* * *
As Doug Phillips and his Vision Forum ministry is sinking, stories of abuse among Christian Patriarchy are surfacing: domestic violence, wife spanking, etc, among other well-known circles such as RC Sproul Jr., etc.
* * *
Warning: this is a heavy and disturbing article.
As Doug Phillips and his ship are sinking, his story is causing a ripple of waves of questioning, recalling of incidences, comparing notes, sharing of stories. The Christian Patriarchy Movement has common denominators which can include families who choose to homeschool their children, family-integrated churches, families who practice courtship, large families, etc. But there are differences in practices and interpretations. For example, teachings under one patriarchal leader, what godly fatherhood looks like or what a godly husband looks like in practice may not be the same among patriarchal leaders.
I have a few observations as I’ve been watching from my spiritual abuse blogging seat. We seem to have quite a few Christian Patriarchal leaders heading up their own groups/churches. Many of these leaders may have elders or church governance in place which gives the appearance of legitimate accountability for the church leaders, but as we see in so many spiritual abuse cases, these elders can be “yes-men” who do not challenge the leaders or turn a blind eye to the known abuses. This is what allowed Phillips to have a decade-long affair and continue in his “godly” fatherhood ministry, living in luxury.
* *
But what about other abuses and practices that can go “unnoticed” or out of the public spotlight?
* *
One of these known abuses going on in some Christian Patriarchal circles is wife spanking. The real label is domestic violence which of course is illegal. If the wife does not agree to spanking, it is not Biblical. Husbands do not own their wives and do not have the right to abuse them. Adding the adjective “Biblical” in front of a word like “discipline” does not make it in fact Biblical. Furthermore, when do husbands have the right to discipline their wives?
**
**
As I have reported on abuses within the Homeschool Movement, I have been the recipient of e-mails and subsequent phone calls from people who have shared their concerns about this ongoing problem. A pastor contacted me last year regarding this topic, naming names, groups involved, etc. What he shared with me (people involved and practices) lines up with the comments which will follow.
One of the difficulties of reporting something like this is that I wanted proof that wife spanking is taught before reporting on it. Everyone I’ve asked has said that we’re not going to find much evidence of wife spanking in print. The leaders who promote it are not dummies – they know there would be outrage if this kind of printed material got in the “wrong” hands.
I asked my source when this abuse is taught to men. I was told that wife spanking is sometimes taught at mens’ meetings, heads-of-households meetings, in one-on-one counseling meetings, or sometimes in marital counseling by church leaders or pastors.
Over at Jen’s Gems blog, several commenters have mentioned some of the key names I’ve been hearing/reading. While some will want to focus on the named man in the comments, it is important to look at the entire Christian Patriarchy system that is at work creating these abuses. Doug Phillips was not alone in his method of spiritual tyranny and preventing “godly men” from disclosing the truths they knew. This is going on elsewhere.
We must understand that Christian Patriarchy can easily set up a man to have a free license to abuse his wife. I am very concerned about pastors who teach men that they need to get their wives under control. I overheard my own former pastor say this. How he would propose doing this, I do not know, but the idea of a man using his authority to control could easily be taken to the extreme of wife spanking.
Christian Patriarchy is fertile ground for wife spanking and domestic violence and it’s time to shout the bullhorn on this abuse.
I’ve copied a few key notable comments from Jen’s Gems to note the abuse. The comments were condensed, so feel free to click on the links to go directly to the full comments.
******************************************
Lindt Says:
December 27, 2013 at 12:32 pm
“Let’s get specific here.” Okay, Mykl, I’m game. Are you okay with wife spanking? R.C. Sproul, Jr. is, as anyone who *really* knows him knows. He regularly spanked his wife and he taught the men in his church to spank their wives. He was also abusive of his children, even the babies. He was deep into Gary Ezzo and blanket training. Just listening to his Basement Tapes won’t clue you in to that. You’d have to know him up close and personal, or have friends who are members of his church in Virginia, to figure any of that out.
I get really suspicious of men who jump to defend wife spankers and child abusers like R.C. Sproul, Jr. So are you in to wife spanking yourself? Blanket training?
Lindt Says:
December 27, 2013 at 1:27 pm
I wish I could agree. What comes out of R.C. Sproul, Jr every time he opens his mouth is hypocrisy. Same thing with Doug Phillips. Eloquence doesn’t make for integrity, and neither man have an ounce of integrity. R.C. Sproul Jr. spanked is wife, abused his babies, and drinks like a fish. Doug Phillips cheated on his wife for many years. Neither man’s name should ever be mentioned again with anything other than contempt. They are biblically disqualified from teaching again and you are a fool to listen to them.
Mykl you are either a very ignorant man or you are a deliberate promoter of hypocrites and wolves in sheep’s clothing. Hopefully it’s the former. If you have a personal opinion on Patriarchy then some of us might like to hear it. The problem is you just destroyed all your credibility with your ignorant name dropping, so now it will be a hard sell.
Ghirard Says:
December 30, 2013 at 11:08 am
Mel, I can confirm Lindt’s comments about RC Sproul Jr and the wife spanking. We were members there years ago and witnessed it in his home. We were there in the early years of St. Peter Presbyterian Church. RC would sometimes invite families to his home for a meal, not so much for the regular folks, but if you were big donors to the church and Highlands Study Center like we were.
Ghirard then discusses a disturbing parenting concept taught in these circles called “blanket training” that Sproul practiced. We pick up the story on the topic of domestic violence as Ghirard shares what happened next at Sproul Jr.’s home:
After supper as we sat in the living room with RC and his children. Denise was cleaning up in the kitchen. RC got up to go in the kitchen. Denise must have done something to make him mad because he angrily told her, “Go to your room”. It sounded just like he was talking to a little child. Denise went to their bedroom and a little later RC went up and we could hear him spanking her. She stayed up there a long time before she came back down. The look on her face told all. She was humiliated and ashamed. It was the most awkward supper we’d ever had in anyone’s home. We didn’t accept anymore invitations from RC after that.
Another commenter asks Ghirard if he confronted Sproul, Jr. about this and Ghirard responded:
December 30, 2013 at 12:27 pm
It makes be sad to say it but I have to agree with you that Denise is better off. She was such a wonderful person and she had such a miserable life married to RC. Many doctors say that a very large percentage of chronic illness is caused by depressed immune systems that are compromised by severe stress, poor diet and lack of exercise. Denise Sproul’s life was tremendously stressful all thanks to RC Jr and he forced the family to eat a horrible diet. I blame Denise’s recurring cancers on him.
JPGR Says:
December 28, 2013 at 8:21 am
I once heard someone say that they were discussing these things with RC Jr. and that he said that if he were to tell his wife to go stand on her head in the corner, and she didn’t, then he would have her put under church discipline.
My immediate response was why wasn’t he put under church discipline for not loving his wife like Christ loved the church?
Seems like that route doesn’t come up with these guys….
******************************************
I have no way of validating the comments above, but am convinced that this is indeed a problem in the Homeschool Movement combined with Christian Patriarchy Movement. Of course when we are part of a movement and don’t see the abuse, we want to say that it doesn’t happen, but it is happening. So what is a godly response to ungodliness?
Exposure!
Women are trapped in homes by their Christian Patriarchal husbands and being told that they are being treated the way God expects godly husbands to treat their wives.
Women are also taught that when there are problems they face and their husbands are negligent, they can turn to their church leaders.
Where is woman to turn when the abuse she is incurring from her husband has been taught by church leaders?
Where is she going to go when she’s been taught to never go outside the church – to police or governmental authorities – for help?
She is virtually held captive in her own home because her husband AND church leaders are abusers.
These women need our prayers and our help. We must expose this mess and put the public spotlight on this travesty. We have voices and must speak up for them.
photo credit: bark via photopin cc
Updated note: Slight modification of title and removed key words See note in comments.
Spiritual Sounding Board 
“trust4himonly, you’re the first person to acknowledge that the bible is important to a Christian, thanks for that!”
Not fair. I talked about reading the Gospels over and over.
“So I wonder, is the bible important to this conversation?”
Why would it be since we interpret it so differently? To the point of major differences in understanding God’s sovereignty. We all agree He is sovereign but differ on what that means and how it plays out.
The only thing that would happen is a proof text war and I have done that to death and not interested anymore. We can cut to the chase and discuss whether Christianity is a relationship with a LIVING Savior or not. If not, we are desperate for our proof texts. And we have a relationship with a book? Or a relationship with those who interpret the book for us? I prefer the Holy Spirit. Not mere humans.
LikeLike
Gary, I’m against corporal punishment in general. The rest of your comments are too ridiculous to bother answering.
LikeLike
Lydia, I like your comment about all of us believing in God’s sovereignty, but the full depth of which He is sovereign is sticking point. Completely agree with you. Not sure that others who have commented here would think God is sovreign over anything though, and that’s why I was questioning. And yes proof texting is exhausting and mostly worthless in general.
LikeLike
Bridget,
You say, “I don’t believe that one attribute or characteristic [of God] trumps any others.” I agree with your sentiment, but would refine it a bit. I would say that God’s attributes flow from His essence, which is Love. Love is no mere attribute. God’s sovereignty must be understood in a manner that is consistent with, even defined by, the fact that He IS Love. Not intending any criticism here, just sharing some thoughts.
LikeLike
“DavidBrainerd2– How do you interpret the most popular passages used to support predestination — like Romans 9 or Ephesians 1?”
In Romans 9 Paul is trying to explain why so many Gentiles accept the gospel but not many Jews do, and his explanation is that God has replaced the Jews with the Gentiles as the chosen people. His argument on election has nothing to do with individuals but national groups. As in olden times God chose the Jews but not the Gentiles, he has reversed and now the Gentiles not the Jews are chosen. But just as in olden times some Gentiles nonetheless did come to God (Rahab, Naaman the leper, Ruth, etc.) so also some Jews still come to Christ despite the Gentiles now being the elect people.
As for Ephesians 1, its not the particular individuals that were chosen before the foundation of the world, but the choice made before the foundation of the world was that whoever would become Christians are to be made holy and without blame before him in love. Its the things God has in store for Christians that are ordained beforehand, not what individuals will become Christians. To assert otherwise is to make the whole creation of the world into a pointless puppet show.
“Or Acts 4:38?”
There is no Acts 4:38. I suppose you mean Acts 13:48. To base a whole doctrine one tiny clause seems silly and absurd to me, especially when this doctrine is at odds with the overall message of scripture and demonstrably leads people into arrogance and immorality and turns all of creation into nothing but a sadistic puppet show. Nowhere in scripture is the Calvinist system ever set out in a reasoned or systematic way. You piece it together from a few clauses, which quite frankly probably began as scribal glosses in the margin and then somehow were moved into the text. This is a phenomena well attested to. Howbeit, no Protestants scholar would dare even pursue a lead on this in this verse, because he knows who butters his bread.
LikeLike
Seth,
You respond to me “The rest of your comments are too ridiculous to bother answering.” The fact is, you do not respond because you cannot. Yours is just another typical attempt to cut of communication when your outlandish positions have been shown to be utterly without merit. Unless and until you can present some credible and persuasive response to my various indictments of you thinking, I (and maybe others) will assume that every observation I have made about you and your thinking is true.
And yes, If I am correct in supposing you believe that God preordains even some to eternal conscious punishment, you are attributing evil to God, which makes you a blasphemer, and you are likely not saved.
Again, I have apologized in advance with regard to any any position concerning which I have misunderstood you. I stand ready to be informed where I attribute to you any thinking to which you do not actually subscribe.
In the meantime, you stand accused before all who are reading here. Keeping in mind that further evasions do not count (except as evidence of guilt), what is your response?
LikeLike
my apologies Julie Ann, I forgot you had requested that in the past. I’ll look around and take this conversation over there if anyone would like to continue in that vein.
LikeLike
Sovereign means Emperor. It doesn’t mean micromanager. And no good Emperor has ever been a micromanager. You can’t manage an Empire affectionately that way; its impossible. Being Emperor requires DELEGATION. Why do you think the church is called the body of Christ? The micromanager could just do all the preaching himself. But the Emperor delegates. If you think that being Sovereign means God must personally foreordain every time you sneeze or take a dump, and that if he doesn’t he ceases to be sovereign and ceases to be God, then you believe a very absurd thing.
LikeLike
affectionately was supposed to be effectively. Faulty spellchecker in Firefox.
LikeLike
Actually Julie Ann, I can’t find the page you referenced but I’m signing off for the evening anyway. If you ever want a token Calvinist (not even being a real Calvinist myself) to represent the other side, I might be able to do so. Happy driving and good night!
LikeLike
Seth said at 4:58PM,
“trust4himonly, you’re the first person to acknowledge that the bible is important to a Christian, thanks for that!”
That’s just not true. I made 2 separate comments about the Bible & it’s necessity:
In my 4:21PM comment:
Seth said, “You can let experience alone be your guide” AND “ignoring the bible”
Seth, it ain’t an either/or: Either reality or Bible. Seth, dear, both live in harmony together. The Bible doesn’t contradict reality. You don’t give up one for the other.
My 4:46PM comment:
Read the Bible through, on your own, & you will find a loving God. Read the gospels, without a study guide, just you, the Bible & the Holy Spirit.
Seth, You completely ignored at least 2 of my comments. In addition, you completely misrepresented me & that’s not respectable dialogue, IMO.
LikeLike
davidbrainerd2,
You suggest the possibility that, at Acts 13:48 a marginal gloss has been incorporated into the text. You don’t even have to go that far. Where the words “were appointed to eternal life” the word “appointed” can be translated “devoted.” It can also be translated as middle voice, meaning passage may refer to those devoting themselves. As to “eternal life” in the English, it is another instance of the translators taking the Greek word for age or period of time an turning it into an unlimited period of time. Borrowing somewhat from NT Wright, I would translated “were appointed to eternal life” as “were devoting themselves to the life of the age to come.”
My point is that I find we cannot even trust the English translations. The translators impose their preconceived theological dogmas on the text to make it “prove” whatever it is they want it to prove.
LikeLike
Wow. Such a powerful topic that needs to be addressed and yet, Pauls Passing Thoughts, David Brainerd2 and a few others derail the discussion with their hatred and conspiracy theories against Calvinism. Nice job guys. You act as if only Calvinism leads to abuse. Calvinism is probably 5% of all Christian churches. It’s so small, yet its doctrine drives all of the abuse in Christendom and I guess in the Roman Catholic church as well, because we all know how Calvinistic the Pope is…..sorry for the sarcasm, but come on…..take your soap box back to your own blogs and let people talk about the topic at hand. Sorry, what we were talking about…..
LikeLike
Gary, its a good point that tetagmenoi could be middle voice. The reason I suspect scribal gloss is because of word order.
I don’t know if unicode will work here or not:
ἀκούοντα δὲ τὰ ἔθνη ἔχαιρον καὶ ἐδέξαντο τὸν λόγον τοῦ Κυρίου, καὶ ἐπίστευσαν ὅσοι ἦσαν τεταγμένοι εἰς ζωὴν αἰώνιον·
The final clause: kai (and) episteusan (believed) osoi (as many) hsan (were) tetagmenoi (devoted) eis (to) zwhn (eternal) aiwnion (life).
In other words, “as many as were devoted to eternal life” seems to just be tacked on to a sentence that is perfectly complete without it. You can’t tell that in the KJV because they move the word “believed” to the end of the sentence. But in the Greek, the word believed (the last word necessary for it to be a complete sentence) precedes this clause “as many as were devoted to eternal life.”
LikeLike
In other words:
ἀκούοντα δὲ τὰ ἔθνη ἔχαιρον καὶ ἐδέξαντο τὸν λόγον τοῦ Κυρίου, καὶ ἐπίστευσαν (And hearing this the Gentiles were glad and glorified the word of the Lord and believed)
The thought is perfectly complete.
Then:
ὅσοι ἦσαν τεταγμένοι εἰς ζωὴν αἰώνιον· (as many as were devoted to eternal life)
Surely Luke isn’t just throwing a deep and controversial point without any explanation, letting it rest on one tiny clause. Obviously a scribal gloss, and one that mars the whole point of the verse and destroys the word of God.
LikeLike
Obviously a scribal gloss, and one that mars the whole point of the verse and destroys the word of God.
That is, if it is taken as meaning anything other than that they were devoted to the pursuit of eternal life, which it could mean. Compare it with Paul’s accusation against the Jews just two verses earlier:
Acts 13:46 “Because you judge yourselves unworthy of eternal life, lo, we go to the Gentiles!”
WHERE IS THE PREDESTINATION HERE? OH CALVINISTS.
Paul could have said to the Jews (if predestination is true) “Because you were not foreordained to eternal life, lo we go to the Gentiles.”
But instead he says “Because you judge yourselves unworthy of eternal life, lo, we go to the Gentiles!”
This would seem to indicate that in Verse 48, the word mistranslated “foreordained” which ought to be translated “devoted” (as Gary points out) means that the Gentiles consider themselves worthy of eternal life.
The Jews are rejected — not because they were not foreordained to eternal life but because they judged themselves unworthy of eternal life.
The Gentiles then are accepted, not because they were foreordained to eternal life, but because they judged themselves worthy of it and “devoted themselves” (middle voice translation) “to eternal life.”
Thank you Gary! You’ve helped me solve the puzzle, and with 2 lifelines to go. This is my final answer.
LikeLike
davidbrainerd2,
Very interesting. Are you aware of any early Greek texts that do not have the suspected gloss?
LikeLike
Acts 13:46 “Because you judge yourselves unworthy of eternal life, lo, we go to the Gentiles!”
WOW!!!! SUPER WOW!!! Glad I noticed this one!
And Calvinists tell us it is good to always cant “We’re unworthy! We’re unworthy!” Yet ultimately, through a comparison of Acts 13:46 and Acts 13:48, it turns out the difference between the Jews who rejected the gospel and the Gentiles who accepted it was not predestination but was that the Jews considered themselves unworthy of eternal life and the Gentiles considered themselves worthy of it and therefore devoted themselves to eternal life by believing the gospel.
The never ending “I’m not worthy” mantra of Calvinism is precisely (according to Acts 13:46) what keeps people from accepting the gospel. No wonder the Calvinists have to preach the gospel to themselves every day — they don’t consider themselves worthy of eternal life and thus find it hard to accept the gospel, so they have to try and force-feed it to themselves.
LikeLike
My faith is exceedingly strengthened by this great revelation I’ve discovered in Acts 13:46. I’m about to get up and dance like King David before the Ark of the Covenant.
LikeLike
A Mom,
How frustrating. It was preordained that Seth would turn tail and sign off just before you could challenge his misrepresentation of your position! Seriously, though, these people (and I’m talking about all doctrinaire types) leave me with the impression that they are only interested in imposing their theology on everybody else. No need to answer questions. No need to pay attention to what the other person is actually saying. No need to enter into an actual discussion. Just repeat the debating points over and over and over (and over) again. Seems to me it’s an awful lot like a husband who thinks it’s somehow Godly to impose his opinions and desires on his spouse, spanking her if necessary.
Disclaimer: I am not saying that the observations in the prior paragraph apply to to everybody who subscribes to any given doctrinal tradition. Well, O.K., I admit it. I believe that my comments probably do apply to the great majority of “Christian” Patriarchists.
LikeLike
My point about the form of predestination that I believe in is that it does not state, and in fact is contradictory to the idea that, God predestined or predestines individuals to be saved or to be condemned, rather, what was predestined is that a free gift of salvation is available through Christ to all who freely choose to believe, and that all are called, all are drawn, but many refuse or ignore the calling and the drawing.
LikeLike
“You act as if only Calvinism leads to abuse.”
Kevin, This is an unfair statement. Go back and read through the comments again.
I, for one, don’t understand how someone can say they have compassion & empathy for another, yet claim to believe in doctrines, theology, religions grounded in fate. Calvinism is just one that is based on fate. There are others, as I have mentioned, like Islam, & Armenian as Calvin-lite.
LikeLike
And yes, while God is sovereign, that does not mean that he predestines everything. It does mean that he could were he to choose to do so. However, he has rather chosen to give us freedom, because he cherishes the love his creatures express toward him (that being his “glory”, to be freely loved and adored). And love cannot be coerced.
LikeLike
An Attorney, I agree with you. I don’t see how anyone can rationalize in their mind the claims that since Jesus the Saviour of the world was foreordained to come and save us this somehow implies predestination of what individuals will be saved. They are two very different concepts and the one does not imply the other. In fact, the foreordination of Jesus coming to die on the cross to save whosoever will means that individual predestination of who will be saved is an impossibility. Likewise, the predestination of individuals to salvation would render the sacrifice of Christ unnecessary, because then salvation would be by predestination rather than the precious blood of Christ. The one thing I would disagree with you on is merely a terminology point. I would say that Jesus was foreordained not predestined, because the even of him coming to die for our sins was indeed ordained of old, but it was not imposed on him as if he had no freewill: he chose to do it. So its foreordination but certainly not predestination. And since he himself was involved in foreordaining it, his choice was present not just later but even at the time that it was determined. Thus it is completely different from any form of predestination and I would not dare classify it as a form of predestination.
LikeLike
Ok, I’m home and trying to catch up. I’ll be responding to some old comments, please bear with me.
This reminds me of the street preaching and abortion protesting that is done by my former pastor. The whole reason the city of Portland has Chuck O’Neal under investigation is because a city official drove by and saw the way he was treating women who were trying to walk into the clinic which does abortions (and offers other medical services). To yell at women that they are murderers when he doesn’t even know if they are pregnant is the height of rudeness and not at all loving. Yet, he has an assumption that if they are walking into that clinic that they are heathens and thinks he has the right to yell, tell them to repent, and treat them disrespectfully. Ick.
We see this time and again within the Homeschool Movement. Adult daughter/son do not hold to all of the parents’ beliefs and so they are labeled as Unbeliever and treated horribly, even shunned. This is not showing the love of Christ.
LikeLike
Nicely put, davidbrainerd2 @ 8:01PM. Amen! 🙂
LikeLike
I sang with our church choir for the Christmas program and they included a song that had John 3:16-17:
For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. 17 For God sent the Son into the world, not to condemn the world, but that the world might be saved through him.
I was thinking about this verse and the elect/sending God’s son to the world so that the world might be saved through Him – – – – and it was such a gorgeous song – – – and I couldn’t help but weep – – the tears would not stop coming. Yes, He sent Christ to the world to save the world. God loved the world. Praise God.
LikeLike
Ahhhhh – – the lightbulb just went off – – that makes sense. If you are elect, you don’t have to worry if you sin. No wonder Doug Phillips could have his nanny for his sinful pleasure for ~12 years and go on preaching/teaching as if he were sinless. Good grief, this is crazy stuff.
LikeLike
Seth,
God’s foreknowledge of our destiny isn’t same as the Calvinist practicing predestination on people who struggle with their Methodology of how they deliver and interpret the scriptures and then controlling the lifestyle of the people they are physically and spiritually abusing.
In Mark 2:16-17 the Pharisees attempted to practice predestination on the Sinner and Tax Collector and even Christ then rebuking him for ministering to them.
Christ responded “it is not the healthy in need of the a doctor, but the sick”
Some of the Hyper guys are spiritually abusing their flock if they don’t embrace their brand they are also abusing ones that embrace their Methodology.
I like what someone said earlier on this thread other than “baptism” we don’t need any other “ism’s”
Some of these Hyper guys are taking it upon themselves to practice “Predestination” in the same manner as the Pharisee’s did on Christ, the Sinner and the Tax Collector, which is Spiritual and Mental Abuse.
LikeLike
Davidbrainerd2: Thanks for your answer about the Rom 9 and Eph 1 passages. That interpretation makes sense to me– especially the corporate/big picture nature of predestination; cf the purpose for predestination in Rom 8– “that he might be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters.”
You missed the passage Seth was asking about– Acts 4:27-28. Not sure how you got to ch 13, though of course that has good stuff to discuss.
Since these verses are one of the MOST foundational to Calvinists I’ve known, I’ll take a quick stab myself. Clearly I can’t keep up with the pace/volume of comments of some of you folks, so it may be some time before I clarify/reply if someone requests.
1st: These verses are part of a PRAYER. By more than one person TOGETHER at the same time.
2nd: They’ve just quoted David about the TOGETHERNESS of nations, peoples, kings and rulers against God/Christ, and move on to the TOGETHERNESS of Herod, Pilate, Gentiles, and Israelites against God/Christ.
3rd: They mention predestination– which I do NOT take to mean that God micromanaged them all- forcing all those patsies to kill Jesus because he was just so doggone mad he had to take it out on somebody. (Sorry, got off topic)
4th: They ASK God for miracles: Look upon their threatenings, and grant to Thy servants with all freedom to speak Thy word, in the stretching forth of Thy hand, for healing, and signs, and wonders, to come to pass through the name of Thy holy child Jesus.” Earlier this evening, and before i saw the “micromanager” description from David, the thought flashed across my mind that, if God’s sovereignty means he directly causes all to come to pass, NOTHING can be a miracle, and prayer is irrelevant. (Haven’t carefully thought that all out.)
5th: The place where they’re gathered TOGETHER is miraculously shaken.
6th: They were ALL spirit-filled and word-proclaiming.
7th: Many more TOGETHERNESS things follow, up through verse 37.
8th: Acts 4:38 is the name of a new church-planting organization I and Mark Driscoll are starting.
9th: Kindly disregard point 8.
LikeLike
Yes, this is my experience, too. In fact, the leaders seems to assume the role of Holy Spirit by their behavior. We were never encouraged to listen to the Holy Spirit. We were encouraged to listen to our leaders.
LikeLike
We’re back to the sin goo? LMBO! So funny!
LikeLike
“Lydia, I like your comment about all of us believing in God’s sovereignty, but the full depth of which He is sovereign is sticking point.”
It is not really the “full depth” of His Sovereignty as you put it. But more about His character and ALL His attributes. A love relationship with His created beings in His image is not about control. He is not a wimpy gramps in the sky nor is He controlling and only interested in His own glory. He is pure LOVE and PURE JUSTICE at the same time. Is there wrath? I believe so but I believe we choose it. We are responsible and accountable.
LikeLike
“…difference between the Jews who rejected the gospel and the Gentiles who accepted it was not predestination but was that the Jews considered themselves unworthy of eternal life and the Gentiles considered themselves worthy of it and therefore devoted themselves to eternal life by believing the gospel”
Yes and this understanding is considered heresy in most of Protestant tradition and orthodoxy, But how can we live out sanctification if we cannot accept the free gift and believe it. It was for us.
We focus on LIFE. Living out sanctification with the help of the Counselor. Growing in Holiness and living out His kingdom here and now as He intended.
This even harkens back to 1 Corin 11 in some ways. Jewish men covered their heads to pray ‘because of their shame for their sin”. That was part of the conundrum for women covering their heads when assembling together and they were praying/prophesying. Note the focus on sin and shame from the Jews so this was a big deal in that mixed group of Jews/Gentiles. Women uncovering to pray or prophesy? Paul said it did not matter. The Gospel is about the Cross AND resurrection. No shame for those who are new creatures in Christ. You are worthy because of His great love and sacrifice.
LikeLike
JA, The sin goo is big! It is the essence of total depravity. :o)
LikeLike
“The Gospel is about the Cross AND resurrection. No shame for those who are new creatures in Christ. You are worthy because of His great love and sacrifice.”
Yes! This is the life-affirming message that everyone needs to know. This is the truth that will save. And it will save women & children & anyone that’s oppressed in His kingdom here on earth, right now.
“You are worthy” is the balm to heal the broken-hearted & it provides hope, not just for eternity, but hope for today as well. This message is for today. And tomorrow. “You are worthy” applies right now. It applies right now.
“You are worthy” rejects suffering unjustly. It rejects wife spanking, child whipping, all types of slavery, gender inequality, etc. It rejects a spiritual mediator, spiritual control, spiritual hierarchy of submission.
Each of us is 100% responsible for our action or lack of action.
I have started to think recently that our actions (& lack of action) on earth are a reflection of what we want heaven to be like. Our actions here on earth are a good gauge of who we think God is & how we will continue to live when we die.
LikeLike
“My faith is exceedingly strengthened by this great revelation I’ve discovered in Acts 13:46. I’m about to get up and dance like King David before the Ark of the Covenant.”
The great revelation is: We are worthy. I’m dancing with you! 🙂
LikeLike
Thank-you Lydia, Gary W, A Mom, and Paul Dohse for your effective responses. Gary W., I loved your replies to Seth.
LikeLike
“Our actions here on earth are a good gauge of who we think God is & how we will continue to live when we die.”
Yes! Yes! So many of us believed it was of Christ to long for the day when we will live in perfection. They basically were teaching us to long for death so we could have life. We are to have life now and in eternity but with perfected bodies. We will be working when the heaven and earth are joined. We start living out the kingdom now. As the prayer says, “His Kingdom come, His will be done —ON EARTH as it is in heaven.
LikeLike
The Lord’s prayer says: your kingdom come, your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven. Jesus taught us a prayer that says that God’s will is perfectly accomplished in heaven and we are to pray that it will become perfectly accomplished on earth, which is a crazy prayer if it is always and everywhere perfectly accomplished already. Why ask for what is accomplished already?
LikeLike
Julie Anne wrote: Ahhhhh – – the lightbulb just went off – – that makes sense. If you are elect, you don’t have to worry if you sin. No wonder Doug Phillips could have his nanny for his sinful pleasure for ~12 years and go on preaching/teaching as if he were sinless. Good grief, this is crazy stuff.
Wow. And the rest of the stuff on here….Sorry, guys, but you have ABSOLUTELY no idea about Calvinism. You misrepresent it because you just don’t know anything about it. You listen to PPT and Brainerd and think they know what they’re talking about. They don’t. Your history is completely wrong. Your premises are completely wrong. And your conclusions are completely wrong.
I’m astonished. No Calvinist has ever said “Boy, im elect, therefore, I can do whatever I want.” Its just the opposite.
Doug Phillips fell into sin because of PRIDE. Not election. Not Calvinism. Good ‘ol PRIDE!
So, keep talking about Calvinism and miss the forest for the trees.
LikeLike
Kevin,
O.K. here is an opportunity for you to cure my ignorance. I understand that the Calvinist position is that some are predestined from birth to suffer eternal conscious torment for God’s good pleasure. Do I have it wrong? If so, maybe you could persuade me to re-adopt my Calvinist convictions.
As to your statement, “No Calvinist has ever said ‘Boy, im elect, therefore, I can do whatever I want.’ Its just the opposite,” how do you know this? Have you taken a poll? I know of one former Calvinist, myself, that used to consciously act in reliance on just that thought. In the very midst of a certain besetting sin, I used to take permissive comfort in the thought that I was eternally secure in my salvation.
Finally, why is it so important to (some of) you Calvinists to come here preaching your doctrine. So far as this thread is concerned, wouldn’t it be better to take up the cause of battered wives? Wouldn’t it better to preach Jesus? I dare say that if there were less emphasis on the TULIP pentagram and more emphasis on Jesus, supposed Christians wouldn’t be spanking their wives (or beating their children, for that matter).
LikeLike
Just as I thought the whole doctrinal debate was petering out… Oh well, I’m not sure what I can add to a thread with 250 comments, but here goes…
Way, way back up-thread, raswhiting introduced this excerpt from Dr. George Simon:
“In my books I describe a type of thinking I call “possessive thinking” and a mindset of ownership that accompanies it… Possessive thinkers believe that their relationship partners don’t really have identities or rights of their own. Rather, they think of their partners as personal property.”
This reminded me of something C.S. Lewis said (through Screwtape) about how the devil might benefit from encouraging “sense of ownership” in us. You can check it out here: http://readanybooks.net/fantasticfiction/2010/139/5922.html
One horrifying possibility is that of treating, not only a spouse, but even God Himself as a kind of possession. As something to use, not someone to love and trust.
I wonder whether that might be another factor in this whole nightmarish situation. Men convinced that God won’t say boo to them (He’s just another pawn on their chessboard), so they can treat their wives with impunity.
LikeLike
Somewhere above Kevin says, “Calvinism is probably 5% of all Christian churches.” Setting aside the question whether it is appropriate to be dedicated to John Calvin as the way to Jesus the Messiah, and also setting aside the question how he comes up with 5%, I do suggest that Kevin’s observation leads to another. It may be legitimate to talk about Calvin (and Luther and Arminius &c.) where the issue is spiritual abuse within evangelical churches, as tends to be the topic here. However, I submit that within a wider context, Augustine, the disciple of Plato and Manichean heretic of Hippo, is the culprit. John Calvin and all other reformers who adopted a deterministic theology were but the doctrinal heirs of the great “saint” Augustine.
Anybody who knows, am I not correct in thinking that Augustine is credited with advocating the use of temporal force in pursuit of Kingdom purposes? Is this not one of the bases on which organized “Christian” religion has justified the wielding of authority, as opposed to Love, as the basis of relationships between Christians? Is this Augustinian thinking not the basis on which the crusades and the Roman catholic inquisition were founded? Is this not the very thinking that was adopted by much of protestantism to justify the execution of supposed heretics, often by burning at the stake? Is not this Augustinian/Reformation thinking not a large part of the current emphasis on the exercise of authority and power by “Christian” leaders over mere congregants?
Is not this whole misguided emphasis on Platonic/Augustinian/Reformation style temporal authority a large part of the explanation for the promulgation of doctrines that lead supposedly Christian husbands to impose their wills by spanking their wives, beating their children, etc?
LikeLike
Gary W,
First, it was not Calvinists who brought the subject up. It was rabid anti-calvinists who hijacked this post. We haven’t preached anything. Only trying to defend what people have been saying because it’s been so badly misrepresented and ridiculous.
Second, I would love to get back to talking about the original subject, but you guys can see fit to do that. I came on here because I’m disgusted by the subject and want to learn more and figure out how to help people and then all I read is you anti-calvinist spewing ignorant hate and conspiracy theories. Well done.
Third, I really don’t have the energy to educate you on Calvinism. There are plenty of resources on the net or simply pick-up a good book on the subject written by a Calvinist and not some anti-calvinist, who has no clue. Listen to Spurgeon’s sermon “Calvinism is the Gospel.”
Fourth, “No Calvinist has ever said ‘Boy, im elect, therefore, I can do whatever I want.’ Its just the opposite,”….this is true because a truly elect person strives for purity and holiness. A truly elect person wants to be like Christ and mirror him. A truly elect person abhors his sin and does everything he can to mortify his sin and flesh, so he can be more like Christ. Perseverance of the Saints, is just that….the elect will PERSEVERE by the power of Christ and the Holy Spirit living in them. You must have been taught wrong.
Fifth, you show your true colors by saying the “TULIP pentagram.” You don’t want to be educated, you just want to mis-characterize and demonize. Reform Theology is ALL about Jesus. You simply have no idea.
Enjoy your hate session. It seems to be very edifying…..
LikeLike
Kevin,
You, like Seth, don’t seem to be willing to fess up to whether the TULIP pentagram incorporates the idea that some are predestined from birth to eternal conscious punishment. From your silence, and until you inform me otherwise, I will understand that this is what you personally believe. I’m sorry, but this doctrine makes God the author of evil. The doctrine is, therefore, blasphemous. Worse, as others have observed, we tend to reflect the image we have of God (just as we tend to be reflections of our earthly fathers). If my idea of God is that He is the arbitrary and sociopathic/narcissistic author of evil (for His glory, of course), I will emulate Him.
Still, so far as the issue of abuse is concerned, I would agree that the more salient issue is whether, and to what extent, a particular body of doctrine, pentagramatic or otherwise, is based on the Platonic/Augustinian notions of power and authority, as opposed to Christian Love.
LikeLike
“Enjoy your hate session. It seems to be very edifying….”
Well, yes, I admit that I hate evil, and I hate the ascription of evil to the God Who is Love; and I hate how misguided views of God get projected in ways that do real harm. Kevin, I do not hate you. I hate evil.
LikeLike
“Listen to Spurgeon’s sermon “Calvinism is the Gospel.”
Kind of strange isn’t it. I thought Jesus was/is the Good News.
Kevin, If I had a dollar for every Calvinist that told me I did not understand it, I would be rich. Never mind I have spent the last 8 years or so really studying it from every angle.
Please tell us how we are ignorant of history? That is a big one as one who loves history as I cannot for the life of me understand why Calvinists cannot look at the historical implications/results of that doctrine and receive a wake up call to question it more deeply.
LikeLike
@JulieAnne:
Amazing what a Get-Out-of-Hell-Free card signed by God Himself before the creation of the world can do to your attitude. God’s Speshul Pets Can Do No Wrong.
LikeLike
Along with other Precious Bodily Fluids…
LikeLike
Kevin said:
Ok, *this* is one of my biggest fears. Think about it – – if you are Calvinist and come to this thread and see all the anti-Calvin talk, would you want to stay and read? People dissing your beliefs? If this is “wrong” maybe the content of the article is wrong – – logical conclusion. MANY will throw out the baby with the bathwater and discredit this important post. That is why I like the Calvin debates to go on the Calvin thread. Besides, how many people really will change their mind on their doctrine based on a debate? Very few. It’s just like me trying to tell current BGBC people CON is a wolf. They won’t believe me at all. We cannot force someone to understand something.
LikeLike
Julie Anne and Kevin, that was part of my point last night. Going after abuse in the church is one thing. And you do a nice job of it btw JA. That’s one reason I like reading your blog and the WBW. But the rabid anti-Calvinism commentators can be turning off ppl coming here to investigate such abuses. Is this an anti-Calvinism blog? Or a church abuse investigation blog? I couldn’t tell from last night. If the former, no Calvinist will come here to investigate abuses.
LikeLike
I hear you, JA. That’s a big reason why I’ve been giving those discussions a wide berth. (That, and the fact that I’m not nearly as knowledgeable on these subjects as some others.)
I hope lots of people read this post, Julie Anne. This needs to be made known.
LikeLike
Lydia,
Your response “I thought Jesus was/is the Good News.” demonstrates you no very little about Calvinism. Not sure what you’ve been studying for 8 years, but its not good. Listen to the sermon and you might understand.
LikeLike
Well put Seth.
LikeLike
Well put JA
LikeLike
Seth,
Scripture states that God already has the “foreknowledge” of our destination.
When Hyper abusers start practicing “Predestination” on their victims because they don’t embrace their reckless interpretation of the bible or their aggressive Methodology or focus their Preaching around a “Sin Centered” Ministry rather than “Christ Centered” with no redemption and Calvinist’ leaders aren’t doing enough to prevent abuse from happening while it continues, what do you want us to do?
The Pharisees in Mark 2:16-17 practiced Predestination and their brand of Spiritual Abuse on the Sinner and Tax Collector and rebuked Christ for ministering to them because they didn’t fit the mold.
Some of the Hyoer guys are doing the same thing today using scriptures to authenticate their Methodology of abuse and with Calvinism having many dialects I think it is risky to embrace anything with an :”Ism”.other than baptism.
LikeLike
If we do not discuss the roots of abuse then what is the point? People justify all sorts of evil in the Name of Jesus. The roots of all abuse are power and control. The ways and means within Protestantism vary when it comes to the methods from the seekers to Calvinists to the IFB. If a doctrinal belief institutionalizes power and control of a few over many in what passes for Christendom, it is a good idea to delve into it and ask why we think that is of Christ. Do we really believe these “few” have more Holy Spirit anointing than we are allowed to have?
Isn’t the point to stop abuse? Was Calvin a spiritual abuser in Geneva? I believe history proves he was and many went along with it. Therefore it is only wise to ask what he believed that made him think such behavior Glorified God and was like that of our Savior.
LikeLike
“Your response “I thought Jesus was/is the Good News.” demonstrates you no very little about Calvinism. Not sure what you’ve been studying for 8 years, but its not good. Listen to the sermon and you might understand.”
Thanks Kevin.. I have read Spurgeon for 20 years. I have come to the conclusion that Calvinism is pseudo intellectualism. I don’t think those followers of dead and alive gurus of Calvinism who are sold out to it understand it at all UNLESS they are able to enjoy the power it brings them from the keys and the caste system it perpetuates. I have always thought debating Calvinists was sort of moot since they remain totally depraved/unable and are controlled 24/7 by either God or Satan. It is not them speaking or writing. They are not able. That is the logical result of that doctrine whether one wants to admit it or not.
LikeLike
Fair question Mark. If anyone mis-applies scripture to abuse others, I think we should call that out as clearly that abuse itself is unscriptural. This is something JA has been doing for a while now. No need to make speculative leaps about any one else that happens to have some theology in common. If you think a particular theology leads to abuse, then follow it and make the case for it. But broad stereotypes just don’t work well.
LikeLike
Kevin, instead of resorting to condescending putdowns, telling Lydia how ignorant she is, why don’t you tell us how it is, exactly, you think she is mistaken. Otherwise, how can a sermon titled “Calvinism is the Gospel” not be contrary to the fact that Jesus is the Good News.
Unless and until Julie Anne requests otherwise, I will continue responding on the thread(s) where the comment(s) to which I am responding appear. However, if you wish to comment further on matters relating to Calvinism, JA has provided a place for you to do so here:
https://spiritualsoundingboard.com/2013/12/02/its-calvinism-free-for-all-off-the-top-of-your-head-part-2/#comments
LikeLike
“If we do not discuss the roots of abuse then what is the point? ”
Lydia,
The problem is the moment Calvinism is brought up, immediately defenses rise and we lose people, so what good has been accomplished? Talking about the abuses themselves is not personally threatening. If someone can see the abuse or how abuse affects them personally, that is when the questions begin. But to throw out: “Calvinism is false religion, Calvin is a heretic” – to someone who holds Calvin dear just isn’t going to work. They will kiss this blog good-bye.
I am already aware of a group of people who no longer read/comment here because of it. That is why it is important to discuss what we actually can see – – the abuse – – and the patterns of abuse. That will naturally draw one to question how that abuse came to be. Some of the foundations of abuse will be doctrinal, some will be church authority structure, some will be plain old narcissism or a combination of all of the above.
Yesterday was an odd day in that I was out of town and had difficulty moderating, so I let it go. I *am* going to ask from here on out that any Calvinism debate be moved to the Calvinism debate thread. https://spiritualsoundingboard.com/2013/12/02/its-calvinism-free-for-all-off-the-top-of-your-head-part-2/
Keep the debate going on that thread so we can free up this thread for the important discussion on wife spanking which should be appalling to Christians, Arminian and Calvinist alike.
Thanks for your help!
LikeLike
I’m weighing in to say that I loathe how the debate/argument/potshots over Calvinism takes over these threads so easily. Take it to the Calvinism post thread (Calvinism — Off The Top of Your Head), get each other’s emails and debate privately, or exert some self control and drop it. I fail to see how back and forth comments on theology can be profitable, especially since the discussion does not stem from a concern for the other person’s heart, as should normally occur in a friendship. It becomes nothing more than just trying to prove one’s point, and I wonder, what is the good of that? Now please, back to the subject of this article. The spiritual abuse of wife spanking ought to be heady enough for one thread!
LikeLike
Seth,
Abusers are practicing “Predestination”.on their victims..
Calvinist and Arminians have many dialects within their own Doctrine and that isn’t being speculative, it is stating facts. (even Calvinist fail to merge with a Consensus to what they believe)
Calvinist have no idea of God’s Foreknowledge any more than the Pharisees did when they practiced Abuse and Predestination on the Sinner and Tax Collector.
Christ ministered to the Sinner and the Tax Collector giving them the opportunity to :Choose” to repent and receive salvation.
LikeLike
So my on-topic comments are that I took a deep breath and did some research on the agenda and philosophy of wife spanking . And I came away with more questions than were answered, the most important one being, “So these wives who justify the practice spiritually really believe that their husbands have the ability to make them more holy women by the act of whipping their backside?!” So many implications here. My heart hurts for women who are so blinded by false unbiblical beliefs, being controlled by abuse and calling it good. So sad.
LikeLike
This is where I have to disagree and agree with what many would say about talking about theology. Julie Anne does have a thread for debating these things, in that, she has provided a way for these types of discussions to go on. Thats good- thanks Julie Anne for not dismissing these types of discussions. 🙂
However, I disagree that theology does not affect abuse. Here is an example: When someone has cancer we can treat all the symptoms and provide treatment; but to get down to the root we would need to know where it started, how it started, what started it to really understand it and its deadly outcome. This is where we will make progress and come up with CURES for it (the cancer). Getting to the source is just basic common sense. The same is with abuse- we can provide help, resources, and encouragement but to really find out what is causing it is getting to the root. You can pull up a weed in a garden, but until you get the root of it, it will always rear up its ugly head.
As far as calling all this debate mean-spirited……well, thats debate for ya! If you can’t feel uncomfortable in a debate and deal with it then thats sad. Debate is controversial and healthy. Good debate does not demean but also its like a wrestling match and not everyone is cut out for it or has the time, but it is essential for a free society; just ask your Founding Fathers. There was plenty of wrestling matches going on between these guys.
LikeLike
Julie Anne,
In my Jan5 3:51PM comment I said this:
“Seth, I know a woman who includes in her testimony that she was raped and she is thankful to God for it. Think about that. This is where fate/predestination/destiny/fatalism leads.
I heard a lady in a reformed baptist church, as part of her testimony, tell the church (as part of the morning service) she prayed for cancer and that God answered her prayer. Cancer was a blessing. The elders/pastor used it as a teaching tool for the rest of us pew-sitters.
Do you SERIOUSLY read that in your Bible?”
Seth’s response to me:
“A Mom, I’m not disputing that real world run ins with evil cause difficult considerations on how God interacts with the world.”
What would you tell these 2 women, JA? Would your response be in line with Seth’s? I am told by Seth he cares about wife-spanking & that’s why he’s here. Maybe so. But I think this response by him is much more telling – about the why & who suffering comes from.
IMO, Seth’s message & responses aren’t helpful to those who are hurting or suffering. I see a pattern of people coming to defend a religion, the hurting are secondary. I’m sorry, JA, that’s my opinion.
My main concern is to help & protect those who are hurting. ANY message, religion, doctrine that makes God the author of suffering or responsible for it IS VERY DAMAGING. I don’t care if it’s called the XYZ religion. It damages.
JA, People are on the brink. They hear these claims about God & they sink into deep depression & even worse. That’s my main concern. I can’t in good conscience agree with this view of God & then say I love the hurting at the same time.
LikeLike
Joyelle: Yes, it is very sad. And there really is no place for these women to turn. If they turn to another woman, they will be met with: pray for your husband, ask God to give you a submissive spirit. It’s never the husband’s fault, but the wife’s fault. The husband owns the wife: her physically, her faith, her emotions. A woman can never turn down her husband sexually (Doug Wilson says a wife’s job is to surrender and accepts – and that is referring to sex.)
LikeLike
Whose whipping the backside of these Hyper-Abusers? Why is this happening? By appearance this isn’t isolated, is this a movement? Does Driscoll spank his wife?
LikeLike
Also, look at the vast amount of atheists that are produced from failed theologies. These Atheists look at God as a monster not One who is a loving and good God- this comes from faulty belief systems. Where they can be helped is when one explains to them that this is not the nature of God to predestine evil, but that He is love and can ONLY do what is pure and good; that which is Love. Getting to the root helps us to see what we may have picked up that is faulty and illogical.
LikeLike
trust4himonly:
I completely get what you and Lydia and Gary and so many are saying. I also see the other side. It puts me in a predicament. Case in point with the Ingrid Schlueter situation in which I was asked to remove her comments. I firmly believe that her comments were 100% right on, yet I had to make a decision to attempt to protect. Does it mean I don’t care about the multitudes who have been affected by Mark Driscoll? Absolutely not. There are some whose ministry is to point out that Calvinism is abusive (Paul Dohse is one). My blog is not on that focus, but of spiritual abuse in general crossing all doctrinal lines. That poses unique challenges. Thanks for trying to work within the boundaries I’ve established. I know it’s messy. But when looking at the overall picture, I think it’s the best way to address key abuse issues. It’s about baby steps. Who knows – – I may change that idea down the road, but for where I am now and my understanding of things – – it seems like the best way to work through this.
LikeLike
You are doing a great job by the way and I appreciate what you do here! 🙂
LikeLike
JA,
The problem is complicated when it happens in churches with abusers using scripture to accomplish Mental, Physical and Spiritual Abuse it gets dicey.
Some Abusers are practicing their own form of “Predestination” on victims that don’t conform while holding others captive for fear, of being judged into hell.
Abusers don’t have God’s foreknowledge any more than the Pharisees had when they practiced their own form of abuse and “Predestination” the Sinner and Tax Collector.
LikeLike
And JA,
I have said before I am ashamed that I once thought this way, the same way Seth & Kevin think. But I started thinking & pondering & searching the internet. I found Paul’s blog, your blog & started reading comments from both sides – just like Seth & Kevin are now, but without adding my 2 cents in defense of it.
I read what Lydia, Paul, you, John Immel, Argo & others were saying for a long time – which is basically God created individuals with worth. God values life. We are to value our life. And the life of others.
I read my side, the defenses of this view of God.
I thought deeply & seriously. Eventually, a light bulb went off. I realized I had traded this other god for the God of my childhood. I came back home.
I wish I had come to this realization sooner. In reality, if it weren’t for the blogs & comments I mentioned, I would still be thinking like Seth.
Censorship is not good. It will always turn one group away.
I was one of them. I have never asked to stop discussions or disagreements with those who disagree with me. So then, why does the others side get so upset & threaten boycott over discussions or disagreements?
It seems they want to prevent what happened to me, by preemptively cutting off free speech. That’s not fair. And is that what we really want to happen?
LikeLike
I understand JA’s focus as well as the need to get to the root of the issue. I believe that getting to the root will take us through (whatever) theology (and some may shelter and promote abuse more than others) and be rooted in the ‘individual’ person perpetrating the abuse. Certain belief systems may simply allow the abuse to thrive.
On another MAJOR note, can anyone here see Jesus (or Paul for that matter) advocating wife spanking? When men and women who believe in such a thing stand before the Lord, do they expect to hear “Well done good and faithful servant. You showed the world who has authority to rule the home and you applied all the one another’s in a Godly way.”
LikeLike
Seth— in the midst of all the other comments, at 8:49 last evening I preached a brief *sermon* on the verses you mentioned, Acts 4:27-28. Emphasizing, ironically and I hope irenically, togetherness. Just in case you missed it. If you’d like to discuss, I’ll be watching the “Calvinism” thread.
As for husbands abusing their wives, a bit of Acts-4-Style church life couldn’t hurt a bit. As for wives agreeing together with husbands at times they ought not, there’s Acts 5.
LikeLike
“IMO, Seth’s message & responses aren’t helpful to those who are hurting or suffering. I see a pattern of people coming to defend a religion, the hurting are secondary. I’m sorry, JA, that’s my opinion.”
I agree with your opinion, too. You are so good at communicating, A Mom. You can easily address it by identifying what you see is the pattern of abuse. Identify specifically what happens with that kind of thinking/practice.
LikeLike
Mark this is true. when we are talking about Wife Spanking- what is the philosophy behind it? What belief is truly being enforced? Ultimately, we see that control is a big part of that. What the Pharisees grew up with was a system of “god” that required dominion (hence Dominion Theology) over those who were deemed commoners. It is a elitist vs. commoner mentality. This is why I was saying get to the root- if ANY theology promotes this IT IS WRONG and DANGEROUS as Lydia (and many others) was trying to point out. Systems require conformity and sometimes that is good- like parent and child relationships, military, healthy churches where balance is kept between elder and churchgoer, etc… But systems without boundaries (like elite vs. commoner where the elite has power to wield its own wishes upon anothers free will) is deadly.
LikeLike
A Mom, I totally agree….
Why is it that so many find this dialogue so mean spirited? Why get defensive? and also it is ok not to have an answer for it all? I have found that I am not a good debater when it comes to getting into the details like Lydia, I like to keep it simple; but I love looking over and perusing others comments because I learn from them. They challenge me AND if it were not for some people like Paul Dohse I would not understand more (by the way Paul is pretty good at it and has tons of research). There were times I disagreed and then turn around and see what the other was trying to get across. It is a part of growing and maturing- this is good!
The one thing I hate, though, is control- despise it!! So if I see any kind of doctrine or theology espousing it, you betcha your bottom dollar I will stick up for freedom!
LikeLike
JA, I understand and totally agree with amom’s last comment at the same time. Just so Calvinists here know where I am coming from when I discuss determinism/Protestantism: I am constantly bombarded with it living at ground zero. A local seeker mega church (preaches free will but very top down authoritarian with elders) spiritually abuses some staff but people in the pews rarely hear about it. Just recently a woman told me that her own family shamed her in thinking she is more valuable than the church because of something very evil the church did to her and she should just keep her mouth shut. An example of that thinking that individuals are not valuable.
This is the thinking in so much of Protestantism. And the roots of it are from a clergy caste system thinking. Calvin just systematized it and provided cover for those who love authority and those who love to follow humans. The only thing we are told is that we do not understand it. Over and over. There are strains of it all over Protestantism with various means and ways. How can it be only a situation of bad people abusing correct doctrine? Some of the nicest most wonderful pastors out there teach that suffering is good for the victims of evil and that the victim is a sinner, too so there is equality in sinning. I breaks my heart. It is their doctrinal beliefs. And it is burying people in despair.
LikeLike
trust3himonly,
The Abused are conforming, because of the Abusers sick interpretation of “Predestination” being held over their heads.
Again, Abusers don;t have God’s foreknowledge any more than the Pharisees did over the Sinner and Tax Collector.
I would caution anyone to be very careful if the Doctrine you are clinging to, routinely emphasizes “Predestination” or if your Doctrine emphasizes you could lose your salvation, even if you are already saved.
It is a remedy for abuse.
LikeLike
“what is the philosophy behind it? What belief is truly being enforced? ”
Power and control over others. Where does that come from? The doctrinal belief that God has ordained certain people to be over others. For some that is pastor/elder/male. And total depravity affirms it. That does not come from Christ. The idea of an elder is one who is fed to the lions first. Not one who feeds others to the lions for power and control. The whole idea has been totally perverted from what Christ is about and WHO He is.
LikeLike
“As for wives agreeing together with husbands at times they ought not, there’s Acts 5.”
Good point! Sapphira paid a high price for going along with her husband. Was she obeying him? Submitting to him?
LikeLike
A Mom said: “I wish I had come to this realization sooner. In reality, if it weren’t for the blogs & comments I mentioned, I would still be thinking like Seth.”
It sounds like you were in the frame of mind to seek out and challenge your own beliefs. I think the difference here is people do not come to here to challenge their doctrinal beliefs. It seems they are usually coming here to hear about abusive practices “out there.” When your personal doctrine is challenged, defenses go up. I have to look at the bigger picture here (and what I know is going on behind the scenes) and try to make decisions that will have the most impact on the largest amount of people.
LikeLike
I hear you, Lydia. So keep telling these kinds of stories:
“Just recently a woman told me that her own family shamed her in thinking she is more valuable than the church because of something very evil the church did to her and she should just keep her mouth shut. An example of that thinking that individuals are not valuable.”
That type of story is important to share here and you did it beautifully. People can connect much more easily to personal stories. And then especially if you back it up with Scripture showing why that kind of thought is wrong. That is the perfect example of how I think we can discuss these important matters.
LikeLike
“what is the philosophy behind it? What belief is truly being enforced? ”
Lydia responded:
“Power and control over others. Where does that come from? The doctrinal belief that God has ordained certain people to be over others. For some that is pastor/elder/male.”
Here’s another great example of how we can discuss abuse patterns. Thanks, Lydia!
LikeLike
One quick thought from way back– the Bayly bro post about head covering. Amongst the unmanly unmentionables men should never do was– “Shedding of tears”. Maybe I didn’t read far enough in the comments, or maybe some were deleted, but no on questioned this assertion. Joseph and his father and brothers– very unmanly. King David– a sissy! Jeremiah– unmentionably unmanly. Peter– effeminate! and of course in that shortest verse in the NT, Jesus… er… um…
Of course, if Godly men don’t shed tears, then Godly women OUGHT to. Could this motivate men to spank– so’s da widdle woman will weep more, and thus fulfill her femininity?
LikeLike
Yes Mark I find that to be the crux of the issue- “the losing of your salvation”. This is held over the heads of many. So we see here that wives who are in this situation of being spanked are probably in some way being coerced by “fear of……” (you fill in the blanks); “Losing salvation” being one of the main culprits.
If any doctrine promotes this fact of losing ones salvation it is a false doctrine. You can find this among vast amount of belief systems; some more overt then others.
LikeLike
The original post: wife spanking?
Gender complementarianism infantilizes adult women.
There is (I guess) sexual overtones to the spanking thing, too.
For all their criticisms of Non-Christians and sex, Christians sure do have lots of their own hang ups and foibles in the same area. (This is especially easier to spot if you’ve arrived at your 40s and older and have never had sex, such as myself.)
LikeLike
Lol……missdaisy
Yeah you are right on that one! I never got why some Christians are just as obsessed with sex as much as Hollywood is- except Christians are more obsessed with the negatives of it or improving it and Hollywood is outright flaunting it.
“Get over it Christians it is just sex- don’t get into my bedroom either!”
LikeLike
Kevin said,
Tee hee, hee hee heeee! 😆
I know I’ve said this at TWW and maybe here in an older thread, but one reason I try to avoid debating Calvinism with Calvinism is because my experience in the past, over a few years when trying to discuss it with them, is that they always claim:
1. You don’t understand Cal
2. You are not smart enough, educated enough or spiritual enough to understand Cal
3. You are creating strawmen about Cal / misrepresenting Cal
Additionally, any material you quote by Calvinists themselves (by Cal theologians or scholars), the Cal on the forum or blog you are talking to, will dismiss the quotes by saying, “So- and- so, whom you quote, does not understand Calvinism.”
If you quote anti-Cal material by a non-Cal, the Cal with whom you are chatting will say, “So- and- so, whom you quote does not understand Cal / is misrepresenting Cal.”
And because many Cals are intellectually pompous, may tack on a comment such as:
“And the scholar you quote does not have as many advanced college degrees as my favorite Cal scholar, so I feel free to disregard any of his comments and thoughts.”
If you are debating Calvinism with ‘Joe Smith the Calvinist’ on a blog, and Joe Smith says you don’t understand Cal sufficiently (or are misrepresenting it), and you say, okay then, please give me YOUR explanation of Calvinism, do you know what happens when you use Joe’s explanation of Calvinism months later when debating Harry the Calvinist?
Harry will say, “Where on earth did you get such strange, incorrect, or ill informed ideas about Cal?”
And you say, “This is what Joe the Cal told me about Cal,”
Harry will reply, “Joe does not understand Cal!”
I have concluded from this that even Calvinists do not agree on what Calvinism is. Calvinists don’t understand Calvinism.
Cals cannot agree on what Cal is among themselves.
I think critics of Cal, when discussing Cal, bring out the contradictions of Cal, which ruffles the feathers of Cals.
Cals seems to be blinded by how Cal appears to Non Cals, or they seem blind to how heartless Cal comes across, or blind to the logical outcomes of Cal (such as double predestination, and in the end, makes God responsible for evil, etc).
So when Non Cals critique Calvinism, I suppose to the committed Cal, the Non Cals do sound ignorant of Calvinism – but only because Non Cals spot issues with Calvinism that Cals do not see because they have bought into the entire system.
I have had the similar displeasure, the same experiences, the same intellectual dishonesty, or “trying to nail Jello to the wall” effect with another group of religious people in the past. I have generally tried to avoid debating them too, like with Calvinists, since it is usually a waste of time.
With Calvinists, you end up proof quoting Scriptures and in arguments about “my scholar is not incompetent” or “my scholar is just as good as yours.”
LikeLike
Actually the underlying dirty secret is that many leaders in the church have their own dark sexual secrets and have to compensate by preaching about it. Its the “well if I preach about it and enforce rules about it, somehow I can redeem myself with the sexual sins I do”.
Ahhh….. ready for indulgences??
LikeLike
Well, missdaisy how about whether or not someone is a 5 pointer, 3 pointer, 2 pointer or …………drum roll…….. 10 pointer Cal?
Talk about confusing and I agree……
LikeLike
Can I just say that I am a 1 pointer and its the finger that points up to Jesus?
LikeLike
JA, I know. (((sigh))) I see various abuses all the time , I just wasn’t aware that the spanking deal was so widespread and acceptable among women. So now the husband basically becomes the wife’s version of Jesus? Wow. With the belief that many of these women adhere to, there really is no need for them to follow after Christ and have a relationship with Him. Their husband-abuser becomes her spiritual end-all. I pray for them to be made free of this bondage.
LikeLike
“I think critics of Cal, when discussing Cal, bring out the contradictions of Cal, which ruffles the feathers of Cals. ”
The internet debate and resources a key stroke away are wrecking havoc on the doctrine. In the past, questioning was not allowed. The Puritans banished you or put you in stocks. Others used various methods of shunning/church discipline. Now it is ‘you don’t understand it” if you are not someone who has signed a member covenant. Case closed.
LikeLike
Mod note: This comment was moved to the Calvin debate thread: https://spiritualsoundingboard.com/2013/12/02/its-calvinism-free-for-all-off-the-top-of-your-head-part-2/#comment-75079
LikeLike
And that is another example of the interpretive grid one uses to read scripture. And their view of God. Changing our thinking in those areas is very hard. I like to focus on OUR responsibility and accountability to Christ to live out the kingdom now. That would not include enabling a husband to abuse you. That is actually enabling his sin.
LikeLike
Daisy, the tension seems to be addressed in Hebrews 10 from what I can tell. 1 John also says more about it later on in the book.
LikeLike
Joyelle,
Most of the Hyper abusers seem to forget that much of Christ rebukes were directed toward Religious Leaders who were Spiritually abusing ordinary people, some of whom they were predestining to hell whether they conformed or not.. Mark 2:16-17
Why do the abused allow the abuser to control and abuse them? It is to avoid being judged or to be “Predestined” to hell, by the Abuser?
LikeLike