***
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.
***
***
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
Spiritual Sounding Board 
I’m just going to come out and say this after thinking about it for two days. Because someone needs to say it. There are men, who claim to be christian, in the church today who scream and rave and rant about about how middle eastern religious practices are sneaking into our churches. When all the while they treat their women/wives no better than the radical muslims do.
LikeLiked by 5 people
That is very true, grace. Sometimes it’s full on- other times it’s just a matter of degrees
[JA note: This comment originally came in under Pulpit and Pen name. Dustin is a moderator for Pulpit and Pen and forgot to sign out of that account, so I switched the user name p/request.]
LikeLike
“Robert & Amanda are not interested in discussion. For all their outrage, they have done nothing but be rude and easily offended while avoiding honest questions and criticism of their views.
Oh well=best of luck to you both!”
Bingo. It is all about control. Their entire world seems to be about who is in control and of what. But that is not that unusual in so many “Christian” circles. He puts his views on the INTERNET– then they get angry and insulting when people discuss them in ways they don’t like.
They should be thanking JA for sending traffic to their blog. I have no problem with couples living however they want to live. But when they go public with it being Biblical then they should be mature enough to realize there are folks out there who are going to disagree and perhaps write about it making another case. Notice how their arguments are always about being misrepresented? Perhaps they are not communicating their biblical beliefs well, then?
But I am saddened by the wives of these types who come out swinging. Why on earth would I ever believe she thinks for herself? Why on earth would I ever see him as anything more than an insecure man?
And it is strange how they view 1 Corin 7 as so one sided. They have missed the whole point. And ironically it is the only passage that uses a Greek word for authority when it comes to marriage…and it is mutual. Oh the irony.
LikeLiked by 5 people
I was troubled by the insufferable, controlling, patriarchy beliefs that were taught at my (former) conservative church in Northern California. The pastors/elders even told women like me in meetings that we were ‘to obey’ and ‘submit’. They treated us like little children.
Christian men from around the world, including conservative Christian men, have pointed out that they don’t do this in their marriages, it’s not taught in their churches, and patriarchy is some extra-Biblical American teaching that has more in common with Islam’s view of women.
I recently learned that the ‘patriarchy’ movement was started by Bill Gothard (I believe in the 1970’s). Gothard has been removed from his position in the wake of the accusations that he sexually abused countless women and girls. So the ‘doctrines of men’ that my pastors/elders espoused was the doctrine of a sexual predator.
http://www.hslda.org/courtreport/V30N2/V30N202.asp
LikeLiked by 1 person
With apologies if somebody has already said something along the same lines, Robert calls slavery marriage. He makes the relationship between husband and wife no different than the relationship between master and slave. Conveniently, he places himself in the position of master. Appallingly, Robert parrots the views of the fundamentalist wing of evangelical Christianity.
Perhaps it should not be surprising that it is difficult to distinguish Robert’s view of marriage from slavery. It is also difficult to distinguish his “Christianity” from Islam, which means submission.
I submit that Jesus has a better Idea. The marriage relationship, as well as all other relationships between followers of Jesus, should be based on Love, not authority and power.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Pulpit and Pen, some of your views are no different when it comes to women after reading your blog.
LikeLiked by 1 person
HUG,
That is a real issue, too. There is a huge concentration on the words, submit, obey, obedience, serve, servant, master, etc.
Seems like some folks haven’t figured out that these terms are not about slavery.
My roommate is an atheist. He talks that Jesus is for slavery, as most of the talk all over the bible is about slaves and masters. He states, “Sure, let’s beat the gospel into them! Submit to that? No way!”
Ed
LikeLiked by 1 person
Sorry Gracie. That was me responding using a different name. I forgot to sign out. But it you can give me some examples of how my/our views on women are similar to Richard here, I would like to hear you out. Of course I can’t speak for all contributors, but I can for myself 🙂
LikeLike
Dustin, the Brenda Maxwell story for one.
LikeLike
and this Dustin-http://pulpitandpen.org/2014/11/26/when-a-husband-loves-an-evil-fornicating-faithless-wife/
LikeLike
I can’t edit my comments, but with that post I see you are in the no divorce ever camp Dustin. So, in my opinion, that reeks of control issues. What it really means is “I can treat my spouse as badly as I want and you are stuck with me.” So, your views really are no different.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Dustin said:
That is very true. Of the Pulpit and Pen moderators, I have only dealt with Dustin and JD personally. But I can tell you that Dustin is his own person and has his own ideas. I know he he has concerns with some of the same issues we have (women reading scripture, marital rape, etc).
LikeLiked by 1 person
So I went back an I reread the article regarding Brenda. Dustin, I apologize as I see you didn’t write it, but it was posted under pulpit and pen. However, I’d like to know if you agree with it or not as it was posted on your blog.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yah Gracie. I am a complementarian, loosely, and so I would not agree with women being able to be…say…lead pastors in a Church. That being said, I know that some contributors don’t believe women should be “allowed” to open air preach or preach and teach at conferences, while I personally love to hear women preaching and teaching in certain venues. That would be one small difference and point of differentiation/contention.
That being said I’m off to work, and so I’ll be back here later this evening.
LikeLike
Dustin,
In this:
“This means that even when your wife or husband is likewise exhaustively unfaithful, cruel, hurtful, adulterous, messy, spiteful, unforgiving, unrepentant, and bruising in their betrayals over a period of weeks, months, years, decades, that you love them still and treat them as Christ does. Will Christ break his covenant? Will he cease to pray for her? Will he cease to woo and draw her back? Will he cease to seek to cleanse and wash her? Will he cease to forgive her? Will he abandon his bride?”
This seems to back up the words of Gracie.
But, I am reminded that some people who think that they are the bride of Christ will be told the following by Jesus: “Get away from me, I never knew you!” Isn’t that in Matthew 25, the famous “Lord, Lord”, “Didn’t I do this in your name, didn’t I do that in your name, etc.”
This shows that Jesus loves them, but does not accept them.
Ed
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks for the clarification Dustin. I bet you have some pretty interesting conversations with your fellow p&p friends.
LikeLike
Dustin, you sound more egalitarian to me from what I’ve heard of you – – just sayin’ and even what you’ve posted here.
I do have issues with the blog post Gracie referred to. I see no divorce option for abuse. No woman should ever be forced to live her marital life with abuse. Every marriage has problems where there must be give and take and grace offered when a spouse acts inappropriately, but an ongoing pattern of abuse when confronted and continues to bring harm upon the wife/children should never be tolerated.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I have not read all 316 comments yet (?!), but I was stopped dead in my tracks when I read this from amanhiswife Robert: “Your body is not your own, it belongs to your spouse…”
No. No, no, no. Simply from a HUMAN perspective, this is 100% wrong and false. How can we teach young girls that their bodies are theirs alone and inappropriate touch is wrong… and then suddenly teach them that, once she says ‘I do,’ her body no longer belongs to her, it belongs to her husband? (And no, saying that his body is hers as well, so it’s all OK doesn’t work at all. He is physically stronger, and behind closed doors, that can play out horribly.)
No. Our bodies are ALWAYS our own and the LAW says that inappropriate and non-consensual touch is ALWAYS wrong, no matter what age, no matter what religion. End of story.
LikeLiked by 4 people
JA, are you sure you are not endangering her by asking that? He could be angry at her for putting him in a bad light.
It is typical for abusers to talk out of both sides of their mouth. This is part of the crazy-making.
Interesting. His wife has to stay at home and not earn a salary outside the home. By this link, his mother is criticized for not working outside the home, but hanging on to men instead?
Especially since she actually wrote on the Internet: “I gave up everything because it was easier to just give up than to fight.”
LikeLiked by 3 people
Carol,
The context of this is marriage where we are supposed to be putting our spouse first and comes from these verses from 1 Corinthians 7:
LikeLike
I don’t think so. This is not new news to him because he’s been following Free Jinger site where they post much more than I have. They have a few ongoing threads about his posts and it appears he even has an account at the site and has mingled with people as he has done here.
LikeLiked by 1 person
After reading Robert’s blog, and your screed all I can say is the path you took to get to your conclusions would require a highly complex satellite tracking/mapping algorithm for me to follow. I am sure that your blog is loved and adored by the wives in full rebellion against God’s Word, feminists and their useful male idiots. I found it was not worth my time to read.
LikeLike
The wife does not have authority over her own body but yields it to her husband. In the same way, the husband does not have authority over his own body but yields it to his wife.
JA,
I think a bit of clarification is necessary when we use that reference. I agree with Carol in the sense that her body is still her body, and that the wife has the right to say “NO!”.
So, when we use this reference from 1 Cor 7:4, what is the reason that she yields her body to her husband?
Is it so that he can get his rocks off?
NO! It’s so that she can get her rocks off.
She gave him authority to satisfy her. If she did not yield her body to her husband, then that shows that she alone is getting her rocks off.
She didn’t give him authority to be used to satisfy her husband.
But it is just that, that is being preached as being the role of a woman.
Ed
LikeLiked by 1 person
Paul also says it is a concession, not a command, though many think it is a command.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks, Ed. I had to run and get a kiddo off to school, so I was primarily giving the reference. Thanks for clarifying.
LikeLike
elovesc34 thinks that the men who read here are idiots. That’s lovely. I find it interesting that it’s not worth your time to read here, but you certainly have the time to comment.
Good day to you.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Michaela –
It goes further back than that, with Rushdoony. I’ve written quite a lot about it (see Patriarchy in sidebar category) and Rushdoony, Reconstructionism, Doug Phillips, Bill Gothard. Interesting that you linked to a post by HSLDA. HSLDA has been long-time proponents of patriarchy although they are trying really hard to say they aren’t. I was a member of HSLDA, heard them speak in conferences for years and you better believe they pushed Patriarchy. Now with the downfall of Phillips and Gothard, Michael Farris has tried to clarify his stance. But the reality is he has written words recorded from years ago that prove otherwise.
LikeLike
Robert was using words like “entitled” and maybe “owe” when it comes to marital sex. I think a better (more accurate) word is “expectation.”
I do think most married couples are expecting to have sex with their spouse, and maybe on a regular basis. I think that’s a far more reasonable way of putting it. I think “expectation” is far more accurate a term than words like “entitled.”
You may marry expecting and hoping your wife will want to have sex as often as you do, but no, you are not entitled to it.
As I said on a previous page of this thread, I used to lurk at Christian forums that had marriage forums on them, and it was a somewhat frequent complaint of married Christian men that they wanted sex more than their wives.
If Robert falls into that category (which would be, IMO, not quite in the same league as an abusive spouse), you still cannot demand sex from your spouse.
If you are sexually frustrated, there’s the self-pleasuring route one can take (the “M'” word), or, you can ask your spouse to see a marriage counselor to iron out your differences or reach a compromise.
If your spouse refuses to budge or see a counselor, and having sex “X” times per week (or per month) is a deal-breaker or non-negotiable to you, you should consider divorce.
Christians need to get over the idea that divorce (or remarriage) is the worse sin of sins.
If God considers divorce a sin, he will forgive you if you do divorce. If your
spouse is not going to be flexible on frequency of sex, and the counseling has not worked, and you can’t live like that, it’s time you seriously consider divorce, and let your spouse know you’re weighing divorce as an option (do not use divorce as a threat or ultimatum, however).
(I don’t support men (or women) in sexless marriages using porn, or having affairs to compensate for lack of spousal sex.)
LikeLiked by 1 person
elovesc34 – A husband and wife truly love each other in Christ when they serve one another, submit to one another, and enjoy one another. No one’s in charge and no one is the leader. That’s what mutual submission means in scripture.
LikeLiked by 7 people
Re: 1 in 3 college males would rape a person if they could get away with it, I find this statistic suspect. The sample size was very small, and although the abstract is available to read, I cannot find the wording of the question. In addition, it looks like all respondents were from a single university.
Re: FJ, it seems that there is a bit of a secular puritan tone to what I have read, but this has not been an exhaustive review at all. This site is more mature, and the posters seem more open-minded. but maybe I have missed the good parts of FJ.
I wish Snark was still a sailboat.
LikeLike
elovesc34,
What?
You said:
“your conclusions would require a highly complex satellite tracking/mapping algorithm for me to follow.”
I guess you have no clue as to how the Bible works, huh? If everything was in the black and white that you wish to follow, you might as well be a Pharisee who thought it was a sin to do good on the Sabbath.
There are prophecies in the Hebrew scriptures that tell about Jesus, and it is indeed highly complex that you need satellite tracking/mapping algorithm to follow.
It is you who I see as being in rebellion, just like the Pharisees.
Ed
LikeLiked by 3 people
elovesc34: I am an idiot. My wife ties my shoes for me. You are brilliant.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Sorry, trying to “snark”.
LikeLiked by 1 person
A successful attempt, Keith. Then again, what do I know. My wife still has to wipe my nose for me and tell me when to come in out of the rain. So glad she does the thinking for me in our marriage.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks, judge. All i can do is try. My wife does notice things I don’t and vice versa. Seems like a pretty good thing.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“your conclusions would require a highly complex satellite tracking/mapping algorithm for me to follow.”
I think some conclusions take a heart to follow, not satellite technology. But one of those are simpler to require, as it could be acquired for mere money and just about everyone without programs for satellite mapping are capable of recognizing they don’t have it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Also as I said on the last page, marriage is not a guarantee to frequent or satisfying sex, nor is it a life time pass to sex anytime and anyway you want it.
I really do believe that in addition to sexism that sneaks into the church, which makes some married men feel entitled to sex (because they got told repeatedly by preachers or on blogs that they are the “head” of the wife, which gets twisted to meaning “husband is boss of the wife, she must obey”), you have Christian purity culture teachings that push this idea to young Christian kids that “married sex is awesome.”
(Not that I am altogether opposed to all values of purity culture, but I do disagree with a few of its points.)
Christian culture sets up this unrealistic notion that if you just wait until marriage to have sex, your sex life with your spouse will be the greatest ever, always.
Perhaps if Christians re-tooled or scrapped altogether the propaganda they give Christian kids and college students about marital sex, that might nip some of these Robert-like problems in the bud.
I don’t know if the Roberts of the world consider that women have other reasons for not having sex, and for not WANTING to have sex for months, not just physical illness or recent childbirth – but due to stress, is the spouse in mourning over death of a family member (which can last months to two years), does she have clinical depression?
Some medications, such as anti-depressants can lower libido, for example.
I also wonder if guys like Robert really understand things like, if your wife is in a job that sends her on business trips out of town for two weeks at a time, or she joins the Marines and is deployed to Afghanistan for a year, you’re not going to be with your wife to have sex with her anyway.
Or there are situations like with my Aunt – her 50 something year old husband, my uncle, was in a car wreck that rendered him infantile.
This uncle spent the first year or so in a coma, then woke up but was like a large child. He could barely talk or understand what was going on around him. About five years after the wreck, he died.
I seriously doubt my Aunt was taking sexual advantage of my uncle during the last five years of his life. She was his nurse-maid, taking care of him. The last year or two of his life, she had to place him in a nursing home.
I’ve read interviews with women in their 50s, 60s, where their husband has dementia and becomes like a large child. The spouse in those cases becomes more like a parent. There is no sex or adult companionship. The spouse becomes a care taker or parental figure.
So, do the Roberts of the world really, truly grasp that being married is not a promise or guarantee of having sex when they want it, how they want it, and the quantity they want?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Robert: “So a man who is the sole provider and taking care of the kids is supposed to clean also? What exactly does the wife contribute? It is this kind of thinking that proves to me that this site is poison.”
You work full-time outside the home or in a home business, yes? And your wife is a full-time mother and cares for the home while you work, yes? Thus you BOTH work full-time, yes?
So, YES – after the regular “work day” is finished and you have BOTH worked full-time, you SHOULD contribute to any other work that is necessary. That means that at 8 PM, if she is bathing the kids, you are not watching TV or laying on the couch; you are DOING DISHES OR LAUNDRY.
I have been a stay at home mom. I have also been a Senior Project Manager at Microsoft, working in the US office 40 hours a week and remotely managing a production staff in Mumbai in the evenings and weekends, resulting in years on end of 80+ hour weeks. Know which one was more time-consuming and had fewer breaks? The full-time mom one.
The answer to your question, Robert, is YES – a man who is the sole provider and “taking care of the kids” (by this, I assume you mean providing financial support for the kids) IS supposed to clean also. Until all work is done and no more needs to be done, YOU are to jump up and help. Your wife works as full-time as you do. In the evenings, you should both share ANY work in the home that needs to be done. THEN, sit and watch a movie together. If she feels supported and respected and honored by you, she might even (voluntarily) snuggle with you.
LikeLiked by 3 people
“I am sure that your blog is loved and adored by the wives in full rebellion against God’s Word, feminists and their useful male idiots. I found it was not worth my time to read.”
It’s obvious you didn’t take the time to read, or you’d find we’re quite a mixed group here. We even have stay-at-home, homeschooling moms who clean toilets, cook dinner, and do the laundry.
Those of us who disagree with male dominance are not in rebellion against God’s word. There are just some homo sapiens who haven’t progressed much beyond the mentality of their neanderthal ancestors.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Kathi sent me a note saying that Robert reminded her of someone else who talks about domination. Here it is Kathi, from Doug Wilson’s book, Fidelity: What it Means to be a One-Woman Man:
LikeLike
“Sorry, trying to “snark”.”
It got a giggle from me, Keith.
LikeLike
Not when it’s going against an “I’M ENTITLED!” attitude worthy of a three-year-old in a sexually-active adult body.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@ Gracie said,
Absolutely. This was something I said to Robert on page 1 of this discussion, that some of his views of women and marriage are more Islamic or Mormon than biblical Christianity.
If your views and teachings about women and marriage mirror those of Non Christian religions or cults, I think you really need to go back to the drawing board, because something about your view is probably not what Jesus intended.
These Christian patriarchy guys or gender complementarians are mis-interpreting the Bible in such a way to make it sound like it is not much different than the Koran, the Hadiths, or the Book of Mormon or the Pearl of Great Price.
LikeLiked by 1 person
HUG said,
I just don’t think the dude grasps that his own wife may end up (God forbid, I am NOT hoping this happens to her, merely saying these are possibilities that can happen to any of us here), in a coma, with dementia, brain dead, etc, and be unable to perform sexually. In which case, he needs to learn how to cope now and learn how to practice celibacy and sexual self-control.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@ChapmanEd:
More like “I hate chocolate milk, but I have Direct Orders from Captain Bonerhelmet to love it!”
LikeLike
I guess his mother isnt as Godly as he is,, so its all good
LikeLike
Carolsnider,
You had quoted Robert:
“Robert: “So a man who is the sole provider and taking care of the kids is supposed to clean also? What exactly does the wife contribute? It is this kind of thinking that proves to me that this site is poison.””
Yes, I had a laugh at that statement, too. I was in the Navy for 15 years, and we put in MANY MANY MANY hours of work, and guess what? In ADDITION to working, we must clean, clean, clean the ship, as well. We strip and wax the decks, dust and sweep, clean the heads (Toilets, sinks, shower stalls), etc.
And, again, that is in addition to the NORMAL work day, PLUS all of the daily watches that we must stand, the fire drills, and general quarters drills that we do.
Sailors get very little sleep, so Robert has no excuse to not do cleaning.
I live with two other guys, and we always have discussions about the housework. One is a mechanic, and the house gets dirty just based on his greasy hands. When he first moved here, he didn’t do much cleaning, including doing the dishes, sweeping the floor, etc. The other two of us had a talk with him about it, and he to us, “I’m not Miss Suzy Homemaker”.
I told him that “Suzy doesn’t live here, so YOU ARE SUZY, start participating in doing some cleaning around the house, because you are a lousy house cleaner.”
I have that same advice for Robert. Sole provider is no excuse for not participating in house cleaning. When I was married, I did dishes, as well as vacuuming the carpet, etc., all the while being a sailor that did all of the above on the ship.
Robert has no excuses.
Ed
LikeLiked by 4 people
“his own wife may end up (God forbid, I am NOT hoping this happens to her, merely saying these are possibilities that can happen to any of us here), in a coma, with dementia, brain dead, etc, and be unable to perform sexually. In which case, he needs to learn how to cope now and learn how to practice celibacy and sexual self-control.”
Yes. Sometimes it can be a tremendous stress load that cools the passion. It has that effect on both men and women. If you really care about the other person, you’ll be more concerned about what they’re going through than getting your “needs” met.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Mod note: I changed the settings to 150 comments per page because the site was crashing for some iPad users. If you were one of them, can you please let me know if this change makes a difference? thanks!
LikeLike
BTDT: Thanks! Glad I could at least generate a giggle.
As an antidote to the Doug Wilson and Robert garbage, I am listening to The Fleetwoods “Come Softly”, alternating with O.V. Wright’s That’s How Strong My Love Is.”
LikeLike
Tim – So your version of the Bible does not contain Ephesians 5 : 22-24 ?
LikeLike
Retha quoting Robert’s wife Amanda,
I didn’t notice that one before.
Robert chaffed when I mentioned on page 1 that women in these sorts of marriage read books like Boundaries (by Dr. Cloud and Dr. Townsend), but this falls on that spectrum, too.
One partner feeling as though it’s easier to keep her mouth shut rather than speak up and risk a fight comes down to having no boundaries, or not enforcing them.
I experienced this in my long term relationship with my ex, whom I shall refer to as “Rick.” The quote again:
Yeah, I went through that too with “Rick”.
I was taught by my gender complementarian Christian mother that the man is always the head in the relationship, the woman should defer to the man.
I was also taught by my mother (and other Christian material) that Christian women should suppress their true needs, their anger, their opinions.
So, my relationship with “Rick” was such that about three years into our dating, when I started voicing my disagreement or concern with him (over anything) he would pitch a fit and complain if he didn’t get his way. (Act like a big toddler, even though he was in his 30s).
I grew tired of the constant squabbling and started quieting down because going along with what HE (Rick) wanted was less exhausting for me than having to stand up for myself and for what I wanted.
So, I did everything Rick wanted, when Rick wanted it, and how he wanted it. He seldom asked me what I wanted, nor did he try to meet my needs.
I couldn’t live that way anymore, not after about 4 or 5 more years of that, so I broke up with Rick (among other reasons). But me voluntarily stifling my needs, my voice, and my anger so as to avoid fights with him was not a workable solution.
I will never, ever re-live that ever again, should I date again (or ever get married). It sounds to me as though Amanda is in that position right now and hasn’t yet come to the realizations that I did, that it’s harmful and unfair.
LikeLike
That Doug Wilson excerpt makes me want to puke. I don’t know why these rape/bondage themes are popular, but it is NOT TRUE that men “dream of being rapists”. These people are so messed up in their thinking on relationships it is almost as if they are aping the baser aspects of our popular culture.
elovesc34: Does your Bible tell you to call us idiots?
LikeLiked by 3 people
elovesc34,
You have a twisted view of the word “submit”. You have a twisted view of what it is to “submit to Christ”. You have a twisted view of “head” adding the word “ship” to the end of the word “head”.
The way that Jesus uses the word “submit”, it’s about “relax, I got your back!”
The way that you people use it, it’s used in a different context, as in slavery.
BAD BAD BAD.
Ed
LikeLiked by 2 people
@elovesc34
There’s also Ephesians 5:28-29. But male dominance types don’t like to be reminded that they are to “love their wives as their own bodies; he who loves his wife loves himself.” Sort of has that “love your neighbor as yourself” ring to it. That’s just so abhorrent if your aim is control.
LikeLiked by 4 people
elovesc34 of JANUARY 12, 2015 @ 8:10 AM
Is this a sock puppet?
Anyway, elovesc34, I started out as a Christian gender complementarian, but upon more reflection of the Bible itself – not feminist works – I realized that the idea that the husband is supposedly the “head” (as in “boss”) of the wife is not biblical.
I have never married, so I am not a “rebellious wife.” (Not that a married woman who disagrees with complementarianism is being “rebellious.”)
As I stated before, I am a right wing, social conservative. I disagree with left wing, secular feminists about 99% of the time.
Really, it drives me bonkers that about anytime I post on various sites about these topics, that I don’t go along with complementarianism (or whatever term Robert and his pals use), I get automatically labeled with the term “feminist.”
If you’re going to refer to people as “idiots,” you’re not going to win converts to your position. I would assume you hope all of us here adopt (or in my case, re-adopt) your views on gender and marriage?
LikeLike
Daisy, I am so glad that you realized what “Rick” was all about before you ended up married to him.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Would the repetitive practice of spousal abuse be considered an abandonment of vows?
LikeLiked by 2 people
Would the repetitive practice of spousal abuse be considered an abandonment of vows?
Mark,
Most definitely. How can you love, honor, respect while abusing. Covenant breaker!!
LikeLiked by 2 people
chapmened said,
This reminds me of one job I had (in an office setting). Some of us got really tired of cleaning up not only after ourselves in the staff kitchenette, but the same one or two people kept leaving messes out, like dirty coffee mugs, crumbs, etc.
At a staff meeting or two, we brought this up and asked people to please be more considerate about keeping the break room clean… the same two, three women should not have to keep picking up after everyone else. (I don’t know why the men weren’t pitching in on this, but anyhow.)
Eventually one of our lady co-workers taped up a sign for whomever was leaving the mess (for us to clean) that said something like, “Your mother does not work here. Clean up after yourself.”
LikeLiked by 2 people
elovesc34: Defend your referring to men who post on here as “useful idiots”.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Biblically speaking, is divorce permitted when a spouse is repetitively practicing abandonment of vows which includes mental and physical abouse?
LikeLike
@ BeenThereDoneThat. of ANUARY 12, 2015 @ 9:19 AM
Yep. I also see it as problematic that most Christian preachers and authors only promote sexual self-control and celibacy for a limited group, usually teens and college students only.
Christians stop explaining the need or rationale for sexual self control to anyone and everyone else but everyone needs to hear it, not just teenagers or singles under the age of 25.
Which means I end up seeing letters to Dear Abby that say stuff like,
“Dear Abby, I am Mary. My husband Ted is never in the mood for sex. So, it is okay if I start diddling the Mail Man now? The Mail Man is so sexy.”
Or, stuff like this happens:
–Bodybuilding Christian Swingers From Florida Start Spouse-Swapping Website–
LikeLike
Mark,
I am at work so I don’t have time to go into it fully right now. I believe there is biblical resource. I would refer you to A Cryout for Justice Blog. There are many good resources there. Barbara Roberts book, “Not Under Bondage”–excellent. She spent several years of research and uses scripture to back up divorce for abuse, abandonment and adultery.
LikeLiked by 2 people
@ elovesc34 said,
Does your Bible version lack Ephesians 5:21,
“21 Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.”
And see also:
_Co Leadership In Marriage: What About Headship?_
LikeLike
Brenda R said,
Thank you. I could probably write another 20 pages of the problems I had with him, but do not want to derail the thread. 🙂
“Rick” took advantage of me – my time and money and affections (I do not mean sex, I refused sex with him) – and he was very self absorbed, but he was no where near as horribly abusive as some men I read about on the blogs.
He did not physically beat me or anything like that, but his constant selfishness and financial exploitation of me (and other things) and me tiring of stuffing my anger down all the time and other things was enough for me to break away.
LikeLike
Going back to comments I made earlier, my best translation of Robert’s defense of his theory is that since a man and his wife “become one”, and that each has a body that belongs to the other, that the concept of rape is foreign because her body, and access to it, is already his.
And I’m going to use a really obnoxious analogy here, so….”Trigger alert” for the following.
If we assume that the “one flesh” picture (which I understand to be a word picture describing the sex act, among other things) and sovereignty over the other’s body as so inviolate that we cannot describe rape in marriage as a crime (which is what he’s really arguing), then simultaneously we could not describe various sorts of physical or emotional abuse as worthy of church discipline or criminal charges.
Let’s draw the picture; couple comes to their pastor, one of them basically beaten almost beyond recognition, and the pastor says “well, your body belongs to him, so all I can say is ‘carry on’. ”
And the logic is exactly the same as Robert gives regarding marital rape. So let’s just say that his argument reduces itself to absurdity, as no one familiar with Ephesians 5 and 6 would dare to argue that such would be an appropriate way of loving one’s wife, bathing her in the Word, and the like.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Keith Blankenship said,
elovesc34: Defend your referring to men who post on here as “useful idiots”.
Men like that guy generally only listen to other men. They tend to tune out or disregard what women say, but when men agree with those women and say the same thing to them, they tend to pay more attention.
I would also guess it makes guys like elovesc34 angry that not all men buy into what he’s selling.
_Why Aren’t Women Advancing At Work? Ask a Transgender Person._
As to elovesc34’s previous question to Tim about does Tim’s Bible contain Ephesians 5,
_Women, Bibles, Translations_
It’s been known for some time that male Bible translators of the past would intentionally render some biblical terms to exclude women, or to make the biblical translation more male-focused.
The female name “Junia” (who was an apostle mentioned in the New Testament) was translated as the male name “Junias” in some Bible translations for many years, for example. There are other web pages out there that explain it better than I did here and with many more examples.
LikeLiked by 1 person
On a somewhat different note, if I had as much power over my wife’s orgasms as the gentleman claims he has over his wife’s……I’d hope I’d more consistently be using my superpowers for good. Just sayin’.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Bike Bubba,
You said:
“Let’s draw the picture; couple comes to their pastor, one of them basically beaten almost beyond recognition, and the pastor says “well, your body belongs to him, so all I can say is ‘carry on’. ””
Wow…if that isn’t a hard pill to swallow.
Reminds me of the movie “A Time to Kill”, when the defense attorney ended with the words to the jury, “Now, imagine that she was white.”
That woke the jury up to major tears. Your picture should do the same. But will it?
Ed
LikeLiked by 1 person
My version of the Bible has it just below Eph 5:21, which say all believers should submit to one another.
If all should submit, we can conclude submission is not a hierarchy. Pastor Joe should submit to deacon Pete and ordinary 12-year old churchgoing boy Bill, Pete to both Joe and Bill, and Bill to Pete and Joe, but they all are not on the bottom rung of a hierarchy below each other. Biblical submission is obviously not about hierarchy.
And if all believers should submit, believing husbands should submit to their wives too. The man is the head (literal meaning body part above neck) of the woman, but that has other symbolic meanings in Greek than in English.
My version of the Bible also say: ““You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them. 26 Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant “(and repeats it in Mark 10 and Luke 22, it is that important). Believers should not exercise authority, so the way of understanding that thinks male headship is about male authority is against the words of Christ Himself.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Thank you, Julie Anne, for the quote. I had the wrong Doug in mind. They all seem to run together after a while.
Of course elovesc34 has to bring up the Ephesians verse while I’m off to work (outside of the house – gasp!). Keep calm and carry on folks. This has been great to be a part of and to follow.
LikeLike
” … in full rebellion against God’s Word, feminists and their useful male idiots.” – elovesc34
” Whoever says to his brother, ‘You have no brains,’ will have to stand in front of the court. Whoever says, ‘You fool,’ will be sent to the fire of hell” – Jesus in Matthew 5:22.
LikeLike
Biblically speaking, is divorce permitted when a spouse is repetitively practicing abandonment of vows which includes mental and physical abouse?
Mark, you can get massive arguments on both sides of this. The historic legal argument is that abandonment entitled the aggrieved spouse to a divorce. With abuse, it’s not so clear.
My personal take is that the law is right to punish physical abuse, and that clear evidence of abuse is also grounds for church discipline–including excommunication for the unrepentant and helping the victim separate for her (or his) own safety.
And quite frankly, since abuse is linked with sexual perversion and abuse, I’d have to guess that a good portion of the time, the abuser would quickly give clear Biblical warrant for a divorce.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Per Brenda Rs and Daisy’s comments above:
Although I’ve never directly run into this myself, it would appear that there are whole segments of protestant Christianity where it is not blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, but divorce, that is the real unforgivable sin. I’m not sure if it has something to do with changes in divorce rates over the decades that is fueling this, or that once bandied-about statistic on how evangelicals supposedly were divorcing at a HIGHER rate than secular people. Then we have those pointing at the state of church families to argue for gay marriage. It’s like we have to do something, anything, to stop the epidemic of divorce! Besides, didn’t Jesus and the apostles suffer a lot worse? Plus we’ve got too many Christian singles out there, and they can’t all have the Gift of Singleness (TM), so they must therefore be using porn and fornicating all over the place. Gotta get them married off asap, and make sure they’re complementarian to boot. If some abuse or other marriage problems crop up later, no worries–we’ll just apply some nouthetic counseling and/or church discipline and that’ll fix things. Marriage=best portrayal of the Gospel.
Ok, sorry about the rant.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Hey, “useful idiots” is pretty nice compared to the things MRAs and MRA-ish folks usually say. He could have called you all “manginas.”
/off sarcasm/
LikeLiked by 1 person
Regarding the conversation Bike Bubba is having with Mike about when or if to divorce.
I’m at a point now where I don’t even care much about what the Bible says about divorce. I see stories like this (the husband in this story is a self professing Christian):
_http://www.wbtv.com/story/26451226/police-man-forced-wife-to-sign-slave-contract_
….And cannot fathom why or how even the “no divorce ever” Christian types would expect or demand people in such sick, perverse, damaging marriages stay in the marriage just for the sake of the marriage.
I’d be more concerned about the health and safety of the abused spouse than keeping the institution of marriage intact.
I don’t share the view that God is dead set against all divorce or most divorce, but even if he was, if God was willing to forgive King David of the Old Testament for adultery and murder (which God did forgive David of), surely, God can get over a person divorcing his/her spouse for abuse or negligence.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Where are all the comments from yesterday, 01/11/15?
LikeLike
One thing I;ll never figure out,, and i have been around long enough to ask ths question, My wife and I have been married for 41 years, and if she was tired or sick or just didnt feel like it,, what right do I have to even demand sex. Who ever quotes the Bible and said its my right is not a person I want to associate with,, nor do I think I am Biblically wrong. I get so tired of people dragging the Bible out and beat people over the head with it to prove there point, The world would be such a nice place if people just did the right thing,, and I am sure wehn we meet our maker He will say,, you did good, as for others like CM,, not so sure
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ann, below the comments, right above “Leave a Reply” there is an arrow pointing to the words “Older Comments”. Click on that.
Ed
LikeLike
NJ, I agree with you.
I’ve never married myself but have read stacks and reams of Christian articles online or in print about these topics, and it is true that a lot of Christians behave as though divorce is the unpardonable sin Jesus spoke of.
I don’t know why divorce is elevated as being the worst of bad sins. I don’t see a biblical foundation for this view.
Didn’t God say in the Old Testament that he was divorcing Israel, at least for a time?
You said,
I don’t have the links handy, but about a year ago, some Christian lady wrote a book debunking this claim.
She claims that divorce rates among (regular, church going) Christians is lower than other groups now (if I recall details correctly).
Since then, more and more Christian sites are reporting this same information. They seem to think it’s a triumph of the Christian faith, which bothers me in a way.
I was on a site for ex-Christians or quasi- Christians who are spiritually wounded. And one of the people in a thread there on a story about spiritual abuse said, “Have you ever noticed how Christians like to “prove” their God is the “right one” by trotting out these new Christians who said they conquered drug abuse or whatever after they became Christian.”
I can’t articulate it, but that is disturbing in a way.
Not that I think it’s wrong or bad for Christians to mention a relationship with Jesus helps them, but some of them turn Jesus into a product, they try to “prove” the faith by making Jesus into a Life Problem Fix It Widget.
One problem with this is not all problems disappear once you accept Jesus, and this can be confusing for new converts especially.
Also, when the New York Times (I think it was) published an article about two months ago saying that American divorce rates have declined, a social conservative (and possibly Christian guy) wrote a rebuttal saying it was actually not good news, because the “state of marriage” in American was still horrible, according to that guy.
I’m socially conservative myself but am baffled by other so cons at times. I would think other so cons would be thrilled that the NY Times reported that divorce has declined, but nope, some so con guy wrote an editorial complaining that is not good news, or not good enough.
It’s like other Christians, or so cons, are determined to be negative nancy, nay sayers on everything in culture.
LikeLike
Ann; look in “older comments”. Probably all there except for perhaps a few oopsies.
Daisy; no need to walk away from Biblical teaching here, as even on the odd chance Mr. Harden wasn’t cheating on his wife (call me skeptical), he gives abundant excuse not just for criminal penalties, but also for church discipline by any deacon board worthy of the name.
Or, it baffles me, too, why many argue for no divorce when Christ and Paul spell out clear conditions under which it is permissible. You end divorce, but you trash marriage worse by doing so.
LikeLiked by 1 person
P.S. NJ, regarding this part of your post,
Speaking of which, please see my comment on page 1 of this thread _here_
That post summarized: there are actually Christians who are asking single, Christian women to marry Christian, men porn users, so as to increase the number of marriages. It’s explained more at the link I just gave above.
LikeLike
Disregard my question, I located yesterday’s comments.
LikeLike
Ann asked,
They are on Page 1 of this thread.
If you are on page two, scroll down to the bottom or to the top of the comment area, and you will see a link that says “Older Comments.” That will take you to page 1.
If you are on page one, scroll to the bottom or the top of the comment area and there will be a link that says “Newer Comments” that will take you to the latest comments.
LikeLike
@ Keith Blankenship- ” I am an idiot. ”
no, useful idiot, which is a term for people perceived as propagandists for a cause whose goals they are not fully aware of, and who are used cynically by the leaders of the cause.
” My wife ties my shoes for me.”
That is a mommy not a wife
@ Tim – “My wife still has to wipe my nose for me and tell me when to come in out of the rain. So glad she does the thinking for me in our marriage.”
Again that is a Mommy.
LikeLike
The context of the words of Jesus on the topic of divorce was in the cased of adultery. That much, we all know. But what Jesus was really saying is that adultery is the result of NOT divorcing, not necessarily as a reason for divorce, although he touched on that as well.
There is two things that is really being discussed, and that gets missed by almost everyone.
1. Put Away
2. Divorce
From the wordings in the book of Matthew, it was lawful to put away, without a divorce. Then there is wordings that you can put away AND divorce.
Matthew 19:8 (Put away without divorce)
He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so.
So, in Matthew 5:23, it states:
“But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.”
The woman in the above verse was not yet divorced. She was “put away”. So, since there was no divorce, anyone that she marries is committing adultery, as well as her committing adultery. The man, himself was divorced, but she wasn’t. And based on her not being divorced, he is committing adultery. We also have law about that, too. Bigamy.
But, if she was put away, as well as being divorced, she is not committing adultery, and neither is the man.
Jesus isn’t saying that divorce is a sin. If it were, it wouldn’t have been allowed in the law of Moses. 1 John 3:4 states that sin is the transgression of the law. Moses is not the author of the law. God is. Moses didn’t allow it. God did. Many times when the law of Moses is referenced, just one word is used, and that word is, “Moses”.
So, the Pharisees asked:
Matthew 19:3 (Notice the words “EVERY CAUSE”)
“The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause?”
Note: Every cause? The real reason for putting away was for fornication (adultery), not every cause.
For which Jesus replied:
He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so.
That is putting away without a divorce, as adultery was the reason for putting away.
Moral of the story: If you are going to put away your spouse, you had better divorce also, otherwise, the both of you will be committing adultery.
Ed
LikeLiked by 2 people
elovesc34 replies,
@elovesc34
Keith and Tim are by no means propagandists. But if you’d actually read the blog you would know that.
You are a perfect example of the type of “Christianity” that this blog exists to discuss.
LikeLiked by 2 people
elovesc34,
Mommy, huh? You sure don’t know much about love, do you? Love is a “do for others”, no matter how big or small.
You have a mommy problem?
From Mommy Dearest:
“No more wire hangers!”
Ed
LikeLiked by 3 people
@Hester
“Hey, “useful idiots” is pretty nice compared to the things MRAs and MRA-ish folks usually say. He could have called you all “manginas.”
/off sarcasm/”
Yes, his whole attitude smacks of MRA. How they manage to commingle it with anything biblical is beyond me.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Regarding elovesc34’s post,
The principle is the same, though.
A lot of these Gender Complementarian (“the man is the head, as in boss, in the marriage”) types treat wives as though wives are their mothers, or as though they are dependent, little daughters.
Robert was saying back on page 1 that essentially a SAHM’s only value or duty is to cook and clean for him/ the family, the man, especially if he holds a 9 to 5 job, should not be expected to do housework.
Isn’t it funny that is the same role (cooking, cleaning) that a lot of (traditional) mothers play for their sons when the sons are children?
The wives are expected by these sorts of husbands to clean the house, sexually service the man whenever he wants it, defer to the man and allow the husband to make all or most decisions, etc.
The women are stripped of independence and autonomy.
So I think Tim’s and Keith’s comments weren’t too far off mark.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@ BTDT:
I’m also pretty sure they were being sarcastic in those particular comments. Not sure elovesc34 picked up on that though.
LikeLiked by 1 person
BB & Mark,
Biblically speaking, is divorce permitted when a spouse is repetitively practicing abandonment of vows which includes mental and physical abuse?
http://cryingoutforjustice.com/2014/05/07/does-a-christian-wife-have-fewer-rights-than-a-slave-wife-in-moses-day/
This is a good start on the issue. Do external bruises mean more than internal ones? Something to consider.
LikeLike
Daisy,
I personally have come to believe over a number of years, mind you. That divorce is not what God intended, BUT he cares more about those in the marriage and the sin that caused the divorce.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Brenda, it might be noted that at least as the rabbis interpret it, the wife under the Law had no right to divorce–and some make the same argument from the NT, since Christ speaks of a man putting away (divorcing) his wife, but not the woman her husband. (to be sure, Paul does write in 1 Cor. 7 of the unbelieving wife leaving, though) I view this more as “men had the means to divorce” than an issue of right, but it is a perspective we need to understand.
And regarding the woman taken in conquest, my take is that you’ve got to understand those restrictions in light of what would ordinarily happen to young, pretty women taken in battle.
Don’t get me wrong–as the child of a woman who was abused (physically and sexually–I saw the former personally), I’m all for various kinds of punishment for the perpetrator–criminal and civil penalties, church discipline, and the like.
But that said, if we posit that church discipline ought properly be about repentance and rehabilitation, I’m simply reluctant to encourage people to pull the trigger on divorce before the offender has been given a chance to repent.
(and yes, most churches handle this as well as the Cubs handle easy fly balls during the “June Swoon”. But it’s still in the Scriptures, so we try)
LikeLike
My final words here are:
“Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.”
― George Carlin
“I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it.”
– George Bernard Shaw
“Do not give what is holy to dogs, and do not throw your pearls before swine, or they will trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you to pieces.”
― Jesus Christ in Matthew 7 : 6
Feel free to ban me.
Earl
LikeLike
Brenda, that brief comment is one of the best treatises on divorce I’ve ever read.
LikeLike
Ah yes elovesc24- you have no intelligent rebuttal so you resort to name calling. Very ‘christ’like of you. Very typical of those who abuse.
LikeLiked by 2 people
@elovesc34
Actually, I wish I could consolidate your comments in to a single screenshot to submit to the byefelipe Instagram account. You’re about on par with that.
LikeLiked by 1 person
But that said, if we posit that church discipline ought properly be about repentance and rehabilitation, I’m simply reluctant to encourage people to pull the trigger on divorce before the offender has been given a chance to repent.
Bike Bubba,
How many decades would you want a wife to wait for that repentance, which is generally artificial for those who are being play acted in front of? I know some who have waited as little as 5 years and others 50. I truly wish you would read the book I suggested. There are others in agreement, but I feel this one is the best. It is taken back to original language and explained well.
Church discipline only applies to those who are within the church. Some that abuse are not and there is nothing the church is going to do about it.
LikeLiked by 1 person