Christian Marriage, Divorce, Domestic Violence, Extra-Biblical Nonsense, Patriarchal-Complementarian Movement, SMH (Shake My Head), Women and the Church

Marital Rape: Is it Even a Possibility in Christian Marriage?

***

Is there such a thing as “rape” in a Christian marriage?

***

JA note:  Thanks to Kathi for putting this post together this week as I’m finding my groove with a new term back at college.

***

medium_2934036153

***

Robert posts on his blog, A Man, His Wife, and the Bible and is married to Amanda. That is all that we know about Robert, although I do think that his Doctrines and Beliefs tab tells us quite a bit.

With regard to physical abuse, Robert believes that it is not grounds for divorce. Robert also believes that emotional abuse is overused and overblown by women today. He does think that both sexes are capable of emotional abuse, but it is more “culturally acceptable” for women to be emotionally abusive.

Adultery is the only Biblical grounds for divorce, and adultery is defined as “physical intercourse with someone not your spouse.” Forget that emotional stuff because everyone does it.

When children enter the picture, a wife is to teach them to honor the Lord and her husband. And, let’s not forget that a wife is to submit to her husband in all things – including his sexual desires – which does not surprise me in the least about Robert’s view of sexual abuse considering the following (added spaces for easier reading):

Sexual Abuse: 

Biblically, we do not believe marital rape is possible.  Scripture clearly teaches in 1 Corinthians 7 that a wife’s body is her husbands and a husband’s body is his wife’s.

We believe consent is given at marriage.

We believe the teaching on marital rape is a poison in the well of women’s hearts and minds towards their husbands and marriage & does much damage.  However, we also do not condone a husband taking his wife against her will and strongly state that a man should not do so.  In situations of repeated and enduring refusal, professional help and Matthew 18 need to be worked through & not force to be used.

We also believe that denying a spouse sex is just as much abuse as forcing sex upon a spouse.

Lastly, we do not believe sex where a man and woman engage in sex while intoxicated is rape.

In closing, we put equal responsibility on each party in such a situation.  Any marriage where sexual abuse is taking place needs to get help from a pastor, or in some situations law enforcement. (Source)

Let’s pause there for a moment and look at the definition of marital rape:

Marital rape can be defined as any unwanted intercourse or penetration (vaginal, anal, or oral) obtained by force, threat of force, or when the wife is unable to consent. (Source)

Back to Robert…

How in the world can he honestly say that he does not believe that marital rape is possible when he states that he does not condone a husband taking his wife against her will? Taking a wife against her will is the definition of marital rape, therefore you must believe that marital rape is possible.

Robert doesn’t go so far as to say that sexual assault is a woman’s fault, but when I read this, I think he comes pretty close. He almost makes it sound that sexual assault is a result of a woman denying sex to her husband. And then to say each party has equal responsibility, but if raped while intoxicated is null and void? In the end, I think Robert’s belief that marital rape is not possible is because there are enough loopholes to get a man out of being accused of raping his wife.

Oh, by the way, when Robert says, “We do believe,” he is referring to himself and his wife, Amanda. He makes it very clear in the Doctrines and Beliefs that they both believe these things. This makes me sad for Amanda and I want to know if that is what she really believes. I certainly hope that this man is not a pastor. I can’t imagine that any woman who comes to them with problems in an abusive marriage will receive any help.

 


 

photo credit: Klardrommar via photopin cc

607 thoughts on “Marital Rape: Is it Even a Possibility in Christian Marriage?”

  1. I assume Robert has a Y Chromosome and a shlong hanging between his legs?
    If so, that’s all the explanation necessary: “ME MAN! ME WANT! GOD SAITH!”

    He does think that both sexes are capable of emotional abuse, but it is more “culturally acceptable” for women to be emotionally abusive.

    This is a valid point (one of the few he makes). Both men and women can be sociopaths, both men and women can be entitled narcissists, both men and women can be control freaks, both men and women can be abusers; because men average greater physical strength, they’re more likely to be physically violent while women have to be sneaky and abuse or control from a one-down position — like emotionally. (I’ve heard it said “A man will shoot you in the face, a woman will poison you behind your back.”) This goes on steroids if you have a “WOMAN, SUBMIT!” situation (like Robert advocates because Divine Right) because then the ONLY way she can fight is indirectly and sneaky.

    Like

  2. If marital rape were not a possibility, why does Paul command spouses to render due benevolence (sex) to one another in 1 Corinthians 7? Paul’s very command assumes the woman’s power to refuse her husband, and vice versa. Etamologically, “rape” simply means to “force” the issue, and I would also point out that 1 Peter 3:7 and Colossians 3:19 prohibit harshness to wives as well.

    So the idea that there is no such thing as marital rape is simply a theological mistake which the Victorians made (probably others), and thankfully we are not required to sustain.

    And on a basic level, I would have to guess that such an act would not exactly be satisfying to a man–at least one whose life was not well characterized by the word “sadism”, I guess.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Well I heard there was a break out from an ” involuntary confinement facility” for psychopaths. Has anyone bothered to check the list for inmates named Robert ? I always want to ask these guys if these marital rights they demand are also something they are willing to SUBMIT to. For example what if you wife has a secret fantasy, a fetish for say bull whips. Since your body is no longer yours either, perhaps she wants her name branded into your BUTT or tattooed on your winky.

    Does this NO CONSENT necessary concept of marital relations still seem like a great idea ?

    Liked by 1 person

  4. Robert’s view is not based on the Bible as he claims, it is based on what Robert wants to believe. Where he gets his statistics from I have no idea. I would say that he probably pulled them out of the air. It sounded good to him at the time. Where is Amanda in all of this? I’m thinking she is locked up somewhere waiting for him to use and abuse at will. How long has she had this garbage told to her until she believes it. Marital rape does exist. How do I know: Past Experience. A week after child birth and he’s ready to go. I sure wasn’t. The docs recommend waiting until after the post partum check-up. The stitches can take a little time to heal, not to mention you’ve just pushed a baby through an opening far smaller than the new life. Marital rape exists, Robert.

    Reading down further in his beliefs: a chick flick is emotional porn. You say what? There is no nudity, there is no one asking a woman to stray from her husband. This guy is about as whacko as they come. No, Robert, porn is porn and is sexual immorality. All sexual immorality is inclusive in adultery. It draws a person away from the person they are married to. I am surprised that he didn’t bring up pedophilia and say that is not adultery.

    I will not be signing on to get updates from Robert’s blog. I believe him to be an abuser if not directly, he is allowing it to happen to others by his belief system.

    Liked by 4 people

  5. Exactly, Brenda. He comes from a sense of entitlement for his sexual desires and makes it about him. He is not considering or respecting Amanda with this stance. Abusers always have a sense of entitlement over their victims.

    Liked by 5 people

  6. “How in the world can he honestly say that he does not believe that marital rape is possible when he states that he does not condone a husband taking his wife against her will?”

    Because he says, “We believe consent is given at marriage.” Once that woman says, “I do” she has already given blanket consent for whenever. Saying, “I do” essentially relegates the woman to a position of property.

    There is no love in this arrangement. IMO, it violates what Jesus called the second greatest commandment.

    Liked by 3 people

  7. Robert also says this before he dives into his Doctrines:

    “Finally, one thread that is weaved throughout is that we believe men & women are in equally bad shape spiritually. However, we believe currently that in large part due to the feminist mindset of the church and culture, women’s sin is largely overlooked, dismissed and in many cases encouraged. This is true to some extent with men, but not nearly to the same degree with women.”

    Deep down inside I get the feeling that Robert really doesn’t like women all that much.

    Liked by 3 people

  8. I love how he uses the pronoun “we” in stating all of the beliefs. I wish Amanda could have her own section of writing, but I’m afraid he would most likely edit all of it.

    Liked by 1 person

  9. “Because he says, “We believe consent is given at marriage.” Once that woman says, “I do” she has already given blanket consent for whenever. Saying, “I do” essentially relegates the woman to a position of property.

    There is no love in this arrangement. IMO, it violates what Jesus called the second greatest commandment.”

    Exactly BTDT! Thank you for stating it so well.

    Like

  10. Bike Bubba asked the question on my site but I will answer it here. First and foremost, I appreciate you at least putting in the last part about we strongly do not condone a husband taking his wife against her will…most of the blogs like yours willfully admit this part out of dishonesty.

    Second, as is woven throughout our teaching a husband’s first and foremost responsiblity is to love his wife as Christ loved the church- which is also stated on our beliefs.

    And yes, they are our beliefs. Amanda is in complete agreement and writes on my blog often. In fact the majority of our readers who support us are women. Including several rape survivors. Who openly and enthusiastically agree with our message, and share all our posts with their husbands.

    Finally, getting down to both a theological and reasoned response to your charges about maritial rape. First theological, because it is the most important because our blog is written for people who believe in the Bible. Scripture teaches than a man and wife are to become one. That we are no longer two, but one flesh. Yes, the husband is the head of the wife but one. How do you rape yourself? The reason adultery is heinous and a sin against the marriage is because you have violated the marriage agreement (and sinned against God). You can’t have it both ways. At the wedding both husband and wife said, I am yours and you are mine. If adultery is adultery every single day of the marriage then so is consent. You don’t decide to be married each day (although most in fault do this), you decided to be married. A husband’s body is his wife’s and a wife’s body is her husband’s. You’ve already decided it. 1 Corinthians 7 teaching does nothing to prove that against that. It just proves that humans, both male and female are sinners and need to be reminded of this elemental truth from God. Your body is not your own, it belongs to your spouse and the default position of marriage is yes- and you’ve already consented to marriage.

    Now if we look at reason, the vast majority of human history has agreed with my position and not yours. In fact the ONLY people that have taken your position is western worlds in the last 30 years. Countries that by and large have turned their back on God and His ways. In fact MOST of the world still is in agreement with me. The United States government was in agreement with me until about 30 years ago. These decisions came about the same time as Roe vs. Wade- probably somethhing else we do not agree on although I have not read throughout your site to confirm that.

    Lastly, we have taught on many occassions that a man is to give his wife the time she needs after childbirth, when she is sick, when she is tired, etc. Just as we have also taught that a wife is to meet her husband’s sexual needs (as he is her).

    That is OUR stance. If in doubt, please feel free to email Amanda directly at [moderator deleted e-mail address]

    Have a great day. God bless, Robert

    Like

  11. Bike Bubba, asked the question on my site but I will answer it here. First and foremost, I appreciate you at least putting in the last part about we strongly do not condone a husband taking his wife against her will…most of the blogs like yours willfully admit this part out of dishonesty.

    Second, as is woven throughout our teaching a husband’s first and foremost responsiblity is to love his wife as Christ loved the church- which is also stated on our beliefs.

    And yes, they are our beliefs. Amanda is in complete agreement and writes on my blog often. In fact the majority of our readers who support us are women. Including several rape survivors. Who openly and enthusiastically agree with our message, and share all our posts with their husbands.

    Finally, getting down to both a theological and reasoned response to your charges about maritial rape. First theological, because it is the most important because our blog is written for people who believe in the Bible. Scripture teaches than a man and wife are to become one. That we are no longer two, but one flesh. Yes, the husband is the head of the wife but one. How do you rape yourself? The reason adultery is heinous and a sin against the marriage is because you have violated the marriage agreement (and sinned against God). You can’t have it both ways. At the wedding both husband and wife said, I am yours and you are mine. If adultery is adultery every single day of the marriage then so is consent. You don’t decide to be married each day (although most in fault do this), you decided to be married. A husband’s body is his wife’s and a wife’s body is her husband’s. You’ve already decided it. 1 Corinthians 7 teaching does nothing to prove that against that. It just proves that humans, both male and female are sinners and need to be reminded of this elemental truth from God. Your body is not your own, it belongs to your spouse and the default position of marriage is yes- and you’ve already consented to marriage.

    Now if we look at reason, the vast majority of human history has agreed with my position and not yours. In fact the ONLY people that have taken your position is western worlds in the last 30 years. Countries that by and large have turned their back on God and His ways. In fact MOST of the world still is in agreement with me. The United States government was in agreement with me until about 30 years ago. These decisions came about the same time as Roe vs. Wade- probably somethhing else we do not agree on although I have not read throughout your site to confirm that.

    Lastly, we have taught on many occassions that a man is to give his wife the time she needs after childbirth, when she is sick, when she is tired, etc. Just as we have also taught that a wife is to meet her husband’s sexual needs (as he is her).

    That is OUR stance. If in doubt, please feel free to email Amanda directly at [JA removed e-mail address]
    Have a great day. God bless, Robert

    Like

  12. I’m sorry, but this guy is wacko. Did he seriously say, “Never listen to your wife, or women, about sex.”? He did. UNbelievable. He will never get good sex that way. And SHE certainly won’t!

    Liked by 1 person

  13. Robert and his internet-friend, Lori Alexander from the blog “Always Learning” have a very base view of men that I find really disturbing. Both of these “teachers” proclaim that it is sinful for a woman to withhold consent from her husband for any reason whatsoever. In fact, they think that consent is given when marital vows are taken so a man doesn’t ever really need to ask.

    Sex is very often a topic on their blogs and usually it has to do with women withholding. They seem to think that men cannot control their sexual urges and that it is the very physical nature of man to want sex whenever, wherever and that he is incapable of NOT doing it. This man also teaches that a man should only allow his wife to have an orgasm 80% of the time just to show her that HE is in control of their sexual relationship. Pretty sad.

    Liked by 1 person

  14. This sounds so out there, right? Sadly, I don’t think that this is shocking in many circles. Do we really think that this philosophy is a big stretch for someone who believes that the bible teaches that their wife must submit in all things and must never withhold sex? Sadly, Robert’s views are the product of the teachings in many conservative churches.

    Liked by 1 person

  15. Welcome, Robert, to SSB. I hope you’ll stick around and interact with my readers who typically have very thoughtful comments and are well-versed in the Bible.

    Like

  16. Raping yourself because 2 = 1? No, i think not. 2 becoming one has to do with 2 people freely giving themselves to the other, not a husband stealing the sex he feels entitled to.

    Liked by 3 people

  17. OK, a couple of comments:

    1. The article states that “Adultery is the only Biblical grounds for divorce, and adultery is defined as “physical intercourse with someone not your spouse.” Forget that emotional stuff because everyone does it.”

    If I am remembering correctly, I think that Jesus said that if you lust after someone that is not your wife, THAT is adultery. Nothing physical there. Lust is in the mind.

    Paul used the word, “consent” as a MUTUAL agreement to not have sex. I guess that would mean that both husband and wife must discuss it together.

    The way that Paul discusses this topic in the whole chapter, from my opinion only, is that the default is that BOTH partners want sex because both partners have passion for each other.

    So, from what I can see, whether the married couple have sex, or if they don’t have sex, both is supposed to be a mutual decision, BASED ON mutual respect for each other. If the woman doesn’t want it, then the man needs to RESPECT that decision, and MUTUALLY agree that maybe tonight, it isn’t a good idea, because he wouldn’t be able to accomplish verse 33 below.

    So yes, rape is possible in a marriage.

    1 Cor 7:33-34
    33 But he that is married careth for the things that are of the world, how he may please his wife.

    I guess the men are missing the above verse, huh? Can you please your wife if she doesn’t want it? Isn’t that a no-brainer?

    34 There is difference also between a wife and a virgin. The unmarried woman careth for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit: but she that is married careth for the things of the world, how she may please her husband.

    Two verses side by side showing that both partners are to please each other.

    It shows that it is mutual. The husband has a responsibility to please his wife. If she is NOT PLEASED, then he is not respecting HIS OWN BODY, that he is supposed to cherish.

    Yes, I think I read that somewhere before.

    Ed

    Liked by 2 people

  18. This comment came in on yhe Facebook page. Its excellent:
    **************************

    First, I’m sad that this point of view is even still articulated as a valid perspective. I feel weary just reading it…

    Second, it’s astounding to me how many (especially conservative) men seem willing to settle for sexual encounters in which the woman is not participating, or only participates minimally. They’re scrambling to justify sex with a nonconsenting partner, and missing out on the richness and fulness of relationships characterized by enthusiastic mutuality. It sells everyone short, cheating both parties.

    Liked by 2 people

  19. “Now if we look at reason, the vast majority of human history has agreed with my position and not yours. In fact the ONLY people that have taken your position is western worlds in the last 30 years. Countries that by and large have turned their back on God and His ways. In fact MOST of the world still is in agreement with me.”

    So, if we don’t agree with this we aren’t being reasonable? Gotcha.

    “The vast majority of human history” has not necessarily been Christian. Many “countries that by and large have turned their back on God and His ways” actually hold the same Patriarchal beliefs that you do. Many Muslims and Hindus believe as you do, so, yes, “MOST of the world still is in agreement with” you. That doesn’t make your beliefs biblical.

    Liked by 3 people

  20. In his comment above Robert relies on the passages declaring that the two shall become one on marriage. That’s a spiritual joining represented by the physical coupling. Intercourse with your spouse is no more intercourse with yourself than punching your spouse would be considered punching yourself. If you punch your spouse and send him or her to the hospital, I’d likely expect an arrest with no excuses about how punching your spouse’s face is no different from punching your own.

    Liked by 7 people

  21. If you punch your spouse and send him or her to the hospital, I’d likely expect an arrest with no excuses about how punching your spouse’s face is no different from punching your own.

    Has anyone tried that defense in your courtroom?

    Liked by 2 people

  22. For the most part folks I have found discussing these items very moot, so no disrespect to your point of views but this will be my last comment because folks takes sides and views on things, including the Bible and it is very hard to move them off that position. If you’d like to learn more about our views you can always read the blog where Amanda & I comment daily.

    So with that in mind, here are my closing thoughts.

    First, in the context of christians…my view is the BY FAR more historically accurate for christians. Yours is very, very recent.

    Second, A husband is not stealing sex. Because he literally is entitled to it- which is exactly what the 1 Cor 7 teaching is all about. Unlike one commentator who is intrepreting this drastically wrong. Only in mutual NO does sex not happen via 1 Cor 7. The default position of the christian spouse- male or female is yes to sex with their spouse in 1 Cor 7.

    We are talking about two different things here. Is maritial rape possible and should a man force himself on his wife. The answer to both is no. Just because I say no to the first does not mean I say yes to the second. And neither should a wife (or a husband) refuse their spouse except by mutual decision for a short time for prayer. As usual the normal disclaimers- wives get tired, sick and have birth. Don’t be a jackass about such things. Love your wife as Christ loves the church.

    As usual many comments assume my wife is not fully on board. She is. I’ve given you her email to verify. Our marriage is happy and loving.

    The bible has many hard truths. Many things- like a husband being willing to die for his wife- are not easy to accept. But they are very much biblical. Many christians who have been raised in the modern church accept things that 1900 years worth of christians (and I think Jesus) would call very bad, unscriptural teaching.

    I wish you all the best. As always, treat others as you’d like to be treated…God bless- Robert

    Like

  23. Robert, you haven’t answered the most basic question; given that 1 Cor. 7 makes clear that a spouse can deny the other (this is necessary if Paul is to order spouses to render due affection), is it not clear that the other can spouse could theoretically “force”, or rape, the one who refuses consent?

    As our hostess notes, to condemn marital forcing while admitting no possibility of marital rape is flat out nonsensical. Give it up, start making sense, and join the civilized world here. And, for that matter, the witness of the Scriptures.

    Liked by 1 person

  24. Robert seems to ignore verse 33 about the word “pleasing”, and now he is trying to peddle his stuff as what he believes the historical context is.

    Well, yes, rape in marriage has existed historically.

    He ignores the word MUTUAL. By the WAY that Robert discusses it, is that if the husband states, “no, I do not agree with you Mrs. Wife”, then he has the authority to take it, because he didn’t agree.

    The default to Robert, then, is that if the wife doesn’t want it, take it anyway, for he is entitled.

    What a nut case.

    Ed

    Liked by 1 person

  25. Robert…Thank you stepping in and commenting.

    When I read 1 Corinthians 7, I look at it from a perspective of the church of Corinth that Paul is writing to. Considering that this letter is written specifically to the Corinthians, answering their questions about faith, I take into account the cultural aspects of the time. Corinth, in the time of Paul, was the well known epicenter of the followers of Aphrodite, the goddess of love and fertility. People would pilgrim to the temple to pay homage to the goddess, and often times would participate in religious prostitution and ceremonies.

    It is possible that in regard to the question of marriage, Paul was telling the Corinthians that sex remains within marriage and should no longer be a part of the Greek religious environment. Paul is reestablishing sex within the marriage. It’s interesting to note that when he says in 6:16 that “the two become one flesh,” he’s actually referring to a prostitute here and not the husband/wife relationship. When Paul says that the “two become one” I do not think he means that in a literal way – it’s not possible (except that two coming together can make one – 10 months down the road!). A marriage is about two individual people who come together to make one relationship work.

    I will agree that mutual sex within marriage is important. However, if my husband indicates to me that he’s wanting to have sex and I’m not ready for it at the moment, he should be able to respect that. He’s told me that it’s not satisfying for him if I’m not interested. And, there have been times where I have said that I’m interested and he’s not. We have a mutual love for each other and understand that we have different moments of interest.

    You said, “How do you rape yourself?” Well, that’s a good question if you believe that the two becoming one flesh is a literal thing that happens. However, I believe that two individuals come together to form one relationship, not one flesh. Therefore, I believe that marital rape can happen when the boundary of mutual respect has been broken.

    Like

  26. One more comment from me Robert.

    In your views, there really is no such thing as a consent to not have sex, because you wouldn’t consent.

    You said:
    “we strongly do not condone a husband taking his wife against her will”

    But that is a lie, because you will not consent to not having sex, because, as you say, your wife’s body is not hers. In other words, she has no say in the matter, because she already consented at marriage. So, yes, you do strongly condone a husband taking his wife against her will.

    You cannot speak out of both sides of your mouth without being called on it.

    MUTUAL IS IN CHAPTER 7 FOR HAVING SEX AND FOR NOT HAVING SEX.

    Ed

    Liked by 1 person

  27. “First, in the context of christians…my view is the BY FAR more historically accurate for christians. Yours is very, very recent.”

    Let’s just imagine for a moment that you are referring to slavery. In that context your statement would be accurate. It’s only been fairly recently (just over 150 years) that slavery was finally abolished in this country. Does that make the pro-slavery view “BY FAR more historically accurate for christians?” Does the length of time a viewpoint is held make it right?

    Liked by 3 people

  28. Robert is a Christian MRA, even if he doesn’t use that term to describe himself. They don’t believe in marital rape either. Also:

    Lastly, we do not believe sex where a man and woman engage in sex while intoxicated is rape.

    Even if one party is so drunk that they’re passed out and aren’t even aware of what’s happening to them? Come on. You can at least try to make your position appear kinda sorta not 100% horrible.

    Again, an MRA by any other name, would smell just as bad.

    Like

  29. @ BTDT:

    My question is, if the husband doesn’t want to have sex, is the wife “entitled” to go ahead with it anyway? That’s usually the question that gets you a marital rape denier’s real position. I don’t recall any of them ever answering “yes.”

    Liked by 1 person

  30. As for “most of the world” agreeing with Robert: here’s a world map of marital rape’s criminal or non-criminal status. Looks like Robert would get outvoted if morality really was decided by polling.

    Hmmmmm!! Seems I was correct about Robert pulling his stats out of thin air. Thank you Hester.

    Liked by 3 people

  31. Now hear this, Robert, because this is HUGE!!!!

    The body of the wife is his ONLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF….Pleasing HER, not him.

    The body of the husband is hers ONLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF…Pleasing him, not her.

    That is why scripture states that your body belongs to her, and her body belongs to you.

    You can’t give pleasure to someone who doesn’t want it. And verses 33-34 states that you have a responsibility to give HER pleasure. But the way that I see your writing on this blog, it’s all about YOUR pleasure, not hers.

    In both instances, verses 33-34, sex is for the GIVING of pleasure, not in the receiving of pleasure.

    Just goes to show that his views are SELFISH. It’s all about HIS pleasure, thinking that he is entitled.

    Ed

    Liked by 3 people

  32. Robert and Amanda, I do not understand what makes either of you qualified to speak out on how a married couple are to negotiate their sex life. I doubt you have either the education or the varied cultural exposure to speak with any authority. Relationships are not static and often have to be renegotiated based on a couple’s changing health, age, and other issues. Jesus certainly showed more respect to the personhood of women than the culture around him.
    It was a woman who first encountered the resurrected Christ and went to tell others, there were women who supported him and followed him. As a follower of Christ, I know my value has been determined through a savior who knows me intimately. My husband loves and respects me as a fellow believer. We desire the best for one another and do not need a black and white template for how to relate to each other sexually.
    I have been fortunate enough to travel and also live in several countries both in Europe and Africa. I have an MA in counseling psych and have worked in the area of psychological testing. I say this to let you know even with my exposure to different cultures, socio-economic groups and religions I would never assume that sex in any marriage relationship could be broken down to a couple simple, static rules. It is also obvious you have found what works in your marriage (good for you) and pulled a bunch of crap out of the air to try and create the impression you are qualified to dictate how sex in all marriages should work. Unfortunately, there are many people who are stuck in their own mental ghetto and see their way is the only way. Even sadder, there are others who choose to blindly follow them rather than trust the wisdom and freedom God allows them.

    Liked by 7 people

  33. “Unfortunately, there are many people who are stuck in their own mental ghetto and see their way is the only way. ”

    And horrific that they think this mental ghetto they have created lines up with the Word of God. (I’m having a hard time typing “we” when we haven’t heard directly from Amanda.)

    If Amanda doesnt comply, she could be subjected to the crime of marital rape with Robert’s way of thinking/living.

    Note to Amanda: if you dont want sex and Robert forces it on you, that is a crime. Not only is it rape, but also domestic violence. Report it to authorities and get to a safe place. If you need help, contact me and I will do my best to find resources for you.

    Liked by 4 people

  34. 1. If Robert and his wife tell me what state they live in, I would be happy to look up the penal code and criminal jury instructions for their state about this topic and post them here.

    2. Another Christian husband, an article was posted here, decided that it was his right to “discipline” his wife by spanking her for not “respecting” him in front of their children. He was arrested, prosecuted, and convicted by a jury (I believe the charges were assault and battery, although I don’t have access to the criminal complaint). Legally an assault is an attempted battery (even a threat); a battery is a completed assault (with some kind of physical contact, even an object).

    3. Ed and Bubba posts are excellent about the complexity of the Scriptures and it not being as cut and dried as Robert thinks (and teaches) when it comes to marital sex.

    4. The dangers of the “obey” and “submit” ideology (it’s not theology) is also requiring it of other people. My former pastors/elders (Northern California) required that I “obey” them and “submit” to them at church about a Megan’s List sex offender in our midst, who was their friend and they were protecting, allowing him near other peoples’ children who had no idea he was on Megan’s List.

    I have had to write up police reports about my pastors/elders since here in California: a) they are legally mandated child abuse reporters and it’s a crime that they haven’t reported that they can be arrested and prosecuted for it; b) it’s a crime that they have ordered people like me to never have contact with this sex offender’s supervising law enforcement agency about him or any law enforcement agency (obstruction of justice); and c) the pastors/elders said that wives at church had to ‘submit’ and ‘obey’ their husbands if the husband permitted the sex offender to touch the children. Uhh, no. Dead wrong. Fathers and mothers are legally required to protect their children and can be arrested and prosecuted for misdemeanor or felony child abuse/endangerment/neglect for their failures, get up to 1-year in jail or up to 6-years in state prison. A mother’s responsibility under law is not absolved because her husband doesn’t have the brains/back bone to protect the kidlets!

    Liked by 4 people

  35. Robert I read what you said I respectfully disagree, no offense but the Bible says all sorts of stuff that is well, never mind.

    Like

  36. Simply put, your opinions Robert, sicken me. Your statements indicate you are a dangerous man. Rape is an act(s) of violence, extreme violence. The primary motivation of a rapist is not sex. After 32 years in law enforcement, 18 of those in investigations of crimes against persons, the majority of those sex crimes, I dare say I never heard a single member of law enforcement
    including prosecutors, many very committed Christians say otherwise. The exceptions were arrested for rape themselves.

    Liked by 1 person

  37. Something happened and I could finish my comment.I personally investigated numerous cases of rape allegations within a marraige and several of those also had another small problem called murder. Your statements are so absurd, in so many ways I question your mental stability. Oh, I forgot, my thoughts on this are moot according to you and you are so arrogant to say you will not comment anymore as getting someone to move from their thoughts and beliefs on this is not likely. You were right about one thing. There won’t be any movement on my part to “your side” no matter how much you twist Gids a Word to justify violence, horrendous violence.

    Liked by 1 person

  38. I was repeatedly raped as a child by a southern Baptist Christian man. Why would I get married if I had to have sex against my will? Why would a loving parent want their daughter to get in a situation were she could not say no to sex? It is sex slavery, a preferred arrangement for men who know women will not want to have sex with them, that would be Robert and his ilk.

    “We also believe that denying a spouse sex is just as much abuse as forcing sex upon a spouse.” This pleases rapist. Why doesn’t Robert have the courage in what his is saying to say, I believe? Who is this other person, is it his wife, these men say their wives have to be submissive to them, she cant say no, she has to say what he says. This gross man does NOT hate rape, he does not know or care anything about rape. Robert, I was raped as a child and denying sex is nothing like being FORCED to. Robert is a sicko.

    There is something really sick and evil about men who like christianity.
    My father told me that rape was not that big of a deal.
    My father hated woman and girls who had been raped.
    My father hated my mothers grandmother with a bloody passion, he got in her face and cussed her out on two occasion, he hated her because people felt sorry for her that she had been raped as a child. He cussed her out for buying my mother a lawn mower. Can you imagine, a man hating raped women and girls so much he cusses out a great grandmother?

    In my experience, men who hate women and little girls are men who have done something vile to a woman or little girl, he wants people to hate her with him, or men who want to do something vile to a woman or little girl, he can not get it off his mind. This is my rapist and father.

    How my father, grandfathers, and rapist talked about rape, they were all church going, bible quoting, southern Baptist Christian men, they would mock, belittle and dismiss rape.
    Rape is something feminist have blown out of proportion, if she would only read the bible she would see rape is no big deal. Oh, how they hate those rape hating feminist.

    As a girl growing up in Christianity I felt like god and my father were my pimps, I did not have good feelings towards either one of them.

    And now I see that Christian men are losers who need christianity to get and keep wives, to get sex, to get children. Men who know they are going to make their wives miserable and the woman will want to escape him, and in Christianity she has to stay and take it. The god who wants this is just like a pimp, pimps do not care if men rape, sexually terrorize and beat the woman or girl, she is to take.

    In my thorough experience with Christian men, Christian men belong in the same category as rapist, pimps, men who own female sex slaves, and men who sexually torture women and little girls. I really hope Christian men end up in those categories, they so deserve to.

    Like

  39. Dear Guest, I am so so sorry you have lived through and still are going through the horror of being treated so terribly and sadisticaly. I cannot begin to know how you feel. I did meet plenty of people hurt like you were in my LE career. I get why you say what you are saying. I know it doesn’t do any good to let you know I am a follower if Jesus. Any man that can do this in my opinion is not a Christian, can’t be. I don’t have the theological expertise to explain that, I just know I saw it, dealt with it and it is pure evil. I fought it my entire adult life and my life is a mess. I still have faith in the real God even though I don’t under everything. I know there are no words that can help. My heart goes out to you, it truly does. You are brave to speak out. May you feel loved some day.

    Robert, happy now after reading this? She is just one of so many crushed by people like you. She is right, you are sick. Evil. Rape destroys, inside or outside of marraige. You have no idea what hurt you are causing……or then maybe you do.

    Liked by 3 people

  40. Julie Anne,
    This article is disturbing. This was a small number of men, but would adding the same number to this cross section make the results any better. The idea that entitlement is so wide spread and already having a basic lack of trust in men, this does not help and yes, reminds me of Robert. There was a Robert on another website yesterday that has to do with pedophilia who showed a severe lack of empathy for those who have been through it. I asked if he had been on another blog through the same time frame because his compassion was equal to the Robert here.

    What a lot of people do not understand is rape is rooted in violence, not a need for sex. Those that would commit this act could care less about their victim. There is just immediate gratification and disconnect from the harm they have done another human being. They don’t understand that the victim is not just going to walk away and have enjoyed the encounter, in many cases she would have rather be dead than go through the emotional torture that will be with her for a very long time.

    Liked by 1 person

  41. Dear Guest,
    I know there are no words that can make the pain you have endured go away over night. You have gone through more than any child should. It has taken me my almost 58 years to rewrite the continual message in my head and now can say, “It is not happening now”. I had an evil stepfather who sexually abused me and when it happened in marriage, I thought it was normal. It was happening in everyone’s home. It was just the way it is. IT ISN’T.

    The men who acted out these violent acts were NOT CHRISTIANS. They use a term that they know nothing about and there are many out their like them. As sad as that fact is, we do not have to be enslaved to what they did to us. Christ was gentle and caring with the women he interacted with while walking this earth. He showed the true nature of who God is and God does NOT want these things to happen to us. He collects every tear that you and I have shed. There are still things that trigger me into remembering events that I thought were gone from my memory, but these things are part of us even though we had nothing to do with causing them, as some would like to tell us. What we choose to do with them is up to us. I do trust God, I don’t trust many men Christian or not. God saw what was happening and was mourning while I mourned. He cried as I cried. I am thankful that He will pass down His judgment, which is far greater than anything I could ever do. Men can harm my body, but they cannot have my soul.

    I was angry and even bitter for a long time. Those emotions ran deeper than I even knew at the time, until I saw that I needed to let go of them for my own sake. Not for the ones who did these vile things to me. They would not want or ask for forgiveness. They didn’t feel they did anything wrong. Forgiveness was for me, to set my heart, mind and soul free. It has been good for me to have outlets and resources over the past few years. There are many good books out there that helped me, both Christian and secular. Lundy Bancroft, Barbara Roberts, Ps. Jeff Crippen, Leslie Vernick are a few I can think of off the top of my head. If you ever need someone to talk to, I would be happy to listen going in one ear and out the other if you choose. It does help to talk to people who have been there.

    Liked by 1 person

  42. Guest,
    You might want to visit Clara Hinton’s blog, as well. She was married to a pedophile for many years without her knowledge and now she and her son try to help the victims and train parents on what to look for.

    Liked by 1 person

  43. Guest, My heart weeps for your pain. I love the healthy anger you express against your perpetrator and the man who excused such crime. It is not bitterness or unforgiveness. It provides you with a healthy boundary to keep you safe!
    These types of crimes that often been minimized by the church and do not reflect Christ. The words Christian and Biblical have recently been associated with heinous behavior. That is one reason I identify as a believer or Christ follower. So sad.

    Liked by 3 people

  44. Guest, your story is sad beyond words. I think I would hate all men and God if I had been subjected to what you grew up with. I’m so very sorry. Thankfully, as can be seen here represented by my male commenters, there are real men who think Robert and those like him – men who objectify women – are evil.

    The men you have seen in your childhood do not represent all men, thank God. I hope and pray that you will meet true Christian men who will show you unconditional love and show you that you, as a woman, are of value, not because of your sexual organ to be used by men, but because of who God made you to be as a person that deserves respect, dignity, love just because you are a child of the God.

    Liked by 2 people

  45. Robert,

    I don’t know whether you’re still reading here. You’ve already stated that you won’t be commenting here again, so I imagine you’re not keeping up with the conversation.

    Many others here have already addressed your disturbing ideas on marital relations. Ed and Bubba have argued from Bible why your position is wrong. BeenThereDoneThat and Tim have appealed to you with common sense. I’d be horrified if Guest’s appalling story didn’t move you in some way. Personally, I can’t blame her if she hears echoes of her disgusting father’s voice in your words.

    All of these people have spoken passionately against your interpretation of the Bible. Ironically, though, I think that the most concise and eloquent argument came from none other than you, Robert. At the end of your last comment, you said:

    As always, treat others as you’d like to be treated…

    You may wonder why I think that marital rape exists, even though I’m a Christian man. There are many reasons, but the main reason is quite simple. Why do I disagree that a husband is entitled to sex with his wife, regardless of her feelings at the moment? Because I would hate for anyone to take that attitude with me. Why do I accept the need to be sure my wife wants to do this or that in bed? Because that’s how I would like to be treated in her place.

    It’s not nearly as hard as you make it out to be, Robert. I hope you can take that to heart.

    Liked by 2 people

  46. Guest, my heart goes out to you. I am so sorry for your experience. Please know that you are welcome here any time. We will listen.

    Liked by 2 people

  47. @JulieAnne:

    Check out this article that @sololoner tweeted to me. It reminded us both of Robert: http://jezebel.com/1-in-3-college-men-admit-they-would-rape-if-we-dont-ca-1678601600

    The full title of that article — “One in Three College Men Admit They Would Rape if We Don’t Call It ‘Rape'” reminded me of this exchange between Kyle and his dad in the South Park episode “Sexual Harassment Panda” (about Perpetually Offended Activism and Lawsuit-sniffing Shysters):

    KYLE: But Dad, isn’t that Fascism?
    KYLE’S DAD: No it isn’t, son. Because we don’t call it Fascism. Do you understand?
    KYLE: Do you?

    Like

  48. Well, coming in a little late to this, but anyway….

    Robert is wrong for the simple reason that he argues a change of context creates a change of essence or nature of an act. Rape is not rape because it happens outside of marriage. The violent nature and essence of the act of rape does not suddenly become legitimate because the wife said “I do” and therefore “her body is not her own.”

    Robert wants to have it both ways by rightly denying such action against one’s wife, correctly saying it is unconscionable, and then “baptizing” and “sanctifying” it under the technical white wash of the wife’s “I do.” He wants to say, well it is still a vile and wicked act but technically we can’t call it rape because she said “I do” and her body is not her own.

    Rape is what it is because of its essence and nature. Not the context in which it is committed.

    Liked by 2 people

  49. Robert,

    Something has been stirring in me since last night, and that is when you said:

    “first and foremost responsiblity is to love his wife as Christ loved the church-”

    First of all, when did Christ have sex with the church?

    Second, and most important:

    A couple of threads ago, we discussed the word LOVE with gracealone1, in that LOVE is an action word, as well as a warm and fuzzy emotion.

    In regards to the action word, love is a GIVING, or DOING, as James puts it, that we are to be DOERS of the Word.

    Love is not selfish. Love is giving. Sin is about self.

    Why is fornication a sin? Because it’s all about you. Why is coveting a sin? Because it’s all about you. Sin is about self.

    Why is going to a prostitute a sin? Because its about self. Love is a giving, not a receiving.

    To Robert, I can’t for the life of me figure out how you are loving your wife as Christ loved the church, since your beliefs in this is about receiving.

    Her body belongs to you for you to GIVE pleasure (That is love), not to receive (that is sin, because it’s about self) pleasure.

    Bottom line, in the reform world, LOVE has been redefined, in that it is to receive than to give. And that is very prevalent when I do research on the reformed people. It’s all about SELF.

    Sin is about self. Roberts theology is about self. He promotes sin. It has nothing to do with his statement: “first and foremost responsiblity is to love his wife as Christ loved the church-“, because there is no love in receiving, but there is love in giving, because that is what love is all about.

    I am very troubled about this theology of his.

    Ed

    Liked by 2 people

  50. Guest, you are exactly right about it being sex slavery.

    You remind me so much of myself. There’s no doubt in my mind that I, too, would associate all Christian men with “rapists, pimps, men who own female sex slaves, and men who sexually torture women and little girls” if I had been in your shoes. It makes perfect sense that you do, since that is what was modeled for you and what you were taught, by those who failed you. That is the truth of what you know, your reasonable conclusion based on actual experience. You have seen no evidence to the contrary and have no reason to believe, or even hope, or want to hope, otherwise.

    I grew up believing very similar things about all men, not just Christian ones. They were all sadistic perverts at heart with evil intentions, just like the abusers, who could not love, only wanting to cause hurt. At age 11, I still had a glimmer of hope, but lost a fight with myself, believing the evidence all around me was undeniable. So, right then I swore off marriage completely, to avoid the inevitable nightmare of hurt and betrayal.

    I know this stuff is very, very complicated, and just wanted you to know that you are definitely not alone in your strong feelings, even though our stories are different. Hope this makes some kind of sense.

    Liked by 3 people

  51. Robert and Amanda live in eastern Washington state. The freejinger forum has ample quotes and screenshots of his blog. He is also a frequent commenter on Lori Alexander’s blog, as Cabinetman. There he has explained that before Amanda came around to his way of thinking, he used to have to force her to sleep outside in a shed when she misbehaved.

    Like

  52. I am in Eastern WA state. I cannot believe what I am reading. Eastern WA state is desert. It is extremely hot in the summer and can be very cold in the winter. I have words for Robert that I cannot type on this site.

    Liked by 4 people

  53. Ah, patriarchs. Standing tall, letting their light shine before the world, never hiding who they are and what they say.

    Robert exemplify real Christian manhood as much in the way his blog remains open to the public despite scorn, as in his attitude towards his wife.

    [/sarcasm off]

    Liked by 2 people

  54. @guest,

    1. Thanks for posting the jurisdiction that Robert and Amanda live in (Washington state). While I look up the penal code for that state (regarding marital rape and Robert’s belief there is no such thing) and the related criminal jury instructions, I have another question;

    2. What is/was Robert’s relationship with his father? Non-existent father? Abusive or alcoholic father? To date, every single man that has espoused Robert’s type of beliefs of obedience and submission (including Mark Driscoll) of a wife did NOT have a good, loving, healthy, relationship with his own father and appropriate male role-modeling.

    Liked by 1 person

  55. There he has explained that before Amanda came around to his way of thinking, he used to have to force her to sleep outside in a shed when she misbehaved.

    Are you kidding me??!

    Yeah. Words that can’t be typed for sure!

    Liked by 2 people

  56. chapmaned24 said: “Robert seems to ignore verse 33 about the word “pleasing” ”

    Even in 7:4 the Greek word is one translated as “goodwill” or “benevolence” elsewhere in the Bible. A husband or wife should not refuse the spouse [benevolence]. In this context, it obviously includes sexual goodness. But sex is not, in itself, the meaning of the word.

    Like

  57. Ok, here’s an article from “Cabinetman” pulled from Lori Alexander ‘s (and her patriarchal abusive husband, Ken’s) blog on the Wayback Machine (btw, you can’t pull up Robert’s blog on the Wayback Machine). I haven’t checked to see if the blog post is still live, but someone had the Wayback Machine link, so that makes me think the Alexanders yanked it because it was too controversial:

    https://web.archive.org/web/20140208090256/http://lorialexander.blogspot.com/2014/02/cabinetmans-story-of-headship-and.html

    Liked by 1 person

  58. Last night a long-time reader sent me a link to a site that had the same belief on marital rape as Robert. I wasn’t able to compare in detail, but if you read through this site, it sounds identical to the wording Robert used – possibly plagiarized. I am using a “do not link” because I don’t want to leave footprints on a Mens Rights blog: http://www.donotlink.com/mm4

    The basis of Christian marriage is laid out in Genesis and reiterated in the Gospels. The man and wife become one flesh.

    Can a person commit a non-consensual act upon their own flesh?

    The very idea is absurd.

    Any statement that there can be non-consent in marriage is an attack on the fundamental basis of Christian marriage and the Christian family.

    If you believe you can have non-consent in marriage, you do not have a Christian view of marriage.

    If you believe non-consent can occur in your marriage, you do not have a Christian marriage.

    Like

  59. Robert, if you were a real man, you’d keep your blog up. If your words were true and Biblical, then you have nothing to hide. I know you are reading here. Your weakness is showing when you hide. What are you afraid of? The truth?

    Liked by 2 people

  60. “Robert and Amanda live in eastern Washington state.”

    I noticed this on their web page: “Final Days: We believe we are seeing signs of the end. Only the Father knows, but we are told to be watchful. You will see signs of preparedness in our teaching. Both spiritually, but also in the day to day so that in the coming days you can take care of not only your loved ones, but be able to give to those who are need. ”

    I can’t help but make a connection between their location, their views on the final days and preparedness, and the American Redoubt.

    “The American Redoubt[1] is a political migration movement first proposed in 2011 by best-selling survivalist novelist and blogger James Wesley Rawles[2][3] which designates three states in the northwestern United States (Idaho, Montana, Wyoming), and adjoining portions of two other states (eastern Oregon, and eastern Washington) as a safe haven for conservative, libertarian-leaning Christians and Jews.[2][4] Kim Murphy, a reporter for The Los Angeles Times summed up one motivation for the movement: “For a growing number of people, it’s the designated point of retreat when the American economy hits the fan. When banks fail, the government declares martial law, the power grid goes down.”[2] ”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Redoubt#cite_note-4

    There is a undercurrent of this in certain sectors of the Homeschool Movement.

    Like

  61. Wow….I can’t believe all that I’m seeing and reading. And here I was trying to be civil in my response to Robert about reading the Bible. Well, no more. The you-know-what has hit the fan.

    Robert, you are nothing but a controlling, abusive husband. When I read Lori’s blog post I felt like I was reading Shakespeare’s Taming of the Shrew. Good for you for breaking down your “rebellious” wife. For taking her away and isolating her. For making her sleep on the couch or out in the cabin for her own good. What a man you are! When people comment on how great your marriage is, please know that everything you show on the outside is a lie. If they knew the truth I’m sure they would be disgusted by you.

    Amanda, please get out of this relationship! This is not love. This is abuse.

    Liked by 3 people

  62. This entire article, comment section, and the blog links in here almost have me sick to my stomach.
    The fact that these abuses are happening in the name of CHRIST is just sick.

    Liked by 2 people

  63. One last go around here…sorry to not keep my word. First, what part of a husband should not force his wife to have sex do you guys not understand? Because that is our stance. The aspect of whether maritial rape is possible or not, is not one we are taking a legal stance on but a theological one. Legally, of this I am sure. It most definetly is a crime and even if it was not- as I stated very clearly a man should not take his wife by force. I don’t know how to be more clear than that.

    As far as locking my wife in a shed, no. Absolutely not. We had a decade long marriage that was very tough. There were times when my wife would lose her cool and as her very feminist counselor agreed with me, she needed to leave the premises. The agreement we had with the counselor was that she had to either go to a hotel or use the cabin on our property. A fully furnished, with electricity, heat and running water cabin. Until she could cool off and contain her emotions and discuss things rationally.

    You may not agree on our theological stance but why don’t you keep it a theological issue. I am not advocating maritial rape or rape of any kind. In fact I have often said I’d be glad to be the one to take off a fellows testicles if he was rapist. As far as comparing me to a pedophil, that is just crazy and cowardly.

    You say you guys don’t like spiritual bullies but then do the exact thing you are advocating against. My readers by and large were women, who read their by their own choice and agreed with the teaching- including rape survivors.

    As far as Amanda being on board or not- you guys are sick. As I have done with the Free Jingers I have done here. You are free to contact her. She communicates regularly with many people on the blog.

    Our marriage and home is one that is filled with love, joy and peace. I understand you hating the theological stance. But I am not some monster. I am a good and loving husband. A loving father. I started my blog because a group of women from two different websites asked me to because they wanted to be able to share it with their husbands. We had several posts a week up on loving your wife sacrificially, helping her, serving her, protecting her and cherishing her.

    I have made my blog private because you again have made wild accusations and attacked me when my own wife has been on the blog for half a year saying I am a loving husband- and you obviously had access to the blog and therefore to my wife and her words. It is blatantly dishonest to take things from the blog and not include her very public words over an extending period of time supporting that I have always been a loving husband.

    I do not like your beliefs. You do not like my beleifs. But at no time have I attacked or bullied your personally. I have not called you vile names. I believe your beliefs are just as dangerous to marriage and hurt just as many people. I know there are evil men in this world which is why since you have my beliefs that if a woman is being abused we advocating bringing in law enforcement. We tell women who are being hurt by bad men to go to the police.

    All that is on the same page you pulled this quote from, but you are not being honest about it at all. We tell men to NOT take their wife against her will. To love her and protect her. To cherish her. But our stance on maritial rape is because of a theological issue of one flesh and what a vow means. It has nothing to do with what a man should do if his wife refuses sex- because if you had read our teaching we told men to make sure his wife is being loved, protected, is well rested and so forth. If that does not work we tell them to inact Matthew 18 as Bike Bubba suggests. And NOWHERE do we tell men to rape their wife or take her against her will. NOWHERE.

    And at no time has my wife been raped or abused by me. As she has stated personally many times because as you state the Free Jingers have asked a thousand times in every conceivable fashion.j

    Disagree with a theological stance. But be honest about the issue. You are pulling a small portion of our teaching, or a particular aspect of our life and taking it completely out of context and coming nowhere close to telling the whole story.

    Respectfully, Robert

    Like

  64. PS. Cabin happened twice in ten years and both times less than a few hours. Have you never asked your spouse to leave the premises because they were too hot to contain themselves?

    Like

  65. PS. Cabin happened twice in ten years and both times less than a few hours. Have you never asked your spouse to leave the premises because they were too hot to contain themselves?

    For you to ask a question tells all. If you don’t like your wife, YOU leave. She legally has just as much right to remain there as you.

    Liked by 6 people

  66. PS. Lori’s post was a set of comments taken over a span of month and thrown into a post. It reads absolutely horribly- of this I fully admit. If I read that I would call me an abuser to. But again, context is everything.

    There were ten years where my wife was quite honestly a bad wife- by her own admission. I would come home after working ten hours and having taken care of our child and the house would be a mess. It is okay to ask a stay at home mom who is not taking care of children to clean the house.

    There were times were my wife, again we had a bad marriage- one she has taken the lions share of the blame for would go to her friends house and bad mouth me and they would tell her to divorce me. I did not want her hanging around such friends even if they were at a biblestudy. I had no problem with her talking or spending time with women who would listen, give her godly advice and honored marriage.

    Every single issue on that post, that sounds horrible because it was pulled from comments written over a month and slapped into a post if taken in context is the exact advice most wives get towards their husbands if they were acting the same way.

    I fully admit the piece at Lori’s is aweful and never should have gone up. I asked her to take it down and she did. But the very people who told Amanda she had stockholm syndrome the day that piece ran were the women (and rape survivor) who followed our blog and shared our teaching with their husbands. Who calls us friends and trusted us with their marriage.

    I can take 5% of your life, or a really poorly written out of context piece and twist any single one of you into a monster. The reality is though is drastically different than what is being presented here. Night and day difference.

    Like

  67. If men and women understood Biblical principles about relationships then both genders would understand that intimacy is all about the woman.

    Like

  68. “It is okay to ask a stay at home mom who is not taking care of children to clean the house.”

    Unless you’re somehow incapacitated, I’d say start cleaning up your 50%. But then, my husband has always picked up after himself and then some. We both pitch in.

    Liked by 1 person

  69. But the very people who told Amanda she had stockholm syndrome the day that piece ran were the women (and rape survivor) who followed our blog and shared our teaching with their husbands. Who calls us friends and trusted us with their marriage.

    They said your wife had Stockholm Syndrome and then shared your teachings with their own husbands and call you friends? Say what? That’s all kinds of messed up unless I’m not understanding you.

    Liked by 2 people

  70. Julie Anne,
    Our agreement with her very feminist counselor was that she would leave. She was the one who was hot and out of control. I followed the counselor’s teaching- a woman who is an ordained minister and proudly waves a feminist flag. Of this Amanda has not only backed up the story on but said I did the right thing as recently as last week on Lori’s blog.

    You can’t have it both ways. That counselor knew every last dirty detail of our marriage and lives and yet she told my wife she was the one who needed to leave.
    Not all men, even ones who have been painted as monsters by people who have an agenda, are guilty. I put myself under the judgement of a woman who has very similar beliefs as you, and while she didn’t agree with my beliefs she did not think I was abusive. Nor did she tell me to leave the premises. She told Amanda she had a good husband who loved her.

    I did some things wrong, but abusing my wife was not one of them. Why don’t you take her word on it? It’s a very public and has been repeated dozens of times.

    Like

  71. Back to your beliefs, Robert:

    1. The teaching of marital rape is not a “poison.” It is reality. Women get raped and can be raped by their husbands. You acknowledge that sexual abuse can happen in a marriage, so why do you not acknowledge marital rape?

    2. You believe that rape can not happen while intoxicated, yet if a wife is intoxicated enough to not give consent to sex, that is rape.

    3. You believe that consent for sex is automatically given at marriage. Is that part of the marriage vow? I don’t believe I’ve ever heard that during a marriage ceremony, unless that’s one you threw in to yours. No where is it mentioned in the Bible that a wife should be expected to have sex whenever the husband wants it. Again, I think that your reading of 1 Corinthians 7 is a bit skewed.

    Sorry, but I do not think that you are loving your wife like Christ loved the church when you deny the validity of consent to sex in marriage. Therefore, I disagree with your “theological” stance.

    Liked by 1 person

  72. I fully admit the piece at Lori’s is aweful and never should have gone up.

    Why was it awful? Why did you not want people to read her words?

    I asked her to take it down and she did.

    Of course she did.

    Liked by 1 person

  73. If I had a counselor and friends telling me that there’s something not right with my marriage and I should leave and divorce, then I hope I would seriously take their advice.

    Liked by 1 person

  74. Robert, in your post on Alexander’s blog you used this phrase:

    “During my wife’s rebellious years ”

    Are you ever rebellious to your wife or is your wife the only one who is rebellious? It’s completely inappropriate to use “rebellious” in reference to a spouse. Rebellious dog? Yes. Wife? No.

    Liked by 2 people

  75. Julie Ann,
    First impressions are not always the right impressions. The women I speak of were not the ones that asked oringinally to start the blog but they read along and after a couple months got a much bigger picture of our marriage and then yes, they shared it with their husbands. As recently as yesterday I have had two of these women email my wife & I and thank us for the blog and improving their marriage and walk with God. And call us friends.

    You cannot take one paragraph or one post and come to a conclusion on somebody. People, marriages and theology is much deeper and more complex than that.

    You want to believe I am some woman hater. And yet my wife, mother and sister would tell you the exact opposite. As recently as November we had promoting giving to women’s shelters on the blog. I’ve threatened more than one abusive husband within an inch of his life when the wife would not leave him.

    The picture you are painting of a man, and the reality is vastly different. You can either choose to willfully ignore my wife’s own words and 36 years of a body of work which proves to anybody in real life who knows us that the exact opposite of what you are saying is true because you have an agenda (because who knows better than my wife who has for a year in multiple forums said I am not an abuser, but a loving husband dozens of times) or you can accept the fact that a man had a decade of tough marriage, but stuck by a wife who you would define as an abuser, who continued to love her and has a theological stance on marriage that you don’t agree with. Even though he has repeatedly told everyone that a man should never force himself on his wife and has told women that if she is being abused to contact the police.

    Like

  76. Are these Amanda’s own words, Robert?

    Post by Amanda:
    It is absolutely a power struggle. I think that he just needs to prove he doesn’t need me or something. I don’t know. I don’t understand. He has so many weird things, he totally needs to counseling or something. He gets mad if I have activities planned more than 2 days a week. In the past (he’s finally learned to leave this one alone), he works hard to passively push my friends away. He has weird control and power struggle issues. I haven’t figured it out. I’ve finally figured how to abide to keep a peaceful house, but much to my own sacrifices. Thank goodness I found this MB when I did or I seriously think I would have lost it due to being put in a life of seclusion! I gave up everything because it was easier to just give up than to fight.

    Funny thing is he’s always telling ME I need counseling. Yeah, there might be some truth to it, but I always say I won’t go unless YOU go. I went to one lady and she told me my perspective was understandable and such. Anyway, he asked me not to go back. Hmmm….I wonder why.

    http://www.clubcreatingkeepsakes.com/forums/t/5225.aspx?PageIndex=3

    Liked by 2 people

  77. From Robert’s writing: “My point is this ladies, at the moment of discipline, you can have the most wonderful loving parent, God or husband in the world but in that moment, it’s going to seem awful.”

    I bet Robert does not teach men to accept discipline from their wives too, when the husbands are “against [the] marriage, family and God’s Word”.

    Liked by 1 person

  78. JANUARY 10, 2015 @ 12:52 PM
    If men and women understood Biblical principles about relationships then both genders would understand that intimacy is all about the woman

    Like

  79. Robert, your theological argument is wrangling over words. You admit it is wrong for a man to force his wife and in doing so you admit it is possible for a man to force his wife, yet you deny such an act is rape. Some how, this forcing is not rape, while forcing done outside the marriage context is rape. The only difference you put forth is the marriage vow, because she said “I do” and therefore supposedly gave consent to have sex forced on her? How is it even possible for a man to force his wife if she already gave consent when she said “I do?”

    You are making connections where they don’t belong. Rape is not defined by marital status; it is defined by the character, nature, and essence of the act. If you don’t want to talk of rape in marriage then you cannot talk of forcing sex in marriage. It is the forcing, which clearly implies non-consent, that defines the act of rape. Not the generic giving of oneself to someone who promised to love, honor, and cherish you, which clearly implies force will never be part of the equation because they will never force you. If you admit force is sometimes part of the equation and can and does happen in a marriage context, then you admit rape is sometimes part of the equation and can and does happen in a marriage context. Though, of course, it never should. Rape is about force and violence, not supposed consent from an “I do,” which did not include any agreement to be forced by virtue of the fact that the “I do” was said to an individual who made a counter vow to love, honor, and cherish.

    Your theological argument does not change the essence or character or nature of the act. It is the same act of violence it was outside of marriage. Context does not change that.

    Now, if you want to argue that a context that includes the forcing of one party to sexual acts against their will is not properly constituted as marriage at all because the one doing the forcing has broken their vow to love, honor, and cherish, then we have a point of strong agreement.

    Liked by 1 person

Thanks for participating in the SSB community. Please be sure to leave a name/pseudonym (not "Anonymous"). Thx :)

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s