉
LikeLiked by 1 person
insanitybytes22 said:
Thanks, Colorstorm, much appreciated. 🙂
LOL! I guess I’m just the Betty Crocker of all Jezebels now. Oh well, it is what it is.
Meanwhile IRL, I’m pretty sure I’m still happily married, enjoying the kids, going to church, praising the Lord every moment I can. Ironically,my husband doesn’t seem to be worried about my storms at all, in fact he kind of laughed.
I’m really starting to get the impression that so many Christians are really confused about who the enemy actually is. For he record, he is not me.
LikeLiked by 1 person
ColorStorm said:
Sure, no problem msb. You can always count on me to add a lemon twist to your living water. 😉
What a combo though eh, a woman to be feared in the kitchen. too funny.
LikeLiked by 1 person
pamelaparizo said:
Let me just say, to those who defend Jon, that what Doug Wilson DOES NOT say is why Kate feels unloved. He seems to imply it is just a mood she is going through and that by submitting to her husband, this will all go away. Not necessarily. Kate says she knows he loves her, but when Wilson elaborates on his qualities as a good husband, AFFECTION seems to be missing. Yes, he’s an excellent provider. Yes, he is a good father. Yes, he tries hard. But if affection is lacking a woman will feel unloved. I am not speaking of romantic love, which clouds women’s minds as to the real thing. The command “Husbands love your wives” is speaking of AGAPE love which includes not only commitment (which Jon has shown) but AFFECTION and HIGH ESTEEM. Does he esteem her? Does he show her affection during his moments of erotic necessity and at other times. How does he express his love for her? These are very important considerations which Wilson leaves out. My pastor PREACHES about his love for his wife, and he is unashamed of it. I believe many men misread Lewis’ allusion to erotic necessity. The real citation IS NOT in Hideous Strength, but here: http://archive.spectator.co.uk/article/27th-august-1943/8/equality. Lewis is saying that the inequality of men and women’s gender is necessary for the act of intimacy. Sexual surrender necessitates that men and women be unequal in their physical beings. He isn’t saying that submission/obedience brings love. A woman can submit herself to a man all day long and not receive genuine love in return. Yes she does need to submit, but yes he needs to show her agape love. Yes, men, being wired differently, express love through sex, BUT it is supposed to also open up their emotions to express AFFECTION. Women need to feel AFFECTION and VALUE (different from valdation), which could perhaps be the root of the problem. It’s difficult to say, because I think his account leaves a hole because he has taken Jon’s part. A good judge hears both sides. Jesus loved us by sacrifice, but He loves us now through communion with our spirits:
And hope maketh not ashamed; because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us. Romans 5:5
LikeLiked by 2 people
OKRickety said:
pamelaparizo,
“But if affection is lacking a woman will feel unloved.”
It seems you are using a definition of love that requires “affection” and, more problematically, requires that the recipient “feel loved”. In fact, I do not believe that any Biblical commands about love mention how the recipient emotionally receives it. Please provide any Biblical support that love must be felt by the recipient.
LikeLike
insanitybytes22 said:
Well we can start with Matthew 19, “Because of your hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so…..”
Every man I’ve ever known who is hard of heart and holds onto the idea that wives do not need to feel loved or experience affection is now DIVORCED.
Than there is the sign of the times, “Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good..”
Husbands love your wives.
LikeLiked by 2 people
pamelaparizo said:
I didn’t say it requires that she feels loved. I am saying that it’s possible she feels that way because he isn’t giving her the commanded affection. Since Doug makes no mention of Jon displaying affection in any form, that is a hole in the article he needs to make clear.
LikeLike
OKRickety said:
pamelaparizo, Where in the Bible is affection commanded? (Note: Love and affection are not synonymous.) If affection is not commanded for a husband to his wife, then there is no Biblical “hole in the article”.
LikeLike
pamelaparizo said:
Ok, affection is an inherent component of agape love, sir.
LikeLike
pamelaparizo said:
Agape means commitment, affection , and high esteem.
LikeLike
OKRickety said:
pamelaparizo,
Thank you for the guidance regarding love, specifically the Greek agape. Many include affection in their definitions. I find this interesting to consider when considering passages such as Jesus teaching that we should love our enemies.
Returning to your argument regarding the idea that Jon may not be showing his love for Kate, you seem to be presuming that the silence on the idea of “affection” strongly implies that he does not demonstrate affection. That is a weak argument, suggesting to me that you want to consider Jon to be at fault rather than consider that Kate has any responsibility for her emotions. That is, you have a confirmation bias influencing your response.
As to the commands to husbands and wives, the Bible commands the husband to love his wife like Christ loved the church, without any conditions based on the wife’s behavior. Similarly, the wife is commanded to submit to her husband, without any conditions based on the husband’s behavior. In short, the commands are unconditional for both parties. Somehow, that seems to be ignored or forgotten in discussions such as this one.
LikeLike
pamelaparizo said:
I am not only considering NT sources. In Greek usage in the classical literature, agape and its variants include AFFECTION. Even should the Bible not command affection, affection a natural expression in both the FEMALE and the MALE. Agape is the highest form of love, and yes Jesus does command that we show affection to our enemies. I hope you don’t see a wife as the enemy. It’s not a weak argument. It’s a hole in the story. He goes to great lengths to show that Jon is fulfilling his role as a husband. Since feeling loved is her complaint, why does he not show that Jon is SHOWING his love? And yes, both commands are unconditional. I am willing to see that Kate’s problem is dissatisfaction with her role as wife, albeit ill-defined by Wilson. Why is it that the men commenting here are willing to see Jon as showing love, when that love is not defined other than fulfilling duties and obligations? LOVE is more than commitment. I’m not just talking about feelings. I’m talking about fondness, caring, tenderness. Natural human emotions. If he isn’t fond of his wife, there’s something wrong with Jon. I also have to say, if she was withholding SEX from Jon, you all would be having a riot. But because I imply that he is withholding AFFECTION, you all seem to want to take up arms and say the woman is being unreasonable. If she is feeling UNLOVED, Wilson needs to show he is LOVING her. That isn’t clear. Being a good provider and good father and good Churchman is not enough to be a GOOD HUSBAND.
LikeLike
OKRickety said:
pamelaparizo,
“… Doug Wilson DOES NOT say is why Kate feels unloved.”
You seem to have read Wilson’s post much differently than others have. I believe that Wilson made many statements about the reasons Kate feels unloved. Here they are (emphases mine):
‘On top of this, your deliberate withholding of a submissive spirit is why things can never be smooth between you. “You do not fail in obedience through lack of love, but (you) have lost love through lack of obedience ….“‘
“Your problem is not excessive authority, but a deficiency in submission.”
“You challenge him, hoping at a basic emotional level to lose, and despising him when you don’t lose.”
“You need to go to Jon and seek his forgiveness for being so disrespectful of his efforts, apologize heartily, and tell him that you have resolved before God to obey him in everything.”
“But think about it. The passages that require wifely submission do not apply (as I happily grant) to a woman married to a serial killer. But these passages do apply to someone. Someone should read these passages of Scripture and see in them their need to obey. And I am convinced that missing this need for application is the single greatest obstacle to contentment in your marriage.”
“You are getting just enough biblical Christianity to keep you stuck in an unhappy marriage, but not enough biblical Christianity to give you peace there.”
‘The greatest accomplishment of feminism … is to make women miserable. Many of them have figured out that the promise “you can have it all” is a lie, and have blamed feminism for lying to them, and have turned away from feminism. Other women, including many Christians, and I would place you in this category, have blamed their husbands for feminism’s failures.’
While I realize that you likely do not accept that Wilson’s position is accurate, it is not reasonable to claim that Wilson did not say why Kate feels unloved.
“… he (Wilson) has taken Jon’s part. A good judge hears both sides.”
Interesting. IB lambasts Wilson for even talking to Jon about the situation, but you imply that Wilson should talk to both. But wait! Wilson clearly did hear both sides, in the letter from Kate and at lunch from Jon.
As to your statement that Wilson “has taken Jon’s part”, I again question your reading of Wilson’s post. Here is what Wilson says about Jon (emphases mine) and, as far as I can tell, he says all of the following about Jon before he makes any of the above statements I quoted above:
“…he does have a significant failing as a husband….”
“So what is his problem? It is, in short, the fact that he is afraid to stand up to you in your emotional fluctuations.”
“He does not help you face down your feelings as liars….”
“He still needs to do what must be done, ….”
“… Jon still needs to establish a rule for your household that you will do nothing on the basis of manifest falsehoods.”
It seems clear to me that while Wilson has indeed taken the position that Kate needs to make significant changes, he has also clearly stated that Jon needs to do much better in his role as a husband. If that is taking Jon’s part, then Christian marriages need more of it.
LikeLike
insanitybytes22 said:
You should really stop posting Wilson’s words,they just make me feel ill all over again.
Submit,obey,and swallow and discount your own feelings so you can become a better erotic necessity is not only unloving advice, it’s not Godly.
I’m done talking about this. You guys are clearly full of hatred, bitterness, and resentment towards women. You need to go heal your own divorce issues and your own red pill behaviors before you try to talk to me about marriage,submission or the Lord.
You are wrong and I am done with you.
LikeLike
pamelaparizo said:
OK, people don’t feel unloved because they are unsubmissive. They feel unloved because they are not FEELING love. How does obedience or submission cause one to feel loved? I feel love from God because I remember how He saved me. I remember how HE showed HIS love for me. Then, when I remember HIS love, then I overcome and submit and obey.
Blaming someone’s feelings on a lack of submission do not explain why she doesn’t feel loved. Trying to convince her that she is loved and not SHOWING that she really is loved does not explain it either. You seem to feel he is trying to explain how to be a better husband,, when really what he’s doing is TAKING JON’S SIDE, and saying Jon, get that woman in line. Stand up to her emotions. Please.
Boy, you all sure have a problem with AFFECTION, don’t you?
Agape love=commitment, affection, high esteem. I see commitment. What I don’t see is that Jon shows affection or high esteem. Wilson leaves that out. Why can’t any of you fellows say it?
What Wilson describes in his article, and what you reiterate for him, is called “Game”. See, I do my reading. Stand up to her. Show her who is boss. Don’t take her emotional outbursts. She wants you to be more dominant and face her down. That’s what women want, a manly man who can make her behave. You can never convince me of that red pill dribble.
Repeat after me: WOMEN NEED AFFECTION. WOMEN NEED AFFECTION.
AFFECTION=Fondness, liking, caring, preferring above others, mercy, compassion.
I could point out lots of scriptures where Jesus showed AFFECTION.
I’m certainly glad I’m in a church where people show each other AFFECTION and aren’t a bunch of stiff necks without JOY, PEACE, and LOVE.
Btw in my church, women submit, their husbands love them, they have good marriages, they don’t have women getting depressed. My pastor preaches about loving his wife and the men certainly follow his loving example.
LikeLike
adad0 said:
Titus 2
2 You, however, must teach what is appropriate to sound doctrine.2 Teach the older men to be temperate, worthy of respect, SELF-CONTROLLED, and sound in faith, in love and in endurance.
3 Likewise, teach the older women to be reverent in the way they live, not to be slanderers or addicted to much wine, but to teach what is good. 4 Then they can urge the younger women to love their husbands and children, 5 to be SELF-CONTROLLED and pure, to be busy at home, to be kind, and to be subject to their husbands, so that no one will malign the word of God.
6 Similarly, encourage the young men to be self-controlled. 7 In everything set them an example by doing what is good. In your teaching show integrity, seriousness 8 and soundness of speech that cannot be condemned, so that those who oppose you may be ashamed because they have nothing bad to say about us.
9 Teach slaves to be subject to their masters in everything, to try to please them, not to talk back to them, 10 and not to steal from them, but to show that they can be fully trusted, so that in every way they will make the teaching about God our Savior attractive.
11 For the grace of God has appeared that offers salvation to all people.12 It teaches us to say “No” to ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live SELF-CONTROLLED, upright and godly lives in this present age, 13 while we wait for the blessed hope—the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ, 14 who gave himself for us to redeem us from all wickedness and to purify for himself a people that are his very own, eager to do what is good.
15 These, then, are the things you should teach. Encourage and rebuke with all authority. Do not let anyone despise you.
Memi, Titus 2 is a good synopsis of what God’s Word teaches about gender, social and family roles. A common thread is that everybody should be self controlled. (SELF-CONTROLLED)
Memi, when we are not self controlled, are we not giving too much control to our feelings and passions?
Isn’t the calm voice of reason somewhat dispassionate?
One last thought. Both Wilson and I grew up in military families, and saw the benefits and the sacrifice required of that social order, where a big part of the benefit is service to country, before self. (Up to and possibly including the sacrifice of death in combat.)
It sounds like you, by extreme contrast, grew up in a hippy commune, and saw perhaps some of the un-traditional tendencies of that social order, and perhaps its’ emphasis on inwardly focused and private pursuits.
Hence our basic ingrained points of view are quite likely very different.Our though bubbles about what submission is are probably pretty different, even as we read the same scriptures.
If the above is anywhere near correct. Is it possible for you to cut people like me and Wilson a bit more slack on the submission thing?
Neither Wilson nor I are monsters to the women in our lives, and I would dare say that Wilson’s marriage is healthier than mine, because he and his wife have found a way to submit to the Word together, and reap the attendant blessings.
In any case, Wilson is far more “Titus 2” than Lundy Bancroft! ; – )
LikeLike
pamelaparizo said:
You give him the benefit of the doubt just because you are brothers-in-arms? That doens’t make him biblically correct. Titus 2 isn’t in question here. The question, to cut to the chase, it whether Kate submitting herself is the problem, and whether that will achieve marital harmony for herself and Jon. Isn’t that the bottom line? So, my question, in response, was why Kate felt unloved if she knew he loved her? The things that Wilson used to demonstrate whether Jon was fulfilling his end were solely responsibilities and had nothing to do with whether he was showing her affection in their relationship, which does fulfill a woman’s emotional needs. Wilson implies that the problem is she won’t submit, but does that answer her problem? We do not know whether Jon is showing her agape love. Isn’t he required to? Ephesians 5:25. I for one, believe in absolute submission. I also believe men should show their wives love. He leaves a lot out, because it appears he has already taken Jon’s side. You seem to have as well, in thinking that her emotions indicate a lack of self-control. Perhaps she is depressed because she feels unloved. Will submission answer that? If Kate is at fault, Wilson should written this better to make that more clear-cut. There is a lot we do not know because of the gaping holes in this article. I also think he erred in bringing eros into the question. Eros has nothing to do with the kind of love that this is required in this situation.
I have seen men who think that showing their wife affection is not necessary and that just fulfilling their obligations and being commited is enough. Incorrect. It helps if we really get back to the ideal of Jesus and the Church. Is Jon showing Kate the love Jesus has for the Church? It isn’t abundantly clear that he is.
LikeLiked by 1 person
insanitybytes22 said:
Can you imagine what would happen if Jon suddenly decided to love Kate as Christ loved the church? What if he asked the Lord to fill her up, to pour the abundance of His love all over her? What if he suddenly began to intercede for her in prayer,to ask the Lord to pour his grace and mercy upon her? What if he prayed to be allowed to be her cover, to give himself up for her like Jesus Christ gave himself up for His church?
My husband isn’t even a strong believer, but just one drop of his grace in prayer and I am ready to surrender to just about anything. “Don’t be mad at her God, it’s totally my fault,” is enough to soften me,no matter how angry I am.
It’s sad, I don’t think these guys understand the first thing about grace. I can’t be merciful about that, Pastor Wilson is a pastor, for crying out loud.
LikeLiked by 2 people
adad0 said:
Ephesians 5
21 Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.
22 Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.
25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her 26 to make her holy, cleansing[b] 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. 28 In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself.
“In the meantime, as you know, and as you said in a number of different ways in your letter, Jon is the exact opposite of a tyrant. He is faithful to you. He comes home every night. He holds down two jobs, doing both of them very well, and has provided for you amply. He takes you and the kids to church, and reads to the kids pretty much every evening. He doesn’t have a temper, and has sought out numerous marriage counselors for the two of you—and all to no avail. Now I want to tell you (as I already told Jon) that he does have a significant failing as a husband—but that failing is not one of being an overbearing tyrant. Those men exist but—I trust you will agree—not at your house.
So what is his problem? It is, in short, the fact that he is afraid to stand up to you in your emotional fluctuations.” Wilson
Pam, Wilson and I are not brothers in arms, so much as we understand the benefits authority, like Jesus and the Centurion did.
As to love, God loves everybody, but not everybody feels His love. In order to benefit from His love, we have to obey Him, and His burdens are not too heavy.
Let me explain from the actual as opposed to the hypothetical. Memi (aka IB) knows I have a child with autism, and that many of the marital difficulties my wife and I have stem from our different attitudes about our child’s autism. Neither of us love the child any less, because I accept his condition more than my wife does.
I love my wife too, but she has bankrupted us buying “snake oil” treatments for autism. Currently she places her hope in a $2000 “snake oil” electric foot bath, that she has our child soak his feet in. The bath allegedly takes “toxins” out of his body, but all it is really doing is making rusty water via electrolisis, and putting us deeper in debt.
I asked my wife to send the foot bath back, and put the $2000 towards our debt. My wife will not submit to my protection of her, by my efforts to spare her the false hopes of another costly “snake oil” autism treatment. Her emotions and obstinance on this issue occur at the expense of the whole family.
Some would say that I do not love my wife enough, because of the above. But they are wrong, submitting our selves to God, each other and hard science would benefit all of us, but my wife is ruled by her emotions on this issue, to the detriment of all of us.
When God tells us to “Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ”, love and respect each other, we should just do it, trust God, and take Him at His Word. Certainly more so than the word of our friends on the internet.
Don’t you agree Pam?
Like “Jon”, it is abundantly clear that I am showing love to my wife, we would all benefit if she trusted God more in submitting to God and respecting her husband.
God does not give me everything I think that I want, but between He and I, His love is not the problem.
LikeLike
adad0 said:
2 Corinthians 12
Therefore, in order to keep me from becoming conceited, I was given a thorn in my flesh, a messenger of Satan, to torment me. 8 Three times I pleaded with the Lord to take it away from me. 9 But he said to me, “My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.” Therefore I will boast all the more gladly about my weaknesses, so that Christ’s power may rest on me. 10 That is why, for Christ’s sake, I delight in weaknesses, in insults, in hardships, in persecutions, in difficulties. For when I am weak, then I am strong.
Memi, in the verse above, God did not give Paul something that Paul asked for 3 times. God calls His Grace sufficient for Paul.
Grace is salt and light, not sugar and shade. ; – )
LikeLike
insanitybytes22 said:
What so many of those people at Pastor Wilson’s are demonstrating is the precise opposite of grace. In fact, what has been directed to me repeatedly is actually called verbal ABUSE. Not only is it not a fruit of the spirit, it is not salt either.
LikeLike
adad0 said:
“Like perhaps the blindness of hearing a woman speak of her feelings and automatically assume they are irrational and unjustified, so you must consult with her husband to get the real story? Like the blindness inherent in believing that if women have any issues in their lives, it’s obviously caused from having girly feelings and failing to submit and obey men?
Like that kind of blindness?” Memi
Memi, I like sarcasm as much as the next guy, but I don’t think I call it Grace, although I might call if rebuke sometimes.
You know I like you Memi, but you are not as clear as the driven snow on the grace thing sometimes! ; – )
Your comment was in response to Bibcnsl saying:
“Because of sin, I am often tempted to put my own motives in a very favorable light and the motives of others in a poor light. I often have a very distorted picture of reality.”
He or she was conceding that he knows he has blind spots with regard to himself, so he would expect that others would have similar issues at times.
Memi, what was fruitful, or salty or lighty or graceful about your response here?
I know you can be pretty graceful at times.
LikeLike
insanitybytes22 said:
Trust me, that was grace. You don’t know Bibcnsl, you haven’t been reading the things he has said as I have.
Your mistake Adad, is in assuming I am being hysterical, irrational, or hostile, and therefore simply reacting emotionally. I don’t play games and I know what I am speaking about.
LikeLike
pamelaparizo said:
Sir, Christ is not human. You automatically assume without adequate proof from the article that Jon is showing her Christlike love. That isn’t abundantly clear. I don’t agree that it is. Your own personal marriage experiences have nothing to do with the article–you are assuming that Kate’s emotions are out of whack without sufficient evidence. I again state that there are holes in the argument that leave some things open. Given what is in the article, I have to again question why she feels unloved and is depressed. Perhaps it is the things he mentions, but he needs to make it clearer that her problem is a feminist quest for self-validation rather than just alluding to it. I am a writer; if I was married, and if my husband asked me to quit writing, I would hate doing so but would still do so. I think his quote from Lewis was unhelpful and it didn’t have anything to do with the question at hand.
The woman is depressed, feels unloved, feels alienated. It isn’t clear why. He should make that clearer. If he had said, she isn’t satisfied with her role as wife and mother and THAT is causing her to feel that way, causing her to be depressed then I would probably agree that there needs to be discussion in a loving manner about why God ordained those roles for her. He also could’ve indicated that Jon is showing her the necessary love and affection rather than just fulfilling his role as provider which isn’t sufficient. If you check out my blog, I clearly believe a woman’s first responsibilities are to her husband and children. I think he went a bit overboard in comparing Jon to David and that Kate should fall on her face before him like Abigail. Not too many Davids around.
LikeLiked by 1 person
adad0 said:
Pam, Please try to listen and hear.
JDF, above, says that his marital situation had many similarities to the hypothetical situation in WIlson’s post.
I am telling you that my marital situation has many similarities to the hypothetical situation in Wilson’s post.
Yet you say:
“Your own personal marriage experiences have nothing to do with the article–you are assuming that Kate’s emotions are out of whack without sufficient evidence.”
Gosh Pam, I am not certain that you are validating my feelings! ; -)
But seriously Pam, my personal marital experiences have a lot to do with the article / original post.
How honest is it of you to insist that they have “nothing to do with the article”?
You seem to be appealing to your own authority. (?)
“You automatically assume without adequate proof from the article that Jon is showing her Christlike love.” Pam
“In the meantime, as you know, and as you said in a number of different ways in your letter, Jon is the exact opposite of a tyrant. He is faithful to you. He comes home every night. He holds down two jobs, doing both of them very well, and has provided for you amply. He takes you and the kids to church, and reads to the kids pretty much every evening. He doesn’t have a temper, and has sought out numerous marriage counselors for the two of you—and all to no avail.” Wilson
“So what is his problem? It is, in short, the fact that he is afraid to stand up to you in your emotional fluctuations. In brief, he is being a great husband to you in every area except the one place where you most desperately need a husband.” Wilson
Pam, we can know people by their fruit. John’s fruit looks pretty good from what is written.
“Great husband in every area but one” assumes affection is there, since the “one’ area is something else.
At the end of the day Pam, I don’t always trust my own emotions, I check them with myself and my friends.
When the Bible says that the “tongue is hard to tame” that means our emotions are hard to tame, because out of the heart the mouth speaks. And we all know of people who have fallen victim to their emotions, to their own detriment.
The below Chesterton quote gets into thanks. Since Jon is holding up his end of the work of the family, I would hope the wife might focus her gratitude on the husband’s commitment. Gratitude is good for the soul!
I would maintain that thanks are the highest form of thought, and that gratitude is happiness doubled by wonder.
G. K. Chesterton
LikeLike
pamelaparizo said:
You made an assumption. Not good. We cannot judge other people’s situations from our own sir, that is why I didn’t validate your feelings. Again you are making assumptions that Kate’s emotional state is her problem and not attributable to anything missing. You have not proven he’s holding up his end. A good provider and good father doesn’t make a good husband. There’s that little thing missing that hasn’t been proven. It wouldn’t stand up as evidence. Commitment is not the sum total of agape love, sir. Please stick to scripture and don’t drag things in that don’t pertain. Agape love has to be present or the house of cards falls apart. Sure there have been marriages that have succeeded that are based solely on obligation and commitment, but that isn’t all that Christ calls us to. I could make assumptions about Jon as well, but I won’t put myself in that position.
TO BE SUCCINCT: If Kate is suffering from a feminist quest for self-validation, if she is feeling unloved and depressed because she is unsatisfied with her role as wife and mother, THEN there is something to talk about. That would make the whole scenario much different, but Wilson hasn’t made his case. IF Jon is loving and affectionate, Wilson needs to say so but I come away from his article that commitment and obligation and duty are sufficient to make a good marriage, and he seems to imply that requiring Jon to do more than that is wrong. Insufficient evidence.
LikeLiked by 1 person
adad0 said:
Pam, I am assuming or “inducing” less than you are. You can assume that Jon is not “a great husband in every way but one” but that does seem to be an idea that Kate expresses.
Also the parables of Jesus tell of one experience by some people, that do inform the experiences of other people.
Hence my actual experience on this topic informs the fictional experience we are talking about, and Pam your experience informs it as well.
We always and can only evaluate other people’s experiences, as compared to our own.
Honestly Pam, can you see why I find your initiall point above unreasonable?
After that, there is a lot about love between people, here on this earth, that is all about “gutting it out at times”. Jesus Himself, asked if there was any other way besides the Cross, to save us. There was not, so an angel strengthened Him, and He took our place on the cross.
There is not a love any greater than that kind Pam, is there?
LikeLike
insanitybytes22 said:
There is a big difference, Adad. Most of the men reading about Jon and Kate are projecting their own anger, hatred, resentment towards ALL women onto Kate, so she becomes the overspending wife, the child having tantrums,the rad/fem,the evil one who has victimized them all.
Adad, I have sat and looked at men who have physically abused their wives with more compassion, forgiveness, and love than you guys have shown Kate, a woman who is guilty of nothing more that being unhappy and wanting her marriage to be better. The hatred being poured out on her is self righteous, arrogant,prideful,and devoid of natural affection.
You are all stoning an innocent, fictional woman to death for the crime of being depressed and not feeling loved.
LikeLiked by 1 person
pamelaparizo said:
I am making an assumption based on a hole he leaves open. I go back and reiterate that he is too vague on the cause of her dilemma. If he would make it clear that it is feminism in nature and that she is dissatisfied with her role, then telling to completely submit is justified. Since he doesn’t mention Jon’s showing his wife affection or love, that leaves it open that he might not be. He needs to clarify both points.
Your experience may not be their experience, and I don’t see that it is. You are transferring your experience to something that it hasn’t been proven is comparable. You are filling in the gap. I think it is safer in this instance to weigh the facts as they are.
I do not understand your allusion to love at all. What are you getting at, gutting it out? Jon is called to be Christ to his wife. Is he “gutting himself out” fully? Is he? That remains to be seen.
I am looking at the article for what it is and weighing the evidences provided. You are interjecting all kinds of unrelated things into it, because, like Wilson, you want to assume Kate is at fault, being an irrational female and that Jon loves her. I’d like to assume that too. I really would. Because I have read stories of what feminism does to women, families. But Wilson needs to clean up his story or comes across as a woman just being an idiot because she wants affection.
Affection is a very real need for women, something a lot of these blogs do not believe. It’s not just about pretty words. It’s about loving a woman from your heart. Women are told continually we are sex objects, we are only good for making sandwiches, that our value is nothing more than satisfying our husband. A little affection goes a long way with us. The word agape does not minimize affection; it exalts it. Christ loved us with compassion, and tender mercies. He loved us even though we were wretched sinners. That’s love. Good provider, good father, these are all good things that Jon is obviously doing right. But Wilson does not convince that he is being loving and affectionate to his wife. Rather he tries to convince that it is her depression causing her to feel that way, when it could very possibly be the root of her depression. I just feel he needs to be clearer about these things in order to give the article the properly needed balance.
LikeLike
adad0 said:
Memi, I am at work at 8:30 here in Boston.
Hope you are having a nice breakfast and coffee.
I and others commenting on this topic are not “stoning” Kate , physically or rhetorically.
My position is simply this. (For everyone)
Do what God says to do, with your eyes open, and see what happens.
God requires faith, but not blind faith.
LikeLike
insanitybytes22 said:
People are stoning Kate. Kate is being stoned.
For crying out loud Adad, I am being stoned for objecting.
Have a nice day at work.
LikeLiked by 1 person
anon said:
IB, I think you’re conflating relationship counseling with victim advocacy.
They aren’t the same thing. I do hope you know that…because it isn’t clear here that you do.
Furthermore, one-sided relationship counseling isn’t relationship counseling at all.
That isn’t to say either partner is “lying”, it is simply an acknowledgement that each party sees only with their own perspective on the matter and both perspectives are important.
The letter indicates a familial relationship between the counselor/Pastor, Kate, and her husband.
It also indicated her husband knew about the letter and was pleased about it.
So it seems no violation of trust there.
When trying to dispute the claim that women are hysterical and irrational, it’s best not to respond in a way that kind of…reinforces that claim.
LikeLike
insanitybytes22 said:
I’m neither hysterical nor am I irrational. You are attempting to deflect from the issue and to disqualify me from making a sound and well reasoned observation.
LikeLike
anon said:
Likening Kate’s husband to a pedophile is neither a sound nor reasonable observation.
You did this immediately and it is no way to persuade anyone to understand your view.
Hyperbolic statements about “Stoning” are not helpful either.
You are not being stoned. No one is being stoned here.
I am rarely accused of being irrational or unreasonable.
When someone does make that accusation, the evidence is pretty clear to the audience whether or not there is any validity to that claim.
I try to keep this in mind with all my correspondences, especially the ones that last forever online.
Not long ago you had a thread entitled “Mindfulness matters”
Perhaps you should revisit your own (very thoughtful and reasonable) thread.
Grace and Peace
-anon out
LikeLike
insanitybytes22 said:
I did not compare Jon to a pedophile.
Pastor Wilson wrote post about a pedophile recently in which he did the same thing, went to the guy, in prison no less, to get “his side of the story.” It is a pattern on Pastor Wilson’s part, one that has harmed the trust of actual victims and created a sense of betrayal.
I am not the least bit concerned about “all my correspondences, especially the ones that last forever online.” I stand by my words. I meant them. I intended to write them. I am not ashamed of them.
LikeLiked by 1 person
pamelaparizo said:
Instead of miserable wives, Wilson should be teaching on why women feel unloved. The red pill and other male bloggers ate teaching that men do not need to show their wives affection, indeed that men don’t express emotions. Men are becoming unemotionally stunted. FOR CRYING OUT LOUD, show the woman some affection. Do you think Jesus wold really be upset if you told her I love you and showed her fondness and caring? That’s probably why Wilson didn’t mention it. FOR CRYING OUT LOUD, it’s not effeminate to show tender loving care. MAN UP! My Dad was every bit a man but he regularly said I love you too my mother.
LikeLiked by 2 people
insanitybytes22 said:
Well said,Pam. There are many, many, manly men who manage to love their wives and actually demonstrate their affection for us.
What is unfortunate about Pastor Wilson is that rather than teaching men what love is all about, he is validating their right to blame their wives and to with hold affection and love. A lot of these men are now divorced, and perpetually bitter towards all of womankind, who they perceive as having blown up their families and destroyed Western civilization. It’s an unhealthy, toxic place for people to remain stuck in, and Pastor Wilson, rather than leading them towards healing and the truth, just seems to want to validate their feelings of hatred, resentment, and bitterness towards women.
LikeLiked by 1 person
pamelaparizo said:
I’m sorry, IB, I just got my German up when OK said, “where does the Bible command a man to show his wife affection”? It’s pretty sad that people do not have natural affection anymore, that they can’t show affection to the woman who bore their children. Not saying Jon is guilty. Saying Wilson left it out, and as you say he doesn’t teach them what love is. Now if Kate had withheld sex, oh my, WWIII. I suspect, based on his allusions, that he was sincerely trying to show the damages of feminism, and he could’ve more clearly showed Kate’s dissatisfaction sprang from that, but he only alludes to it and doesn’t directly address it. But, he also left out affection, which is important.
LikeLiked by 1 person
insanitybytes22 said:
Don’t be sorry, it’s the truth. My heart breaks thinking of all the men hearing that it’s okay to not love, and all the women who will endure such teachings, some until they die, but many will eventually see the lie and file for divorce. Our fictional Kate will probably just overdose on anti-depressants one day and off herself.
It doesn’t have to be like that, marriage can be really, really, good.
I love submission, love the bible, but this stuff is not right, this is not what’s actually in The Word. Those ears are closed,those hearts are hard, I can’t get through to any of them, but Pastor Wilson could. He just doesn’t care to, he genuinely believes he’s doing the Lord’s work and any resistance is probably just the result of rebellion, feminism, liberalism, whatever.
LikeLiked by 1 person
pamelaparizo said:
Yes, exactly. I”m not comparing Jon to a tyrant, because she emphasizes he is not. But that is why I am using the red pill doctrine as an analogy for the American Revolution. King George kept telling the Americans, just submit to your king, without hearing their grievances. Eventually, they got fed up and divorced Him. 🙂 Resistance to the King is rebellion!
I haven’t read that much of Wilson’s stuff. I hesitate to do so. It would just make me ill, particularly if the red pill addicts are feeding on it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
pamelaparizo said:
IB, isn’t it sad that a little word like AFFECTION makes these fellows go bat-crazy?
You’d think Jon was expected to give half his kingdom or something,
They fear pedestalizing women if they show them affection, but they’re don’t fear pedestalizing them as erotic vessels.
Hmm….where are their priorities?
Pam
LikeLiked by 1 person
insanitybytes22 said:
Ironically Pam, pedestalizing them as erotic vessels is a form of goddess worship. The problem being, when life gets tough, they will blame the goddess who failed to protect them, fulfill them, make their dreams come true. She will become the one they must take all their frustrations and rage out on. I call it dominance as destruction, because what they can’t control they have to destroy,and a mindset like that all entwined in sexuality, is a potent and toxic cocktail.
LikeLiked by 1 person
adad0 said:
You know Pam, Memi and I have been “friends” on here on the internet, for quite a while, because between the two of us, we always manage to keep our conversation pretty civil.
I see that you and I can pretty much do the same, and I appreciate that.
As for our different perceptions of Wilson’s “Miserable Wives” post, we both state our respective reasons for thinking our own perception is the most correct denominator for a proper understanding of the post.
Since the post is a fictional construction of issues everyone knows about, we can’t really establish “fact”, so much as establish underlying principles, and you and I don’t agree on what the underlying principle is.
Here, a beauty of a civil conversation is that, at least we can hear more about what the other person’s point of view is.
That is why I keep talking to people like you and Memi / IB.
My point about love was:
John 15
10 If you keep my commands, you will remain in my love, just as I have kept my Father’s commands and remain in his love. 11 I have told you this so that my joy may be in you and that your joy may be complete. 12 My command is this: Love each other as I have loved you.13 Greater love has no one than this: TO LAY DOWN ONE’S LIFE FOR HIS FRIENDS 14 You are my friends if you do what I command. 15 I no longer call you servants, because a servant does not know his master’s business. Instead, I have called you friends, for everything that I learned from my Father I have made known to you. 16 You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you so that you might go and bear fruit—fruit that will last—and so that whatever you ask in my name the Father will give you. 17 This is my command: Love each other. 18 “If the world hates you, keep in mind that it hated me first. 19 If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own. As it is, you do not belong to the world, but I have chosen you out of the world. That is why the world hates you.
The husband in the post is laying his living life down and serving his wife, kids and God, in a difficult circumstance.
In some sense, so is the wife, but for reasons we can’t agree on, she is afraid of losing her grip.
As parents we know about sacrificial love, often by how we treat our kids, diapers and milk in the middle of the night, constantly putting the needs of the kids ahead of our own. In that sense, the husband is “gutting it out”.
And Christ “gutted it out” on the cross for us.
And I do say that that kind of love is the “greatest love”, and so does the Word.
My earlier point, that you missed, about the military sub-culture, is that literally laying down one’s life for his friends, is a real possibility in the military, and many run that risk, with a proper and great sense of love, while running that risk.
Finally, per John 15:10-19, Jesus says that, keeping God’s commands is the way that we remain in His love. And that we are Jesus’s friends if we do what He commands.
Here I expect that we both agree that Husbands are commanded to Love their wives, and wives are commanded to respect their husbands.
If we agree on the love and respect commands, then we can help each other out, on ways to do both, and what those ways look like when done properly.
Hope this makes more sense to you! ; – )
LikeLiked by 1 person
insanitybytes22 said:
Adad, we are still friends. I am not angry with you.
You are still projecting your own self into the story as if Jon were you. You see a man in difficult circumstances giving his all. I get that, we all do that sometimes, we’re supposed to, but that is not the story. For all you know Kate could be the sweetest,most submissive wife ever. The assumption that she is rebellious and defiant is yet another projection.
If you could pull yourself out of the story,you might be able to see Kate better. They’ve been married for less than five years, but apparently been to all kinds of marital counseling and she is now on anti-depressants and writing to a pastor for help. That doesn’t sound like a rebellious woman at all, that sounds like one who is in throes of depression,self loathing,and misery. Something is making her miserable and telling her she just isn’t being submissive enough is literally,a really good way to just drive her to suicide and finish her off.
LikeLiked by 1 person
adad0 said:
Memi, ‘never doubted that we are still friends. Do consider that Wilson dis not say that submission alone was the solution to the couple’s problems.
Wilson made the point that the husband had to DELIVER godly headship no matter how difficult, that his wife could choose to submit to.
I do not dismiss your views or Pam’s, all of our views express needed parts of a healthy marriage, duty, love and feelings do not exclude each other. It is best when they are all on the same page.
Most of the guys commenting seem to be saying that there are times when our faith and our obligations as husbands, wives and parents do come down to black or white choices, right and wrong choices, hard or easy choices or obey / disobey choices.
Where our feelings confuse us, we should do what God says to do. Sometimes we have to “make” ourselves do the right thing, when our feelings direct us otherwise.
To me, this is what Wilson is getting at, for both the husband and wife. Husband lead better, Wife, follow better.
Husband, lead like I do, when he does, wife follow him like you follow me.
LikeLike
pamelaparizo said:
Adad, I’m going to have to take a look at this later, but I don’t feel Jon is “gutting it out” for Kate. I also don’t think her obedience alone is going to solve the problem. He’s not only called to sacrifice himself either. He’s also called to CHERISH her. I don’t see that described.
LikeLike
anon said:
“He’s not only called to sacrifice himself either. He’s also called to CHERISH her. I don’t see that described.”
Perhaps you don’t see that described because it is simply a letter intended to convey basic information, not a novel about Jon and Kate.
LikeLike
anon said:
I really wonder what folks would say if the sexes were reversed here.
Guy does through midlife crisis and is now unhappy. His wife is a good wife but he just doesn’t feel appreciated.
Is he a victim of abuse?
I read threads like this and have to believe a great many people don’t live in the real world.
It isn’t like romance novels. Typically people go through mid-life “crises” of one sort or the other, where they feel unfulfilled for one reason or another. That’s a pretty basic part of life and relationships.
LikeLike
anon said:
Here is a (beautifully done) song by Carly Simon.
Looking at the normal, stable, successful quotian marriage as though it’s a human tragedy.
LikeLike
pamelaparizo said:
Is that what Jesus said it should be? I don’t think so. God loves women as much as He loves men. The OT says “Rejoice with the wife of your youth.” Doesn’t sound very tragic to me. Song of Solomon? Very joyous, very happy, and not just erotic. When’s the last time Jon called Kate “my dove, my sister”? In fact, how many men do that? I’ll bet there would be a lot happier marriages. If every man took the time to extol their wife’s sweet virtues as well as her physical attributes, I’ll bet 1/2 if not more of the marital complaints would disappear.
LikeLiked by 1 person
anon said:
Pam, are you married and how long have you been married?
I’ve been married for a quarter of a century. My youngest child is 14, our oldest in college.
We’re the happiest married couple I know. We’re the happiest married couple I’ve ever seen (and people note this often, it shows).
I can tell you for an absolute fact this song is truth a great portion of the time. Yes, even the best kids sometimes hate you (it’s part of life…if you’re raising them well, you don’t always give them what they want), life can be mundane. There are hard times. That’s a blessing because then you really appreciate the good times.
LikeLike
insanitybytes22 said:
Okay,well first of all Kate and Jon have been married for five years. I’m pretty sure this is not a mid life crisis. But to answer your question, if we were to reverse the genders,it would be Jon whose trust was being betrayed, who was being spiritually abused.
“You say you’re unhappy, Jon? I went and checked with your wife to see if that was true. I think you’re an irrational,incompetent, hysterical person,Jon, so I didn’t trust you to know your own feelings. I think your wife is far more qualified to understand what’s going on with you. Here’s the deal Jon,you’re an emotionally overwrought hysteric who needs to learn to suck it up,submit and obey,make yourself so small and invisible that there is no “you” in this relationship anymore. Have you ever considered an eating disorder? That’s a good way to help erase yourself! Embrace the truth Jon, you exist only as an erotic necessity for your wife, kind of like a human toilet. In you have any rebellious and defiant feelings about your lot in life, suppress them and try to remember a wrathful God who hates you, designed you for nothing but suffering.”
Uh yeah,Jon needs a new pastor, probably a whole new church.In fact, if he could move halfway across the country,I would encourage him to do so.
LikeLiked by 1 person
anon said:
No one would suggest Jon submit to his spouse, but I suspect folks would be very very comfortable with an equal “man up and lead” challenge for similar.
LikeLike
pamelaparizo said:
Why do you assume it’s midlife?
LikeLike
anon said:
“Why do you assume it’s midlife?”
Does it matter?
What she is describing sounds very very much like a midlife crisis type situation.
Women go through that earlier than men.
Around their mid to late thirties.
They just don’t typically call it that when the woman is the unhappy person.
Probably because women go through a lot of unhappy phases (post partum depression, the first year of marriage is pretty challenging typically, when the kids are toddlers those years are hard too…and so on).
Happiness= reality-expectations.
Most of our modern day problems with “happiness” are problems with balancing expectations and reality.
LikeLike
pamelaparizo said:
No. Most women go through midlife crisis in their forties or later. You obviously don’t know women. And it sounds to me as if Kate is a younger woman. As IB so well points out, they have only been married 5 years and seem to still have young women. Making assumptions is adding to the storyline, and you are making a lot of assumptions as to why Kate is in this emotional state. It could be this it could be that. You seem to be interjecting a lot into it that isn’t described there. Wilson seems to be showing a woman dissatisfied with her role as wife and mother. Why, we do not know. She could be listening to feminist voices telling her to find herself. I grant that. But there could be holes in her relationship that lead to this and that is my take and IBs. Wilson does not satisfactorily let Jon off the hook in my view. Women are not as unreasonable as men assume, and yes, many of us do know what we want–AFFECTION and VALUE. If those things were present, I doubt she would feel dissatisfied. While children cannot return a lot of what we give, the man could go a long way to helping her feel valued. Do you know a man is supposed to praise his wife is she is doing well? If you knocked yourself out on the job and wasn’t praised or appreciated, wouldn’t you begin to feel dissatisfied? If this was me writing this letter, I would tell Kate to prioritize herself and ensure she was taking care of her family before her creative needs, ensure she was submitting herself fully and let her know I counseled Jon to ensure he was cherishing her and praising her when she was fulfilling her wifely duties and obligations. My goodness, maybe a few more hugs and kisses. Oh my! Guys overestimate what it takes to please a woman, and yet they feel they are called to do too much for her.
LikeLike
pamelaparizo said:
Anon—I realize it is not intended to be an novel, BUT, it is SUPPOSED to intend to show that he took a balanced approach to counseling this couple and I do not see that he did so. In my estimation, he failed to convey that Jon is living up to Ephesians 5 and all that it requires of him. Instead, he takes the patriarchal view that Kate, like all other women, just need to fall in line and all their problems will magically disappear. While it is true that Kate is called to submission, submission alone is not going to help this woman, as Mr. Wilson seems to imply.
LikeLike
insanitybytes22 said:
https://insanitybytes2.wordpress.com/2017/09/28/what-is-abuse-2/
LikeLike
Mel Wild said:
Wow, quite a conversation here. I might as well chime in, too. 🙂
I think we’ve lost the plot on the whole Ephesians 5 thing, and certain English words like “submit” and even “love” have become nerve words that get confused and muddled in our culture.
First of all, God is love (agape), which means (in various contexts) brotherly love, affection, benevolence. The word benevolence is key here. It comes from a combination of two Latin words,bene volentem: “to use our volition, or will, for the benefit of another.”
This agape is seen between the Father and Son in the Trinity. It’s not about hierarchy as much as it’s about being self-giving and other-centered. The Father cherishes and pours out His love on the Son, and the Son cherishes and pours out His love on the Father. And Spirit provides this holy communion, this other-centered love fest, for us to participate in!
So, we see in Eph.5:21 that we are to submit to one another. Submit (hypotasso) means to subordinate, subject oneself to. In other words, I choose to limit my freedoms and my personal desires for the benefit of another. Again, this speaks of other-centered self-giving love.
What makes a marriage (or any relationship) wonderful is when two totally free people willingly give up their autonomy for the benefit of the other. They choose to “decrease,” or limit themselves, in order to make room for another in their life. This is exactly what God did for us by giving us freedom. And this other-centered love most definitely includes the way we show our affections, as well as how we live our lives. So, what I’m getting at is that if “Kate” feels unloved, it’s probably because the husband is not loving her the way SHE needs to be loved. He is loving her the way it feels comfortable to him (providing, serving, etc.). While it may fulfill the legalities of a good husband it’s not other-centered, self-giving love in this case. In other words, this may be comfortable for him but it’s not agape love. And I could say the same thing about Kate, because when this reciprocating, other-centered, self-giving relationship is absent, or one-sided, anxiety and fear will rule the relationship, which is the opposite of love. Love is, and always will be, relational. And love requires that we die to our self-will for the benefit of the other. I know, as a husband myself, this “death” looks like loving my wife the way she needs to be loved, not the way that’s comfortable for me. And she has the same call to love me the way I need to be loved. That’s the heart of submission.
You cannot separate the man’s part from the woman’s part any more than trying to separate hydrogen from oxygen in order to analyze water. All you end up with is hydrogen and oxygen. The water is lost. The same in a love relationship between husband and wife. So, when we reduce this problem down to compartmental commands, like “wives submit,” used in some hierarchical, top-down paradigm, we’ve missed the whole point of love in relationship. It becomes dualistic and stoically wooden. Rather that finding out who’s “following the Bible,” they should learn how to communicate openly and honestly to one another with understanding being the goal. That’s the heart of love.
Sorry this so long! It’s a subject I deal with a lot in counseling couples. And this is almost always the issue (other than abusive situations) in one form or another.
LikeLiked by 2 people
insanitybytes22 said:
Amen, Mel! Thanks for weighing in. All in good humor here, but let me quite cheerfully submit to all the words you have just written. Your H2O analogy was fabulous. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
OKRickety said:
“First of all, God is love (agape), which means (in various contexts) brotherly love, affection, benevolence.”
Considering philia is the Greek “love” that is commonly defined as “brotherly love” (e.g. the city of Philadelphia is considered to be the City of Brotherly Love), I find it interesting that your first meaning for agape is “brotherly love”.
LikeLike
Mel Wild said:
My definition of “agape” was quoted from Mounce’s Greek dictionary. While it is true that “phileo” is generally thought to be brotherly love, more specifically it means “to manifest some act or token of kindness or affection; to kiss” (Mounce). So, the two words are somewhat more interchangeable than popular assumptions. But, again, which meaning depends on context. In the case of 1 John 4:8 for God’s agape love, the context is benevolence (other-centered, self-giving). And we see this same context in Ephesians 5, because it relates perfectly with the idea of submitting to one another. The fruit is mutual affection, which is subsumed within the meaning of other-centered, self-giving love.
LikeLiked by 2 people
pamelaparizo said:
anon, whether or not agape includes “brotherly love” or not, it certainly includes affection and high esteem, and this is from classical Greek literature not just biblical sources. You would be surprised to see the wide berth that agape includes, even the good will for your enemies. Agape is very important to Ephesians 5. Love is the fulfillment of every command in the Bible.
As to my length of marriage, I was married 38 years before becoming a widow. My parents were married 50 years. My dad was an Okie, not a sentimental man in his youth (though later in life he did soften up) and he would I think fulfill a lot of the duties and obligations that Jon is extolled for. He always let my mother know how much he loved her. The thing is, in the midst of fighting feminism and emasculation, men are being told to stuff their emotions even more than they were before. They think they don’t have to hug and kiss their wives or tell her sweet nothings. And lest you find that unmanly, Solomon called his wife, “My sister, my dove”. He not only extolled her physical virtues, but called her things I don’t think many men today want to touch.
I am in the midst of a study of agape (and its variants) in the Song of Solomon, vis-a-vis the Septuagint. Here is a rundown on the use of agape in the Septuagint Old Testament:
http://loveofgodproject.org/2013/02/agape-septuagint-verses/
LikeLiked by 1 person
OKRickety said:
pamelaparizo,
Contrary to common opinion here on this blog, I am not only unopposed to men being affectionate to their wives, I strongly believe that they should be. However, I continue to have my doubts that agape love has such a strong component of affection and high esteem as you claim. I recognize that you believe that this is true, but, although I have asked, you have not provided specific examples demonstrating this (but have repeated your claim several times).
If I had been considering marriage (don’t worry, no woman is going to have to endure such punishment), reading what you have written would have pushed me to be a confirmed bachelor. Considering you had 38 years of presumably happy marriage and your stated belief in submission, the attitude demonstrated in your comments here does not bode well for the success of Christian marriages going forward.
I am skeptical of the value of studying agape via the Septuagint. After all, it is a translation of the original language into Greek, meaning you are relying on the translators’ understanding of the original words for love. For example, they used agape in reference to the “love” of Amnon for Tamar.
LikeLike
pamelaparizo said:
OK, the Greek lexicons include affection and high esteem as part of the definition. You questioned having affection for an enemy. Jesus goes on to explain that you are to wish good will for your enemy. That is part of the affection. I do not know why they used Agape for Amnon, but it is one of only a few instances. You question the translators of the Septuagint, yet it is widely believed that Jesus used the Septuagint. I am studying the Hebrew word Ahavah which has broader meanings that agape. You question the inclusion of affection in agape love, yet Christianly affection for each other is widely mentioned. Agape is the most common form of love mentioned in the Bible, which is not surprising given that it is the highest form of love. Classical Greek literature
LikeLike
pamelaparizo said:
You don’t explain why you object to what I wrote. Others have seen it as very balance, and actually supporting of the husband and kids.
LikeLiked by 1 person
pamelaparizo said:
Sorry, it’s late and I thought you were talking about my article. What exactly do you find in my comments so horrible to Chritian marriages?
LikeLiked by 1 person
pamelaparizo said:
Agape (ἀγάπη agápē) refers to a general affection of “love” rather than the attraction suggested by eros; it is used in ancient texts to denote feelings for a good meal, one’s children, and one’s spouse. It can be described as the feeling of being content or holding one in high regard. This broad meaning of agape or its verb agapao can be seen extensively in the Septuagint as the Greek translation of the common Hebrew term for love (aḥaba), which denotes not only God’s love for humanity but also one’s affection for one’s spouse and children, brotherly love, and even sexual desire. It is uncertain why agape was chosen, but the similarity of consonant sounds (aḥaba) may have played a part. This usage provides the context for the choice of this otherwise still quite obscure word, in preference to other more common Greek words, as the most frequently used word for love in the New Testament. But, when it is used in the New Testament, its meaning becomes more focused, mainly referring to unconditional, self-sacrificing, giving love to all—both friend and enemy. New World Encyclopedia
LikeLiked by 1 person
OKRickety said:
pamelaparizo,
“But, when it is used in the New Testament, its meaning becomes more focused, mainly referring to unconditional, self-sacrificing, giving love to all—both friend and enemy.”
This is basically my understanding of agape, and is the reason that I have been so doubtful that “affection” and “esteem” are always significant components of its meaning (as I believe you have claimed). To clarify, I believe affection and esteem are included on some occasions (for example, marriage), but those elements are not always present. Since it is a “quite obscure word”, I think understanding its meaning in a given New Testament passage is far more dependent on the immediate context than anything else, including its usage in the Septuagint. Note: In case you have any doubt, I consider the usage of agape in the Septuagint to be irrelevant to understanding its meaning.
LikeLike
OKRickety said:
pamelaparizo,
“What exactly do you find in my comments so horrible to Chritian marriages?”
Well, I had written a full answer but accidentally clicked something and lost it. I’m not going to try to recreate it (but I do plan to have a solution to prevent it from happening again in the future). This is a recreated version:
You believe Wilson takes Jon’s side and complain, then you take Kate’s side, supposing Wilson’s silence to be proof that Jon is not showing sufficient affection to Kate. This argument from silence is not how to “weigh the facts as they are”.
You said “if she (Kate)was withholding SEX from Jon, you all would be having a riot”. In this case, you again argue from silence in Kate’s favor that Kate is not doing this. Here’s what I find most interesting about this: Silence on withholding of sex did not result in any male comment. However, silence on affection to Kate did result in many comments by you.
You seem certain that Wilson’s solution has little value, but yours (Jon displays affection sufficient for Kate to feel loved) will provide the desired result.
It is my opinion that your general attitude (the husband is responsible to make his wife feel loved) would likely result in a wife’s dissatisfaction in the marriage. Now magnify it (due to factors such as feminism) in younger Christian women and I believe that the state of Christian marriage will deteriorate even further.
LikeLike
anon said:
I think this was intended for me. I didn’t see it until now. Thank you for this response. Congratulations on your long marriage, I am very sorry to hear that your husband has passed.
“The thing is, in the midst of fighting feminism and emasculation, men are being told to stuff their emotions even more than they were before. They think they don’t have to hug and kiss their wives or tell her sweet nothings. And lest you find that unmanly, Solomon called his wife, “My sister, my dove”. He not only extolled her physical virtues, but called her things I don’t think many men today want to touch.”
You’ve been spending too much time reading red pill forums online. There is nothing to indicate Kate’s husband was affectionless or emotionally distant. Saying, “I’m having an identity crisis” is not the same as saying, “my husband is cold, uncaring, and not affectionate enough.” I’ve known so so many women with good husbands who were caring and committed…yet they were still unhappy and would use the same type of phrase. Men have never been encouraged to be more emotional than they are now. They’re fed emotion in the public school system on the day to day.
LikeLike
pamelaparizo said:
There is nothing to indicate he is affectionate. Since feeling unloved is Kate’s malady, I would think that pointing out Jon’s efforts to make her feel loved would be one of the first things Wilson would have mentioned. That is my point of the emphasis on affection. He emphasizes his qualities of commitment (good), his qualities as a father (good), his qualities on being a spiritual leader (good), but does little to emphasize his qualities of being loving and caring. It is possible for women to feel unloved even with that present, you are right. If you read the article I wrote, where I write a letter to Kate I address her need for emotional healing. As Christians, it isn’t just about our behavior. Christ wasn’t just a good teacher. Jesus gave us power through the Holy Spirit to be TRANSFORMED and HEALED. Jesus healed me of clinical depression after 25 years of suffering. I am surprised that Wilson never mentions prayer as an answer for Kate’s emotional problems.
Men are caught in the middle between Feminism and the Masculine movement. Feminism wants them to be more emotional, well, more feminine. How natural do men find that though? So the Men’s Right’s Movement comes along and says stuff your emotions, it’s unmanly, to the point of stoicism, well beyond what the generations before the Baby Boom were told.
LikeLiked by 1 person
anon said:
There is nothing to indicate he is affectionate.”
Nothing to indicate he isn’t affectionate.
” Since feeling unloved is Kate’s malady…”
Nothing to indicate feeling unloved is her malady either.
Here is the actual statement:
“I would like to start by summarizing your complaint, which falls under two general heads. The first is that Jon seems incapable of meeting your needs, and the second is that you feel like you are trapped in a severe identity crisis.”
“I would think that pointing out Jon’s efforts to make her feel loved would be one of the first things Wilson would have mentioned.”
They’ve been to two counselors already, he is happy she is writing to the chaplain. Why is he on trial here because his wife is unhappy? Why is he an ipso factor abuser because his wife is unhappy and how exactly is he supposed to prove he isn’t cold an distant when she hasn’t even asserted that he is cold and distant nor has she asserted that he is unloving, in the first place?
Okay, I’ve talked enough here. Now I”m just repeating myself.
LikeLike
insanitybytes22 said:
Anon, when a woman declares a man “can’t meet her needs” and she is having an “identity crisis, ” she is feeling unloved.
What is a “woman’s need?” To be loved.
What is a “woman’s identity?” To be one who is loved.
Whether Jon is to blame or totally blameless is irrelevant. The woman still needs to know, feel, and experience love. The cure for what ails her is love.
The very fact that you and quite a few other men are trying to argue that whether Kate feels loved or not should not be Jon’s problem, is yet another indication that Kate is likely not feeling loved. I mean for crying out loud,many of you can’t even seem to acknowledge that feeling loved is a genuine need a woman has!
Let’s try equating this with sex. Jon is feeling unloved. Oh well Jon, suck it up. Suppress your needs, feelings, and desires. Kate’s busy looking good, she’s fulfilled her duty, and the fact that you’re left out in the cold sure ain’t her problem.
LikeLiked by 1 person
OKRickety said:
IB,
You argue that Kate feels unloved by Jon, therefore he is not loving her. The problem with this argument is that her perception, while it is indeed her reality, is not necessarily actuality. You seem to have difficulty with this distinction, choosing instead to consider her reality equivalent to actuality. Why is this important? As you are no doubt aware, you cannot force another person to perceive actuality as their reality. Consequently, there is the possibility that, in actuality, Jon is loving Kate as he should (with affection and esteem, of course), but Kate’s reality (her perception) is that she feels unloved. I think that you believe that this situation is impossible, instead supposing that a wife will always feel loved when her husband truly loves her properly. That would be wonderful, but we are human and we don’t always behave in a logical way.
Based on your experience with abused women, do some of them feel loved even though they are, in actuality, being abused? If so, that would strongly suggest that a woman’s perception of feeling loved is not based solely on the behavior of her partner, but on other factor(s), too. What are those factors?
LikeLike
insanitybytes22 said:
“You seem to have difficulty with this distinction, choosing instead to consider her reality equivalent to actuality.”
Her reality IS equivalent to actuality. Part of what makes your position so abusive is that you are denying her her right to perceive her own reality. The assumption is that the woman is just a borderline, irrational, hysterical,hormonal, whatever defensive, disqualifying label you can assign to her in order to avoid Jon having a responsibility to love his wife.
There are things like mental illness,addiction,childhood trauma,that can make it very hard for people to receive love, but you and more specifically Pastor Wilson, have implied that Kate’s condition of simply being female, makes her a defective unit who can’t even perceive reality properly.
LikeLike
OKRickety said:
IB,
You are assuming I would only say this about a woman. THAT IS NOT TRUE. I used Kate (and feminine pronouns,etc.) because that is the scenario that is being discussed. I believe that the concepts I expressed are true for both sexes.
I would appreciate it if you would provide answers to the questions in the second paragraph of my previous comment.
LikeLiked by 1 person
insanitybytes22 said:
“Based on your experience with abused women, do some of them feel loved even though they are, in actuality, being abused? If so, that would strongly suggest that a woman’s perception of feeling loved is not based solely on the behavior of her partner, but on other factor(s), too. What are those factors?”
In my experience battered women generally do not feel loved. Usually they are so starved for love that they believe they can heal him or cure him or make him love them at some future date. Sometimes they will try to justify abuse by telling themselves and others, “but he loves me.” That is not a genuine feeling of being loved however,it is a rationalization, a future hope.
There are some women who get so wounded, we can actually begin to confuse abuse with love, not unlike the way jealousy can feel flattering on one hand, until it becomes psychotic.
Can she brainwash herself into a kind of Stockholm syndrome state? Yes, totally.
I do believe that woman can feel loved, can orient our minds and attitudes to receive our Father’s abundant love and that will fill us up,fulfill us. We can also learn how to speak a husband’s love language, how to register and feel the love he is showing in perhaps less affectionate ways. So there is quite a bit that women can do on our end to feel loved.
“I believe that the concepts I expressed are true for both sexes.”
Than I look forward to the post from Pastor Wilson where it is implied that Jon is just being irrational, hysterical, hormonal, emotional, and failing to perceive reality right.
LikeLike
OKRickety said:
IB,
Thank you for answering my questions. Abuse is a big mess that is out of my experience (I think).
“We can also learn how to speak a husband’s love language, how to register and feel the love he is showing in perhaps less affectionate ways. So there is quite a bit that women can do on our end to feel loved.”
Please expand on what women can do to feel loved.
LikeLiked by 1 person
OKRickety said:
IB,
I really would appreciate you expanding on what women can do to feel loved.
Also, my latest comment to pamelaparizo is still in moderation. Perhaps you would let it through?
LikeLiked by 1 person
insanitybytes22 said:
Sorry, I do not see your comment in moderation anywhere, so it may have been eaten.
I will probably write a post on what women can do to feel loved. It’s a good subject, but I’ll have to think and pray about that first. The short answer is to turn yourself over to the Lord, to put yourself in a state of just receiving His love and feeling gratitude. He fills our cup.
LikeLike
anon said:
“And lest you find that unmanly, Solomon called his wife, “My sister, my dove”. He not only extolled her physical virtues, but called her things I don’t think many men today want to touch.”
I’m personally glad. Because if my spouse called me his “sister” I’d be nauseated.
Might have something to do with the fact that Solomon had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concubines.
LikeLike
insanitybytes22 said:
LOL, my husband sometimes call me “sister,” mostly when he’s annoyed.
Jesus often called women, “Woman,” not a derrogatory term at all as it is sometimes perceived today. It was actually a term of affection and separation, as you hear when He speaks to His mother.
The actual words used don’t matter, but speaking life over your wife is vital. I have no idea why anyone would try to argue against that point.
LikeLike
OKRickety said:
“He …. called her things I don’t think many men today want to touch.”
That’s probably true. I doubt many women today would feel affection if they were told their eyes are like doves, their hair is like a flock of goats, their teeth are like sheep, their neck is like a tower, etc.
“Might have something to do with the fact that Solomon had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concubines.”
I doubt Solomon could remember the names of all of his wives, so maybe he called them by generic pet names instead, much like baby or sweetheart is used today. Added bonus: He never used someone else’s name in the throes of passion.
LikeLike
pamelaparizo said:
It’s a term of endearment and not erotic. Btw, your wife is your Sister in Christ. Just like the woman calls her her brother. You gotta sometimes get beyond the erotic and think “soul”.
LikeLike
pamelaparizo said:
Song of Solomon 8:1
LikeLike
pamelaparizo said:
Ok, your comment doesn’t hold validity. There’s nothing wrong with him calling her my sister, since it is a term for endearment. You missed the point. And although it may not be true for Solomon, for Christians, your wife is your Christian sister as well as your wife.
Also, and I was trying to post the verse, in SoS 8:1, SHE says, Oh how i wish you were as my brother that sucked at the breast of my mother. Since we know SHE had no one else (that would’ve been adultery), it wasn’t just a matter of a generic pet name. Hmm…eyes like a dove=gentle, hair like a flock of goats=full thick hair. Think outside the box a little. How many women would love being told how he loves her physical AND her personal attributes. The endearment, my sister isn’t generic. It’s a term of emotional closeness, familial affection–agape!
LikeLike
anon said:
Pam, I’m quite sure Solomon gave far less attention to each of his individual wives/concubines than Jon, the working guy with two jobs who funds Kate’s therapy and anti-depressants. There just aren’t that many hours in a month.
Why do I argue the point, IB?
Because the point is absurd.
LikeLike
OKRickety said:
pamelaparizo,
‘It’s a term of endearment and not erotic. ….’
I’m not sure who you’re addressing here, or what term you are referencing.
LikeLike
anon said:
My advice to Kate would be to go to a longterm care facility and look at some folks who have had those really really bad deals in life. Then give thanks to God (yes, PRAY!) every single minute thereafter that her kids are healthy and whole and she isn’t tied to a bed or wheelchair.
Then I’d say, Kate:
1) Get an exercise program. Remember that kid in the wheelchair? She’d love to be able to do that.
2) Write for twenty minutes each day about a positive experience.
3) Carry out at least five random acts of kindness weekly
4) Write at least three things you are grateful for in a journal every week
5) Stop seeing a therapist, because talking about why you’re unhappy is a way to continue to be unhappy.
The above will do far more for anyone’s happiness and wellbeing and personal relationship (that gets better when you break the habit pattern of unhappiness) than taking notes from an ancient Hebrew love poem
LikeLike
insanitybytes22 said:
I get the distinct impression you are female, red pilled,somewhat self-absorbed, and resentful towards other women. Needless to say I cannot identify an Anon, but your attitude and complete lack of empathy for your sisters, doesn’t read male to me at all,it reads female. Also,that “ancient Hebrew love poem” is actually called “the bible” and your dismissal of it is not appreciated.
LikeLike
OKRickety said:
pamelaparizo,
Contrary to what you seem to think, I never objected to “my sister”, perceiving it to be a term accepted in that culture, possibly used as a pet name by lovers. The same would go for “my brother”. Today, not so much. In fact, anon expressed a strong dislike to the idea of being called “sister”.
“How many women would love being told how he loves her physical AND her personal attributes.”?
Well, I don’t see that his description has anything to do with her personal, non-physical attributes. I’m supposing that is something you have been told in your study of Song of Songs. As to telling how he loves her physical attributes, I am under the impression that this would be physically or sexually objectifying a woman, and this is unacceptable for a Christian to do, even if it’s his wife. If women do love this, then something’s got to give.
Overall, I don’t think Song of Songs is a great tool for teaching marriage skills today. It’s just too far away from our situation to be very useful.
LikeLike
insanitybytes22 said:
“Overall, I don’t think Song of Songs is a great tool for teaching marriage skills today.”
Perhaps if it were taught we’d have a whole lot less divorce going on in the world.
LikeLike
anon said:
Per “Red pill”: I do not base my life decisions on the plot line of a mediocre movie.
“that “ancient Hebrew love poem” is actually called “the bible” and your dismissal of it is not appreciated.”
My suggestions:
1. Have an attitude of gratitude
1 Thessalonians 5:18
“Be thankful in all circumstances, for this is God’s will for you who belong to Christ Jesus.”
2. Take care of your body
1 Corinthians 6:19-20
“Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own; 20 you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your bodies.”
3. Positive experiences (recall brings them to mind)
Proverbs 17:22
“A joyful heart is good medicine, but a crushed spirit dries up the bones.”
4. Random acts of kindness
Ephesians 4:32
“Be kind to one another, tender-hearted, forgiving each other, just as God in Christ also has forgiven you.”
Per “self absorption” (used to describe me) It’s a very self absorbed thing to blame others for one’s own misery and wallow in it. Victimhood can be an addiction and blaming others enablement. Kate isn’t unhappy because Jon didn’t call her his sister dove, she is unhappy because she is self absorbed.
Don’t worry I won’t be back. I’m sure I make you uncomfortable.
LikeLike
pamelaparizo said:
Anon, this is directly from the article, first sentence of the 8th paragraph. Did you read that far?
“When the mood is upon you—and you say they are increasingly frequent since last winter—you feel exasperated, pulled thin, alienated, useless, and unloved.”
I am willing to admit that some of the problem is probably Kate’s. Wilson alludes to, but does not clarify that her identity crisis likely springs from her dissatisfaction as a wife and a mother. People tend to get dissatisfied with their role when they lose sight of the importance of it and/or do not feel valued in it. In my article, I stress the importance of Kate’s role of being a loving wife and mother, and the healing of her emotions so that she can give positive rather than negative emotions to her family. Telling her to ignore her feelings doesn’t’ help. My concern, like, IBs is that love is the missing part of the equation.
Doug Wilson has 1)met Jon in a buddy lunch to discuss the problem, 2)laid the malady squarely at Kate’s door, 3)doesn’t even touch on Jesus ability to heal her 4) emphasizes Jon’s commitment but never mentions that he is a loving husband, 5) thinks submission will make the blues go away.
I would discuss it with both of them together at once and pray with them, re-emphasize the importance of both their roles (including LOVE) and give them a get-along shirt: a weekend away without the kids to re-discover their marriage and become intimate with each other which solves many a marital problem (including emotional). Kate’s emotions would probably be 100% better than what he’s advising her to do….
LikeLiked by 1 person
supernaturalsnark said:
That response to Kate is just… wow. Basically it’s all her fault and her husband is perfect, Amen! This is why sometimes I’m happy to say my prayers alone. Too many pastors subscribe to these outdated values.
Good post!
LikeLiked by 2 people
adad0 said:
” Than I look forward to the post from Pastor Wilson where it is implied that Jon is just being irrational, hysterical, hormonal, emotional, and failing to perceive reality right.” Memi.
Hey Memi. What about this one?
https://dougwils.com/the-church/an-open-letter-to-an-angry-husband.html
LikeLiked by 1 person
insanitybytes22 said:
I appreciate your efforts, Adad. However, I was not really excited about that post either. Several people wrote very good articles in responses to it, so I didn’t feel the need to add to the mix. There is major blind spot in Pastor Wilson, and say that with a great deal of patience and grace. Recently the crec report made some good suggestions, ideas I rather approved of, so I pray for eyes to be opened and for wisdom to prevail.
LikeLiked by 1 person
adad0 said:
Can you link me to some of those responses? So I can know more what you are meaning?
LikeLiked by 1 person
insanitybytes22 said:
LOL! It was two years ago, Adad. I’d have to dig all those blogs up again. The heart of the problem is simply that what comes through loud and clear in Pastor Wilson’s writing is that he doesn’t have a very good understanding of either child sexual abuse or domestic violence,and he is biased towards men. That’s not a “sin” or a “crime” or an accusation, it simply means he has a blind spot.
LikeLiked by 1 person
adad0 said:
I found the Rachel Shubin post. She does communicate with Wilson sometimes or has in the past.
Based on her comments, she seems like she is in the Barb Roberts / Jeff Crippen camp re: “abuse”, a.k.a. “The deceived by Lundy Bancroft camp.” whether she has heard of Bancroft or not.
Whatever understanding Wilson may have about child sexual abuse or domestic violence, he certainly has a better and more Word grounded understanding than Barb and Jeff, and those of similar ilk.
Consider this Memi, Barb and Jeff don’t have a “blind spot”, so much as they are blind guides.
How blind do they have to be to block you from their blog? Never mind me! ; – )
How do people become blind guides?
My little quip is that people start becoming blind guides.
“when they do not treat God’s Word like a hammer, especially with regard to themselves,
and start using their own word like a gavel!”
(Ruh – Roh!)
LikeLiked by 1 person
insanitybytes22 said:
I’ve said before to many people, that I really believe Pastor Wilson’s theology is sound and that his heart is in the right place. He has a bit of a blind spot.
That is totally different from being a “blind guide,” or a woman so damaged by DV/SA, she now sees it in EVERY church, every pastor.
LOL! Seriously, if I lived closer I’d make an appointment with Pastor Wilson and begin to make a nuisance of myself. A pleasant nuisance with a desire to gently impart some wisdom on him.
By the way,did you know Jeff Crippin decided to go spend more time with the grandchildren and his church? I was quite pleased by his decision to disengage from a Cry for Justice.
LikeLiked by 1 person
pamelaparizo said:
True, IB. I found Doug’s comments to be a bit harsh in this letter, perhaps cause he felt he was dealing with an irrational, emotional woman who needed to just get over it. I really feel the whole point of his letter was the dissatisfaction that he felt was coming from a feministic “find yourself” point of view, and that if she just turned to him that would all go away. But as you pointed out (which I missed), is that Jon was at a convention, and so he MIGHT HAVE been becoming a little distanced from her.
I think his whole point of “miserable wives” is that women get dissatisfied when they follow the feministic urge. That said, you don’t just tell a woman to stuff her feelings, and if they’ve gotten to the point of depression and taking medicine, she needs healing and affection to bring her back to a point where she can appreciate her importance to the family unit.
Every man thinks every woman is in such serious rebellion that she just needs submission to bring her around. That may have been the point of using the name “Kate” ;-).
LikeLiked by 1 person
adad0 said:
Hey Memi! I am really glad to hear that Jeff Crippen is stepping back from “A Cry for Justice”.
Now he will only have about 7 years of blind guidance re: “abuse”, and two marginal books to walk back.
Also Memi, it sounds like you live in western Washington state. Moscow ID is not that far away! ; – )
Hopefully with Jeff stepping back, more wheels will fall off “A Cry for Justice”.
Let’s pray that God will soon rectify the damage they and other blind guide “abuse” “ministries” have done.
Let’s also pray for wider exposure of Lundy Bancroft’s charlatanism! ; – )
LikeLiked by 2 people
OKRickety said:
As much as I would like to see it, I doubt Crippen is going to “walk back” any of what he has done.
I expect “A Cry for Justice” could be going to the scrapyard and Barbara Roberts will be hanging on, kicking and screaming. It is a huge part of her identity.
LikeLiked by 1 person
adad0 said:
Well Rick, we can still hope any pray.
The way I see it, Memi and I might have been the “one or two” that Jeff refers to here, and in the link below: “We were criticized by one or two rather fanatic type people for endorsing someone who held to a theology like Bancroft does,”
I thought it was pretty funny that Jeff was so blind that he called Bancroft’s ecstasy cult, Nature’s Temple, “a theology”! ; – )
ACFJ kicked me off their blog a long time ago for proving that Bancroft was a charlatan. They kicked Memi off more recently.;-)
But I did get to interact with Barb on other blogs where she could not cut me off. I think those interactions, and Bancroft himself got Jeff to back off at least as much as he did below.
They stopped posting every day in the same time frame. (this year)
I suspect the Holy Spirit is working on what little conscience they had left, and then Jeff baled out.
https://cryingoutforjustice.com/2017/05/15/acfj-does-not-recommend-lundy-bancrofts-retreats-or-his-new-peak-living-network/
I may write Jeff (and his elders) hard copy to his church in Tillamook, with more fact about Bancroft’s charlatanism, in an effort to get Jeff to repent of deceiving and being deceived and in the hope that he would gain some actual sight.(and humility)
If Barb has nowhere to go, perhaps she will follow. (?)
LikeLike
Anna Waldherr said:
While I applaud this post, I cannot agree that there is a kind of sin in forgetting we are daughters of the King. Unfortunately, many of us were never taught that to begin with.
LikeLike
insanitybytes22 said:
I guess I am thinking of sin as meaning something that misses the mark, does harm to us, rather than sin being something shameful, willful. Sometimes it is, but much of the time, like when people grow up with abuse, it is simply foisted upon us.
LikeLike
pamelaparizo said:
OK, I chose to bring this statement back here so that I would not add more to IB’s lovely post on Solomon’s proverbs. When I wrote to you that Doug Wilson could have prayed for “Kate” to be healed emotionally of depression, it was based on my own personal experience . Being an overcomer of childhood sexual abuse, and suffering from inherited SEVERE emotional depression, I suffered for over 2 decades being depressed mentally and emotionally. I probably would’ve been diagnosed with some sort of major depressive disorder. When I received the Holy Ghost on June 11, 1995, I was healed completely of depression. I have down days like anyone else, but I have never suffered from serious depression again. So, I know what I’m talking about. I can testify that one can be healed through the prayer of faith according to James 5:15.
LikeLiked by 1 person