Book Review Series, Christian Marriage, Complementarianism, Doctrine as Idol, Domestic Violence, Domestic Violence and Churches, Gender Roles, Martha Peace, Spiritual Abuse, Women and the Church

Book Review Series – “The Excellent Wife” by Martha Peace – Chapter Seven – False Idols and Faking Joy

Book Review Series, The Excellent Wife, Martha Peace, Complementarian Doctrine, Abusive Behavior


-by Kathi

This is a book review series of The Excellent Wife by Martha Peace. If you are just joining us, you may click on previous chapter reviews if you’d like to catch up.

Chapter OneChapter TwoChapter ThreeChapter FourChapter FiveChapter Six

Chapter Seven begins part two of this book which is: “A Wife’s Responsibility: Faithful Commitments of the Excellent Wife.” Chapter Seven focuses on the wife’s heart. Let’s see where a wife’s heart should be faithfully committed.

For those of you who have read this book, I am going to jump a bit here to put together Peace’s argument. Peace tells us that people may run to “false saviors” for comfort and relief. Some of the false saviors include: sex, sleep, food, sports, exercise, hobbies, etc. On this I agree with her. While none of these things in and of themselves are bad, if we focus so much on one that it affects our daily living or sense of reality, then that is not healthy.

Peace tells us that “idols/lusts in the heart are rampant.” Is it really “rampant,” or does she draw this conclusion because she doesn’t think women place their focus on right, godly things? Again, finding comfort in sleep, food, exercise, hobbies, etc. is not a bad thing. Having balance in your life is good for you. It seems like we will never get away from the constant badgering of how sinful we are. What are some of these “wrong desires” you ask?

  1. That my husband will be more affectionate.
  2. That he will anticipate my needs without my asking.
  3. That he will give me compliments.
  4. That he will make me feel special.
  5. That he will not hurt my feelings.
  6. That he will talk to me and share his thoughts and feelings.
  7. That he will put me first.

What should a wife have her heart set on?

  1. That I may know God’s word and obey it.
  2. That I may delight in Him.
  3. That I may seek Him with all my heart.
  4. That I may be pleasing to Him regardless of my circumstances.
  5. That I may cultivate an attitude of joy and gratitude in what God is doing in my life no matter what my husband does or does not do.
  6. That I may have joy in God deciding how my life and circumstances can glorify Him the most, that He can use me for His glory.

Let me try and understand this….a wife’s expectation of her husband treating her well can be an idol, yet the 18-point list in the last chapter for what a wife can do to glorify her husband isn’t a form of idolatry? And, why would a wife strive to bring glory to God when she is designed to bring glory to her husband? I honestly don’t understand how a wife expecting her husband to treat her with respect, kindness, and love is an idol. Everyone has the need and desire to feel worthy, loved, and valued. There is absolutely nothing wrong with these feelings.

What is more concerning about the second part of the list is that a wife should maintain joy and gratitude no matter what her husband does, or what her circumstances are. Is your husband viewing pornography, sleeping with other women, or a sex offender? Have joy and glorify God. Does your husband spend all of the family finances on a gambling, alcohol, or drug addiction? Be joyful and praise God. Is your husband emotionally, physically, or spiritually abusive to you and your children? Fake the joy.

It is clear that Peace is making an idol out of “biblical marriage” and “biblical gender roles.” I am beginning to get a grasp on the stories that I have heard of how damaging this book was for women in abusive marriages. Lord have mercy.

106 thoughts on “Book Review Series – “The Excellent Wife” by Martha Peace – Chapter Seven – False Idols and Faking Joy”

  1. Is your husband viewing pornography, sleeping with other women, or a sex offender? Have joy and glorify God.

    Have joy and glorify god on your own then, sans husband. Its interesting the way she talks about a relationship is almost as if that relationship does not exist. If you cannot expect anything from your relationship, why on earth bother having one?

    Peace tells us that people may run to “false saviors” for comfort and relief. Some of the false saviors include: sex, sleep, food, sports, exercise, hobbies, etc.

    If sleep gives you relief, you might really need sleep. Or are alternately depressed. Both of these should probably be addressed, either with sleep or medically/therapeutically.

    And if you need relief in general, maybe look at the source of grief you need relief from.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. I honestly don’t understand how a wife expecting her husband to treat her with respect, kindness, and love is an idol.

    Because she’s just a woman.
    Only the MAN deserves and is entitled to such Worship.

    Like

  3. I grew up in a cult like this pervert hag is promoting.

    When I was twelve and thirteen I could not stop being devastated by why God could not just have given his beloved men a robot. I concluded it is because God gets pleasure out of his godly men causing women physical and emotional pain.

    After growing up in comp land I will never see bible god as anything other than sexually sadistic pimp who gets turned on when men demean, use, trap, and hurt women and little girls.

    It is embarrassing that sex sadist Martha Peace, Debi Pearl, and Lori Alexander think they are in any way morally superior to the pervert woman who wrote Fifty Shades of Grey or sicko Allison Mack. All these women have the same fetishes of women having to be used, demeaned, abused, and trapped as slaves to a man.

    Allison Mack deserves to go to prison and so does many of these sexually sadistic pervert Christian mothers who brainwash their miserable little girls to grow up and become slaves for loser men.

    Like

  4. Fake – the – joy?! What sort of brainwashing is going on here?! The Holy Spirit Himself TOLD me DIRECTLY that I am never to be a martyr to my husband or his sin. That would be making an idol of him and my marriage and putting my holy sacrifice in a place where it does not belong! I still can’t believe that in this day and age someone would still give this advice!!

    Liked by 1 person

  5. I’m nearing my mid-fifties and it’s funny how I can still hear my Mom’s words in my head from when I was a child. She didn’t like me to say the word “pissed,” but it was okay for me to say “ticked off.” So, pardon me, Mom, but I need to say it: I am so pissed at this teaching, you guys!!

    Women were created in the image of God, yet Martha Peace is telling us to deny our personhood, reject our feelings, our God-given gifts for the sake of sucking it up to husbands who do not love their wives as Christ loves the church, which is a Biblical command. This teaching is vile.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. It is noteworthy that the book was written some 20 years ago. I dare say anyone, male or female, younger than 35, and even the author herself, would be embarrassed to actually read this sort of thing, and in no way concur with the nonsensical reasoning…

    Like

  7. KFFARLEY – I’m reading the 2005 edition of this book, which was 14 years ago. I know that I was a part of a women’s group and read it around that time. Several women have commented on the Facebook page that they were given this book when they were married or when they experienced troubles in their marriage.

    I wouldn’t throw out this book due to age. There are still books that have been published recently with similar teachings. Also, there are older similar books which are still recommended such as Love and Respect.

    Like

  8. This whole book is idolatry- putting men in the place of God. I don’t believe that people can stifle all of their human needs and be happy. What they do is become deceivers, of themselves and others, pretending to be happy and have their needs met “in God” while they become twisted and deformed inside. Meanwhile, enabling an abusive man to get worse and worse and further and further from God. So unhealthy and bizarre.

    Like

  9. Is the following intended to faithfully encapsulate the extremes of the author’s ideas, or purely somewhat sarcastic ?

    “Is your husband viewing pornography, sleeping with other women, or a sex offender? Have joy and glorify God. Does your husband spend all of the family finances on a gambling, alcohol, or drug addiction? Be joyful and praise God. Is your husband emotionally, physically, or spiritually abusive to you and your children? Fake the joy.”

    Like

  10. good grief, why don’t they just hire a maid?

    They are cheap? Shy1, a relationship with no emotional support sounds so empty to me. Might as well get a roommate. You’d probably get better results shaking up than some of these wives get in their ‘Christian’ marriages.

    Like

  11. KFFARLEY – The author suggests that a wife should be joyful no matter what her husband does or does not do. Since this site focuses on abuse, I took that teaching and applied it toward abusive situations. Are we really to expect wives to maintain a joyful attitude during these very real situations? Many women have commented that this type of attitude was expected of them when dealing with their abusive husbands. This is an absurd expectation. And, it uses God and the Bible in a spiritually abusive way.

    Like

  12. @Shy1:

    Christian Pundit: Well, excuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuse us! lol good grief, why don’t they just hire a maid?

    They’d also have to hire a prostitute for those Urrges in the Aareas.
    (Orders from Captain Bonerhelmet cannot be infringed in any way.)
    Or “hit on the help” like Thomas Jefferson and Douggie ESQUIRE.

    Like

  13. @Kathi:

    KFFARLEY – The author suggests that a wife should be joyful no matter what her husband does or does not do.

    Like North Korean Population Units.
    All Dance Joyfully with Great Enthusiasm before Beloved Leader Comrade Kim Jong-Un!
    OR ELSE!

    Like

  14. Why does this sound like it’s putting Hubby in the position of “His Majesty the Baby”?

    Like

  15. KFFARLEY: When my daughter was undergoing “biblical counseling” for her abusive marriage 7-10 years ago this is the ONLY book the counselors wanted to use. Even though she’s already been through it once, a second counselor insisted on using it again. (At that point I told my daughter to skip the counseling… it was only going to be the “same old”.) And yes, her husband was viewing porn, engaged in other immoral behavior, abusing the family finances, AND emotionally, physically, and spiritually abusing her and the children. The bottom line was that she was supposed to ignore all that and concentrate on her own shortcomings.

    Like

  16. MARY27 – Yikes! That’s horrible. I am not a fan of biblical counseling. I hope she and the children are doing okay.

    Like

  17. KATHI: She left the marriage in 2012 and obviously they all did better out of the pressure cooker. They could finally breathe. However, the emotional and spiritual scars run very deep and I sometimes think I lost my “little girl” forever… not just because of the abusive marriage but even more the abusive church.

    Like

  18. @Mary27

    I know I’m going to get a huge amount of flak for this, but has anyone seen any research or correlation between a husband’s viewing of “porn” and a wife’s refusal to meet her husband’s sexual needs?

    I would love to see some research on this area as everyone loves to chastise and belittle when men turn to porn, but has anyone seen where a wife is pulled up and made accountable for not providing regular and frequent sex for her man. While not excusing a man’s use of porn here, we too often forget to see that it doesn’t happen in a vacuum, the underlying reason is normally men turn to porn for their sexual needs because he knows his wife will simply refuse to have sex night after night so he doesn’t have much of a choice. There are literally tons of sexless marriages out there so is it any wonder why porn use is increasing?
    Wives seem to have a blasé attitude towards sex where they belittle their husbands for even expecting it in marriage

    I truly believe this, you want the porn use to stop then start having lots and lots of hot frequent sex with your husband. …not how much YOU want it, but every time HE wants it, which is oft a hell of a lot more than she does

    Thoughts people?

    Like

  19. @CYBERSITH195

    I’m sure there’s a correlation, but I don’t think it’s fair to sweep away all sexual issues as the husband being unrealistic for some immoral reason. I think one example that is not immoral is mismatched sex drives. Now, maybe we can dig into sex drives and find that women who are raised complementarian tend to have lower sex drives, but perhaps Jill Duggar is a outlier.

    I think this is the same sort of doublespeak that was prevalent in the last chapter. That is – women must treat their husbands like gods, but now women cannot expect any sort of reciprocity. I think this is a complete misunderstanding of “contracting” marriage in the first place. The vows are binding. The husband agrees to take care of the wife and the wife agrees to take care of the husband. There are definitely extenuating circumstances, like incapacity, but generally, a husband who expects to be taken care of without doing his part is trashing the marriage covenant.

    So, to put it back into other legal terms. I agree to pay someone to mow my lawn each week. After the contract is signed, this person never shows up. Yet, Peace is saying… what matters is being faithful to my vow. Well, no. What matters is that the marriage is actually a marriage. If we really believe in the sanctity of marriage, then we ought to be calling out fraudulent marriages. We should then encourage the negligent party to step up, but if not, there isn’t a marriage to fight for. In this case, the church isn’t fighting for marriage as much as it is fighting for toxic male privilege.

    Peace is saying, just keep paying the bills. Hopefully God will put it on his heart to decide to mow the lawn, but that doesn’t remove your obligation to pay for someone to mow your lawn. Following God’s example, what happened to the farmers who didn’t pay their rent? Grace first, yes, but then judgment and eviction.

    Why do we put these burdens on women?

    Like

  20. @CYBERSITH195 – “I truly believe this, you want the porn use to stop then start having lots and lots of hot frequent sex with your husband.”

    There are four problems with this upfront. First of all, “hot” sex as defined by porn is going to be painful and degrading to women, so a woman agreeing to “hot” sex is agreeing to be abused, in an effort to stop her husband from viewing porn. Second, porn does happen in a vacuum. A quick search says “93% of males have seen porn by age 18.” The average male age for first marriage is 29. So, men are already addicted to porn before they’re even married. Third, this is codependency. The woman in this case is taught that her willingness/hotness is directly correlated to her husband’s use of porn. Therefore we turn the victim into the abuser. Somehow men are being abused everywhere because their wives are making them watch porn? Do men have a right to watch porn during the first six weeks post-partum? Do men have a right to watch porn when their wives are on their period?

    Like

  21. Re: CYBERSITH195

    Why is it every time a post is made on a blog about how women get hurt by men or by systemic sexism, someone always wants to bring up a “not all men” point, or “what about the men”?

    What about the Christian men who are refusing to have sex with their wives?

    Sometimes wives use porn.

    Why is the assumption always that men want sex, and women do not, so men must cajole or browbeat a woman into having sex?

    If it is the case the wife doesn’t want sex…
    Maybe the husband is terrible at sex.
    Maybe he’s not doing his share of the housework, so the wife resents him or is too tired at night to have sex.
    Maybe he’s out of shape, she’s turned off by him, and he has bad breath.

    (Link): When Women Wanted Sex Much More Than Men – and how the stereotype flipped</a

    I have a billion posts like this on my blog, of women, some Christian, who wrote someone for advice because their husband has not had sex with them for months or years, and they don’t know what to do:

    (Link): A June 2017 Viewer Tells Christian Host She’s Suicidal Over Being In Sexless Marriage for Twenty Years</a

    Like

  22. My posts are in moderation. Here’s another one.

    Re: CYBERSITH195
    “While not excusing a man’s use of porn here, we too often forget to see that it doesn’t happen in a vacuum, the underlying reason is normally men turn to porn for their sexual needs because he knows his wife will simply refuse to have sex night after night so he doesn’t have much of a choice. “

    What’s stopping these guys from using masturbation?
    You don’t need another person to get off. That is just a luxury.

    As an over 40 woman with a libido who’d like to be married and having sex, I have no compassion for men (or women) who complain about not getting sex from their spouse, or “not enough.”

    Trying going without for four plus decades.

    Like

  23. Mark,
    There are four problems with this upfront. First of all, “hot” sex as defined by porn is going to be painful and degrading to women, so a woman agreeing to “hot” sex is agreeing to be abused, in an effort to stop her husband from viewing porn.

    (Link): Girl, 16, Has To Wear Colostomy Bag for Life After Rough Group Sex ‘Copying Porn Scenes’ Left Her With Horror Injuries by Debbie White

    (Link): “I Hate, Hate, Hate Anal Sex, but My Husband Says It’s “Unfair” Not to Do It – Do I have to keep trying?” – by Stoya

    Like

  24. @HUG:
    “They’d also have to hire a prostitute for those Urrges in the Aareas.”

    It’s funny, I no sooner posted that comment than I thought “HUG will point out who else they have to hire” ha ha! And, you are right. Thing is, they do not want an equal human being to actually have a relationship with, like what God must have had in mind when he said “It is not good for the man to be alone.”

    Like

  25. @Mark
    “I know I’m going to get a huge amount of flak for this, but has anyone seen any research or correlation between a husband’s viewing of “porn” and a wife’s refusal to meet her husband’s sexual needs?”

    Porn is an addiction. It is no one else’s fault but the husband’s. He has many choices open to him if his sexual relationship with his wife is not working out, all of them healthier than just giving up on his relationship and turning to porn. There are counselors for this. He needs to love his wife as Christ loved the church- get close to her, develop a trusting friendship, be sensitive, communicate, work together to overcome whatever is going on. He needs to own his part in it and make changes if it’s him that’s causing issues.

    Like

  26. @Mark:
    “I truly believe this, you want the porn use to stop then start having lots and lots of hot frequent sex with your husband. …not how much YOU want it, but every time HE wants it, which is oft a hell of a lot more than she does

    Thoughts people?”

    You want an actual loving relationship? this is the worst advice ever.
    Your wife is a human being, not a tool. You come into marriage with this attitude and you are going to kill love, alienate your wife, breed resentment, and reap what you sow.

    Like

  27. Hey thanks for all the awesome feedback guys. I intend to read all the links that were provided as they look pretty helpful

    My apologies if I stepped on anyone one’s toes and I’m really looking forward to answering the points that were raised, I just don’t have time at the moment

    Have a great and blessed weekend everyone

    Like

  28. @Mark people so often forget that sex depicted in porn is very unrealistic and many scenes require several takes because the positions are utterly unrealistic. In addition, anal sex scenes are prepared for in advance with the female star eating little to nothing 24 hrs. before and then cleansing her anal cavity in addition to using a ton of lube. Female stars often have to see physicians for anal and vaginal tears and most if not all performers have substance abuse problems. So, the so called “hot” sex in porn is anything but and if a husband uses that as an excuse then he has to realize what is realistic and what is not. As a [51 year old post-menopausal] woman, I love sex quite a bit and have a great sex life with my husband, but we are also realistic about “hot” sex. If a man really wants hot sex with his wife, he has to get to her heart and I once heard a saying that if a man wants 1 hours of good sex, then he has to spend 24 hours showing his wife affection. I can honestly say this is the truth.

    Like

  29. If a wife doesn’t want sex, there may be a d*** good reason, like the husband (in the case actually discussed) being ABUSIVE, but he might also just be really selfish in bed or the wife might be tired from no help or depressed or any number of other things. Address THOSE things and the sex will return probably.
    Many women want more sex than their partners.
    You are 100% excusing porn, what you said, and sex without consent is rape, and if you want the wife to hate sex, telling her she has to have sex whether she likes it or not is a darn good way to do that.
    “has anyone seen where a wife is pulled up and made accountable for not providing regular and frequent sex for her man.

    How do you propose she be ‘made accountable’ in this hypothetical you made up so it is the wife’s ‘fault’, despite the actual circumstances described to you? Because you’re a hop skip and a jump from force and punishment here. Think really carefully about the implications of this line of thought.

    Many men at this point are coming into marriage with an addiction to pornography, and are actively turning their wives down, preferring women on a computer who aren’t real people, with thoughts and emotions that need tending to. “more sex” doesn’t fix any of that.

    Like

  30. CYBERSITH195: You seemed to be addressing your comment to me so I will make two statements: First, in an abusive marriage, the abusive husband will take what he wants whenever he wants it, but will deny it whenever his wife wants it. It’s all about power and control.

    Secondly, you seem to be making the integrity of a man the responsibility of his wife. IMHO if a man wants to look at porn there is no wife anywhere who can give him what he wants often enough or hot enough to keep him from doing so. As mentioned above, the addiction to porn is often (usually?) well established long before the marriage. His wife didn’t cause it and she can’t cure it. Each of us chooses whether or not we want to live a life of integrity.

    Like

  31. @Shy1/Rechelle, Just to point out, I was quoting Cybersith to respond, so please don’t attribute those quotes to me.

    Like

  32. Well, CyberSith, I’ll hand it to you. Credit where it’s due. You got one thing right in your comment, at least.

    And here it is:

    I’m going to get a huge amount of flak for this…

    Nothing more.

    Like

  33. @Cybersith – re: correlation

    The problem with a study like that, scientifically, is called ‘isolation’. The first accepted demonstration of gravity as a force that attracts two masses was one that eliminated the effect of Earth’s gravity and allowed the attraction to be measured.

    So, let’s say a scientist is coming up with an experiment to determine whether refusal and porn are correlated. One way is to survey scores of couples about their sex lives and try to use the law of large numbers to come to some conclusion, but even this doesn’t work when ‘refusal’ is such a culturally loaded term. Having sex or not having sex is factual, feeling happy or not with the frequency is factual, viewing porn is factual, but trying to draw conclusions from these facts or their correlation is junk science at best. So, a husband who has unrealistic expectations may be unhappy with frequency and view porn, but is it the frequency, or is it the expectations? A husband that sees his gratification as the purpose of his marriage may view porn. Even then, correlation does not imply causation.

    Good example is umbrellas and rain. They have high correlation, but does rain cause umbrellas, or do umbrellas cause rain? In actuality, a certain weather pattern indicates rain, and that is correlated with a forecast of rain, causing people to bring umbrellas, and the likelihood of actual rain. In the same way, refusal in sex and porn may be correlated, but not causal – it may be unrealistic societal expectations about sex. If men are taught that women are always available, and that they deserve to have their sexual desires fulfilled. That both causes refusal – because women are not always available, and porn, because men feel the right to satisfy their desires through other means.

    Like

  34. and porn, because men feel the right to satisfy their desires through other means.

    I would say that a man who uses porn (in a regular, destructive way that affects his relationship however we might define that) after his wife has turned him down may have decided that is easier than actually trying to deal with the real live woman in front of him who has needs that may not be being met.

    Although I am by no means convinced that this is a large part of porn use. I think many people enter marriage with a problem, and destructive expectations of sex, and it affects their sex life, not the other way around.

    Like

  35. Wow! I wasn’t kidding when I thought my comment might stir up a hornet’s nest lol……I certainly seem to have “triggered” some people. Let us always remember that SPIRITUAL ABUSE is not gender specific, it affects males as much as it does females, and while I am sympathetic that most of the clientele that frequents “Spiritual Sounding Board” are women, there are tons of us males that have suffered spiritual abuse at the hands of the church, religion and those in power over us as well.

    In saying all that, I think how I will attempt to answer some of the issues raised with my initial comment, will be when I’m addressing someone specifically I will use this symbol @ and the person’s name, and I will always quote their comments with quotation marks like this ” “.

    Let us begin!

    Like

  36. @MARK

    “What matters is that the marriage is actually a marriage”

    Agreed, a marriage where sexual intimacy doesn’t occur is not a marriage, it is a fraud, and a sham.

    ” If we really believe in the sanctity of marriage, then we ought to be calling out fraudulent marriages. We should then encourage the negligent party to step up, but if not, there isn’t a marriage to fight for”

    Agreed, It is high time we took marriage seriously and start to call out and hold those accountable who refuse to provide sexual intimacy to their partner. Normally it is the women withholding sex in modern day marriages, but we should call out men who withhold sex as well.

    ” In this case, the church isn’t fighting for marriage as much as it is fighting for toxic male privilege”

    Stop assuming that the fault is always with the male in marriages…..Let us call out toxic femininity where it occurs as well.

    “Why do we put these burdens on women?”

    Why do we place these burdens on men?, women are not paragons of virtue so stop virtue signalling…..both genders need to be called to ask when marriages ain’t working.

    Like

  37. @MARK

    “First of all, “hot” sex as defined by porn is going to be painful and degrading to women, so a woman agreeing to “hot” sex is agreeing to be abused”

    What on earth kind of porn are you watching?? according to Pornhub, 95% of the legal porn on the Internet is what is defined as “amateur sex” which is uploaded by CONSENSUAL COUPLES. Porn made by studios and big companies are fast on the decline, as amateur sex is rapidly taking over the market, and I’m quite sure the women involved in the consensual sex that they upload doesn’t feel degraded or abused at all. You have raised a straw man caricature of what porn is

    Like

  38. @RECHELLE P FLECK

    “If a man really wants hot sex with his wife, he has to get to her heart”

    Absolutely 100% true….It is high time that men realize that the way to get “hot sex” is to win her heart, and to be a lot more affectionate, caring and thoughtful TO HER NEEDS AS A WOMAN.

    Like

  39. @CHRISTIANPUNDIT

    “Why is it every time a post is made on a blog about how women get hurt by men or by systemic sexism, someone always wants to bring up a “not all men” point, or “what about the men”?”

    Oh I guess for the same reason women hate how men generalize how ALL women are evil, or toxic and nasty towards men, or how not all women are like that, because we know for a fact that not all women are abusive or nasty to their partners. None of us should be making sweeping generalizations for either gender.

    “What about the Christian men who are refusing to have sex with their wives?”

    Those men don’t get any sympathy from me. Any so called Christian man who is not providing regular and frequent sex for his wife is an uncaring piece of garbage, and he needs to be pulled up, held to account and taken to task with no mercy shown towards him. We need to expose these men and make public examples of them so they can repent from their wicked behavior towards their wives by refusing them sex.

    “Sometimes wives use porn”

    Agreed, and women who view porn are normal and should not be shamed for doing so.

    “Why is the assumption always that men want sex, and women do not, so men must cajole or browbeat a woman into having sex?”

    There is no getting around the fact, that as a general rule, men need sex way more than women do, a lot of women can either take it or leave it in marriages as statistics reveal. There is no getting around the fact that women use sex as a weapon in marriage to manipulate men because of a man’s need for sex. Men have learned that in marriage if you want sex from your wife, just shut up, keep the peace and don’t upset her otherwise you ain’t getting “any”. This is not just my opinion here, this fact is borne out by ample testimony from couples in therapy and counseling.

    “If it is the case the wife doesn’t want sex…
    Maybe the husband is terrible at sex”

    Sex is not an “option” that wives can turn down, sex is an integral part of true marriage. If he’s no good at sex, then she can teach him, she doesn’t have the option to say no to sex, otherwise don’t bother getting married.

    “some Christian, who wrote someone for advice because their husband has not had sex with them for months or years, and they don’t know what to do”

    I read your links and it broke my heart. Any husband refusing sex with his wife is not married, he is a vow breaker and living in sin. We need to call these scum bag men out and expose them. To make your wife endure months, and years of no sexual satisfaction is beyond cruel, it borders on pure evil, and sadism.
    There is NO excuse to not have sex in marriage, NONE. And that goes for both partners.

    Like

  40. @CHRISTIANPUNDIT

    “What’s stopping these guys from using masturbation?
    You don’t need another person to get off. That is just a luxury”

    All men masturbate, but we are highly visual creatures so we need an image to masturbate to, and I make no apologies for that.

    “Trying going without for four plus decades”

    That truly horrifies me, and scares me beyond belief….NO ONE should have to go through 4 decades of their life with no sexual outlet, it is cruel and mean. is there any reason you can’t find a man to settle down with and have regular sex with?

    Like

  41. @SHY1

    ” He has many choices open to him if his sexual relationship with his wife is not working out”

    Yes of course, and one of them is watching porn. One of the other options I recommend couples is divorce. if your wife refuses to have sex, just divorce her…. a sexless marriage should NOT be tolerated for any reason at all, and I’m quite firm on this…If you’re not having sex, you’re not married, you can pretend to be married, but you’re not, you have a friendship nothing more.

    “He needs to love his wife as Christ loved the church”

    I always find it ironic that those who call husbands to love their wives, NEVER obey the woman’s responsibilities in a marriage to be in subjection and to obey her husband, even when the call to love your wife is in the very same passage that calls wives to submit to their husbands.

    Don’t get me wrong, I don’t believe in that complimentarianiasm garbage, but if we’re going to start quoting the bible’s call on men to love their wives, let us be consistent and teach the wives THEIR PART as well.

    “get close to her, develop a trusting friendship, be sensitive, communicate, work together to overcome whatever is going on. He needs to own his part in it and make changes if it’s him that’s causing issues.”

    Agreed 100000000%….It’s high time we call men out to sort their issues out if they’re the ones causing problems in a marriage. i know a very close couple to me, where she would love to have sex with her man, but she just can’t bring herself to do it because her partner is filthy, stinks and has terrible hygiene issues. he is demonstrating the very opposite of loving your wife as Christ loves the church, and I blame him for the lack of sex in their marriage. He need to step up and fix himself if he wants sex.

    Like

  42. @LEA

    “and are actively turning their wives down, preferring women on a computer who aren’t real people”

    If any man who gets offered sex from his partner, and STILL turns it down in favor of watching porn, has got way more issues than can be fixed here.

    Like

  43. Cybersith: “Stop assuming that the fault is always with the male in marriages…..Let us call out toxic femininity where it occurs as well.”

    Sure, but we’re talking about a book review where women are told to treat their husbands like God, offer them sex whenever they want and if the husband doesn’t reciprocate, then keep on giving. And… it’s not just some book, but a book that has been used many times in counseling women in loveless and abusive marriages. What were they counseled? Try harder, offer more sex and don’t expect anything in return.

    This book creates a toxic pattern that exists across much of evangelicalism, and that’s why we assume, within evangelicalism that much of the cause for marital dysfunction is, in fact, the teaching of the church.

    “Why do we place these burdens on men?, women are not paragons of virtue so stop virtue signalling…..both genders need to be called to ask when marriages ain’t working.”

    I asked for a debate, not a contradiction. Simply turning my words around isn’t intelligent debate. Do you expect to be called to task when your car is stolen? When your house is broken into? When someone mugs you? If not, then why must we apriori assume that both parties in the marriage are equally guilty? Why do we assume that the woman raped should share the blame with the rapist? What clothes was she wearing? Did she go down the right street? Did she somehow indicate interest? Did she scream out? Did she say no?

    This happens and it’s well documented. Simply trying to turn the argument upside down and assuming it’s true is not a valid technique. Statements like this just confirm that you’re unwilling to confront your bias.

    “What on earth kind of porn are you watching??”

    I don’t watch porn. I read articles on various forms of addictive behavior, including porn and its effect on intimacy in marriage, and that’s what experts are saying. Maybe you are “satisfied” with different porn than others, but just because that’s your experience doesn’t mean that the experts are ‘caricaturing’ porn.

    “There is no getting around the fact, that as a general rule, men need sex way more than women do, a lot of women can either take it or leave it in marriages as statistics reveal.”

    care to cite any actual statistics or is this another instance of “73.6% of all statistics are made up.”

    “a sexless marriage should NOT be tolerated for any reason at all, and I’m quite firm on this…If you’re not having sex, you’re not married, you can pretend to be married, but you’re not, you have a friendship nothing more.”

    Sounds like another Jeff Foxworthy thing… If your husband comes home with PTSD and can’t have sex… you might not be married. If your wife gets into a car accident as is in a coma… you might not be married. If you’re paralyzed from the neck down, you might not be married. Sex is a very important part of marriage, and normal people will struggle without sex, but sex cannot be equated with marriage. I didn’t even vow to have sex with my wife, nor she with me. We vowed to love, honor, respect, in sickness and in health.

    “Don’t get me wrong, I don’t believe in that complimentarianiasm garbage”

    After you said the Bible teaches wives must obey their husbands?? are you just trolling? I believe the Bible is inerrant and I believe that husbands must love their wives. I don’t believe the Bible says wives must obey their husbands. It’s nowhere to be found.

    My wife and I have mismatched sex drives. We have to work through it because our marriage is more than me feeling satisfied. I think if I had the intense focus you had on sex, our marriage would be intolerable, but there’s much more to it.

    Like

  44. @MARK

    “I asked for a debate, not a contradiction”

    That’s a damn lie and you know it. You didn’t ask for any debate, you stated your opinion in a comment, and I pulled you up on it and corrected your bias and flawed reasoning with a competing “opinion” of my own. Is correcting your errors allowed?, or is constructive criticism forbidden?

    “Simply turning my words around isn’t intelligent debate”

    Actually it is “intelligent debate” if it’s purpose is to highlight the incredibly flawed logic in someone’s proposition, which is what I did TO YOU. Contrast is incredibly helpful in demolishing’s someone’s preconceived bias’s by highlighting it’s errors when used against itself.

    “I don’t watch porn. I read articles on various forms of addictive behavior, including porn and its effect on intimacy in marriage, and that’s what experts are saying”

    Another bold faced LIE, you didn’t quote any sources, you stated your OPINION that the sex in porn is and i quote “First of all, “hot” sex as defined by porn is going to be painful and degrading to women, so a woman agreeing to “hot” sex is agreeing to be abused” (Those are your exact words), How on earth would YOU know that the sex in porn is painful and degrading to women, did you ask any of the women who con-sensually agree to making porn vids? No, of course not, you stated YOUR OPINION and preconceived bias against porn.

    ” but sex cannot be equated with marriage”

    Lol, are you serious?….a marriage is not even considered binding unless sexual intercourse has taken place….no sex= just a friendship, in fact the very Hebrew word for marriage, “to know” means sex.

    “After you said the Bible teaches wives must obey their husbands?? are you just trolling?”

    Don’t you dare misquote me, or misrepresent my position because I will come down on you hard as a ton of bricks……My allusion to wives obeying their husbands is because of the oft misquoting of Ephesians 5 in telling husbands to love their wives as Christ loved the church. You cannot insist on husbands obeying that verse whilst simultaneously ignoring a wives part in being obedient and under subjection to her husband, in the same chapter! i never once said that I believe in either, i was merely pointing out the extreme hypocrisy in twisting the bible to support the egalitarianism model of marriage as opposed to the comp view. I reject the comp view as I previously stated….Do I need to state my position again so you can understand it better?

    “I don’t believe the Bible says wives must obey their husbands. It’s nowhere to be found.”

    Your ignorance is appalling….Here you are Tit 2:5  “To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands”
    Here’s another one for good measure: 1Pe 3:6  “Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose daughters ye are…..”

    Do I believe these verses teach what the complimentarianists teach?, No I don’t….I believe these verses are mis quoted and used to abuse women by Evangelicals, but it doesn’t mean there are no verses like you said.

    “I didn’t even vow to have sex with my wife, nor she with me. We vowed to love, honor, respect, in sickness and in health.”

    Part and parcel of love is insuring that our partners needs are met, and that includes our sexual needs…..Long story short, if your wife isn’t meeting your sexual needs she isn’t upholding her vows to love you and cherish you….Likewise if the husband is not meeting her needs for sexual intimacy, HE is not upholding his vow to love cherish and obey.

    I love how I am being taken to task about my insistence of the importance of sex in a true marriage, yet I have come down equally hard on MEN who refuse to have sex with their wives as much as I take to task when women refuse to have sex. I don’t gender discriminate.

    Like

  45. Wow! I wasn’t kidding when I thought my comment might stir up a hornet’s nest lol……I certainly seem to have “triggered” some people.

    People who talk like this tend to be saying

    I am about to say a rude/incorrect thing and then
    Wow, people called that rude/incorrect thing I said rude/incorrect! Shocking! The problem is clearly them.

    Honey, you didn’t stir a hornets nest, people have given you the benefit of the doubt by engaging in good faith with your statement. This comment makes me believe you are not speaking in good faith.

    And no matter how popular it may be, on a site that deals with thing like abuse, making fun of ‘triggered’ is the wrong call, because it has a real meaning.

    Now i’m going to enjoy my sunday.

    Like

  46. Hi All!

    I’ve had family in town and not been able to watch discussion. I’d like to ask that we move back to the point of the original post on where the author thinks the focus of the wife’s heart should be. There has been some good discussion, but this chapter does not focus on sex, masturbation, or pornography. (Even though Peace says a wife should be joyful no matter what her husband does – and I can see these categories fitting in here, which I mentioned.)

    I noticed glaring inconsistencies with her lists. She states that the wife’s heart should be solely focused on God and any desire for respect, love, and intimacy in her marriage is an idol. However, in previous chapters she made it very clear that the wife’s role and responsibility is to focus on her husband and his needs, goals, and desires. It can’t be both ways. Which leaves me to see how this book, when given to women in abusive marriages who are only trying to make things better, can be very confusing.

    Carry on.

    Like

  47. Cybersith, trying really hard not to respond to your vicious tone. I’ll quote a source: https://www.bu.edu/sph/2015/10/20/viewpoint-domestic-violence-whats-porn-got-to-do-with-it/

    One area where the research is becoming increasingly clear is the contribution of SEM[Sexually Explicit Material i.e. porn] to partnership abuse, defined here as dating or non-stranger sexual aggression. One longitudinal study of SEM exposure and subsequent sexual aggression among youth found that intentional exposure to violent SEM over time predicted an almost six-fold increase in the odds of self-reported sexually aggressive behavior. In another study, SEM use was associated with the self-reported perpetration of sexual aggression by college males.

    Some people also coerce their partners to do things that they see in SEM. Eleven percent of female patients at urban community health centers stated that they were “forced or threatened to participate in sexual behaviors that the perpetrator saw in pornography.” The results of two qualitative studies also suggest that people are sometimes pressured to imitate sex acts that their partner first saw in pornography. One study found that women are pressured to engage in anal sex when their male partners see SEM featuring anal sex, and a second study found that young women and young men alike report trying sexual acts and positions that they first see in pornography with their partners. In one case described in the literature, a young woman reported being surprised that she was in so much pain from anal sex that she needed Ibuprofen, because women in pornography seemed to enjoy it so much.

    I find it very telling that you came in here saying, “Thoughts people?” and then when people so much as dare to contradict YOUR thoughts, you become abusive.

    Re: the Bible, the word in Tit 2:5 is hupotassó https://biblehub.com/greek/5293.htm and, for example, in the KJV it is translated “subject” except when it comes to wives and slaves. So, this is a an example where “the Bible” doesn’t necessarily say obey, but the translators decided that it should say obey in these cases, where otherwise, it is presumably not as strong a word. In 1 Tim 3, Sarah is given as a positive example, with the stronger word for obey (hypēkousen), but examples are tricky, because, for example, Paul says “If anyone else has a mind to put confidence in the flesh, I far more: circumcised the eighth day, of the nation of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; as to the Law, a Pharisee; as to zeal, a persecutor of the church; as to the righteousness which is in the Law, found blameless.” — we don’t say that we should be zealous like Paul and persecute the church, but it is, in a sense, an example of extreme zeal. In the same way, Sarah obeying Abraham is an example of extreme submission, but not necessarily a pattern to follow.

    But, yes, those passages are used to suggest that obedience is required, due to translational and representational errors.

    Like

  48. @MARK

    “and then when people so much as dare to contradict YOUR thoughts, you become abusive”

    I didn’t become abusive, I called YOU in particular out for your incorrect comments. You lied twice, so I corrected them with some facts.
    Actually I take that back Mark, it’s hard to know whether someone is lying or just being imprecise with their language, so I do apologize.
    So let me restate my initial comment…..I challenged your presuppositions with some facts that as yet you have not being able to refute, and if that is being “abusive” I’ll take that on the chin like a man and live with it.

    I always find it strange that you take me to task for the manner and tone in which I speak to you, rather than my content….I guess the old saying is true “truth always hurts”.

    ” I’ll quote a source: https://www.bu.edu/sph/2015/10/20/viewpoint-domestic-violence-whats-porn-got-to-do-with-it/

    I challenge everyone here to go to the link you provided as it doesn’t prove your contentions at all, it actually sides with my hypothesis, but I did have a chuckle at your attempt to quote “sources” to try and back up your position, nice try though!……I see you deliberately left out the part where it says and I quote “Approximately 36 percent of US men age 18 years old and older, and 34 percent of US women aged 18 to 30 view pornography at least once per year”

    If as you concede that there is a direct correlation between domestic violence and porn, then we should see an equal amount of female on male violence in real life, since the amount of porn viewed by BOTH genders is about the same according to that survey. With the disturbing amount and exponential increase of violent WOMEN behavior towards MEN in the last 2 decades, should we then conclude that porn is the culprit and an instrumental cause of this disturbing societal phenomena?
    If not, why not?, if it’s good enough to blame men for domestic violence because of their porn use, then it’s good enough to blame the massive increase on female violence and aggressive behavior towards MEN on their porn use….It works both ways.

    Also you deliberately left out this quote from your link “SEM can have positive effects for some users. The results of multiple studies suggest that pornography can help some individuals realize or negotiate their sexual identity, improve couples’ sexual satisfaction, provide helpful information about the mechanics of sex, promote safer sex practices, and improve sexual response for individuals suffering from dysfunction disorders”

    Oh dear! we can’t have that now can we!! Porn actually positive and helpful!!….so tell me Mark, why did you omit THAT quote from your same article? mmmmmm, can it be because it didn’t fit YOUR narrative that Porn is somehow evil and the cause of all the world’s problems??
    You might want to rethink where you get your sources from Mark, so far they are embarrassing your position.

    Still not convinced?….Go to PornHub and click on the first 100 videos available on their home page (PornHub is THE largest Internet source available for LEGAL Porn), out of that 100 you will find 98% of the Porn available is amateur porn uploaded by consensual couples and non violent, and the remaining 1% are by VIOLENT WOMEN towards men as they play out their sado masochistic S and M fantasies of aggressive DOM women against submissive men. You won’t find any violent Porn against women from men being the perpetrators, unless you really try and dig for it. so go on I dare you, go have a look…..It is no surprise that 125 MILLION copies of 50 Shades Of Grey were sold, with WOMEN being the main buyers.
    That’s 125 MILLION copies Mark, where women were purchasing Pornographic material….so much for the fallacious claim that Porn is a male thing!

    Anyway this is NOT meant to be a defense of Porn here…..I am merely demonstrating how badly you have lost this entire argument with me.

    “Re: the Bible, the word in Tit 2:5 is hupotassó https://biblehub.com/greek/5293.htm and, for example, in the KJV it is translated “subject” except when it comes to wives and slaves”

    Half truth at best, the word is also used of Christ, principalities, the flesh, and also Govt’s, NOT just for wives sand slaves….Also the word ὑποτάσσω hupotassō according to Strong’s definition of the Greek terms means, and I quote: “to subordinate; reflexively TO OBEY: – be under obedience (obedient), put under, subdue unto, (be, make) subject (to, unto), be (put) in subjection (to, under), submit self unto”
    ὑποτάσσω does indeed mean OBEY, so the KJV’s usage in Titus 2:5 is entirely warranted….Their is no conspiracy of the KJV translators to purposely use stronger terms ONLY when it concerns women and slaves.
    You lost this debate Mark, please stop otherwise we will end up derailing this thread.

    The really sad thing about our entire exchange is that I have literally had to become the Devil’s advocate and argue AGAINST my present day position that Evangelicalism and comp thinking is both abusive and destructive. I am still struggling with trying to work out how on earth did I allow anyone to get me to argue for my enemies theological position when it was never my intention

    I should not have let you get under my skin so badly, as by and far the main body of my work has been exposing Bayley, MacArthur, Michael Foster, Tim Conway, Warhorn media etc for their ridiculous and harmful hierarchical power and control structures that hurt women in particular with their antiquated and abusive views on the genders. And I have been blocked and banned by The Transformed Wife (Lori Alexander) as i attempted to correct her false theology about 2 months ago.
    I am also perma banned by Dalrock and his pathetic goons, and I have 3 banned accounts with Biblical gender Roles (he keeps banning me every time I contradict his views), , who in my opinion is perhaps THE most dangerous man on the planet with his insidious and evil teaching on the genders, so don’t get me wrong Mark, I am mostly on your side and fight for the same cause as you do.

    Like

  49. Kathi, I respect your interest in moving back to the topic and will not refute the incorrect data I see, but I do hate to see it go unchallenged.

    On topic, can we talk about these supposed ““wrong desires”?

    That my husband will be more affectionate.

    Why is this the wrong desire? Does she say, or does she just think any desire is wrong if it comes from the wife?

    Like

  50. Cybersith, “I see you deliberately left out the part where it says and I quote.. ”

    Yes, because what I quoted is what specifically addresses our debate. By pulling in other parts of the article, you’re not responding to my claim, but simply trying to move the goalposts. Here is another article that says the same thing: https://endsexualexploitation.org/articles/three-ways-domestic-violence-is-connected-to-pornography/

    Aggressive acts against women in pornography occur in roughly 87% of the scenes, and 95% of the time when these acts are committed, women respond with expressions of pleasure or neutrality.2 Pornography acts as a form of sexual education, teaching the lesson that female sexual partners ought to enjoy physical acts such as hitting, gagging, slapping, or nonconsensual sex. Unsurprisingly, the research is clear that even mainstream pornography use by frequent viewers is associated with greater intent to commit rape3—a real danger for an domestic abuse victim/survivor.

    2 Ana J. Bridges, Robert Wosnitzer, Erica Scharrer, Chyng Sun, and Rachael Liberman, “Aggression and Sexual Behavior in Best-Selling Pornography Videos: A Content Analysis Update,” Violence Against Women 16, no. 10 (2010): 1065-1085

    3 Foubert, J., Brosi, M., & Bannon, S. (2011). Pornography viewing among fraternity men: Effects on bystander intervention, rape myth acceptance & behavioral intent to commit sexual assault. Sexual Addiction & Compulsivity, 18: 212-231.

    “does indeed mean OBEY, so the KJV’s usage in Titus 2:5 is entirely warranted….Their is no conspiracy of the KJV translators to purposely use stronger terms ONLY when it concerns women and slaves.”

    It’s only warranted if that was the author’s intent. For example, there is huge debate over what the 2nd amendment means, and that is plain English. Does it mean a private right to own guns for self-defense, or does it mean owning guns as part of a system of national defense? Experts look beyond the words into the culture of the time, other concurrent writings.

    The fact that the word is translated, in the KJV, “obey” ONLY when talking about women and slaves, and not in talking about Jesus’s relationship to his parents, or our relationship to government suggests that they felt “in subjection” was not strong enough usage of the word. That suggests that the translators themselves applied their own biases in translating the word to “obey”. The fact that Paul DID NOT use the stronger word (the word used in 1 Tim 3) is also part of the discussion – if Paul meant obey, there was a much clearer and stronger word for obey, but Paul chose NOT to use that word, but chose a different word that is somewhere between submit (which we are called to do to each other) and obey.

    There are many occurrences where words are translated differently based on whether the subject is a female or male (such as Titus 2:5). https://www.cbeinternational.org/blogs/will-truly-honest-bible-translation-women-ever-be-made

    “Still not convinced?….Go to PornHub and click on the first 100 videos available on their home page”

    I’m convinced that radiation is deadly. I’m convinced that certain drugs are physically and psychologically addictive. I’m convinced that taking a bottle full of Tylenol will kill me. I’m convinced based on reading articles that point out the dangers and effects. I don’t have to go see for myself.

    I did occasionally view porn and read porn-like articles about sex in men’s health magazines before my marriage and it gave me completely unrealistic expectations. Those expectations were in line with what I’ve said and what the article said, and my wife would probably say they were painful and degrading. I can’t speak for other couples, but when I read the article about women saying they were forced into painful and degrading sex, that seems in line with my experience.

    Like

  51. “I am still struggling with trying to work out how on earth did I allow anyone to get me to argue for my enemies theological position when it was never my intention”

    I think it has to do with whether you’re here to win debates or here to correct incorrect facts and bad theology.

    Like

  52. here to correct incorrect facts and bad theology

    Mark, I also don’t think ‘if you want your husband to love you, you have to obey him, that’s just the rules’ is great theology though… It does fit right in with the book being reviewed though!

    (Also, I don’t think most actual egalitarians would be arguing for comp positions like that with such zest, but I mostly think our friend here watches a lot of porn and is offended by the idea that people might not approve.)

    Like

  53. Lea, I’m in a somewhat awkward position – holding both egalitarian theology and believing in scriptural inerrancy. Much of the problem is having grown up in a patriarchal church that promoted a very narrow interpretation of scripture as the only valid interpretation.

    I believe at a high level, the Bible teaches equality, and that’s the pattern through which scripture should be interpreted, but when the very translation (e.g. subject vs. obey) promotes what I believe to be a patriarchally skewed interpretation, it’s hard to see the truth through the false presuppositions.

    I completely get where KAS is coming from because that’s where I was ten years ago. I respected and valued my wife and we moved forward out of consensus, not submission, but I still saw my role as “authoritative” – i.e. “soft” comp. It’s been a somewhat slow, circular process of simultaneously refining what authority means and understanding the practical outworkings of that where I finally came face to face to the conclusion that no matter how service-oriented and sacrificial my authority could theoretically become, there still was an element of superiority and inferiority that could not be justified in a marriage relationship. Even as the perfect example of sacrifice and service, Jesus told his disciples what to do and expected them to do it, and that is not what the marriage relationship looks like.

    Like

  54. Lea, I’m in a somewhat awkward position – holding both egalitarian theology and believing in scriptural inerrancy.

    Mark, I think the case for egalitarian marriages and relationships in general is quite clearly set in the gospels, and I think Paul is wildly misunderstand and misused by men who wish to maintain power, and the otherwise well meaning people who take their interpretations as gospel. Sometimes it takes time to break out of that.

    However I do not have the patience to make biblical arguments for my basic human equality with men who think women are made to be beneath them. So I appreciate you doing it. Even if it sometimes feels irritating to watch men debating with each other over what women ought and ought not be doing. Hello to all of history.

    Like

  55. @LEA

    “Also, I don’t think most actual egalitarians would be arguing for comp positions like that with such zest”

    Hey Lea, If you wish to slander my position in this blog, I would appreciate the courtesy of you addressing your comments to my face instead of behind my back.

    For the record, I am not a complememtarian, nor do I subscribe to the comp’s theology of the genders. My partner is EQUAL to me in worth, status and authority, she does not rule over me, and I do not rule over her, she is my exact equal, so i resent you implying that I’m shilling for the comp side. There are many, many things that my partner does that is better than I could possibly ever do, she has strengths and gifts that she brings to our relationship that I could only dream about, but where she is weak in an area, I am strong and we mutually benefit. I never once see my partner as beneath me, or me being in a position “over her”

    If it looks like I argue for the complimenentarian position in my debate with MARK, it is because his reasoning when it comes to his anti-porn stance is highly flawed that I just couldn’t let it go unchallenged. Excluding MARK’S position on porn, I actually have far more in common with him then he realizes, as we have both come from a background of an authoritative patriarchal church environment which was very abusive.

    Like

  56. @MARK

    “By pulling in other parts of the article, you’re not responding to my claim, but simply trying to move the goalposts”

    Mark, with all due respect, it is not me who is moving the goalposts but YOU…..Your initial comment which I rebutted was the correlation you attempted to make that domestic violence and porn use go hand in hand by citing your source material.
    I easily destroyed your argument by quoting from the EXACT same article where that’s not what the article was suggesting at all You attempted to bolster your position by deliberately omitting key points that same article made, when it was not conducive to your argument.

    “Aggressive acts against women in pornography occur in roughly 87% of the scenes”

    That’s a bold faced, wicked, Satanic, filthy, disgusting lie that simply cannot go unchallenged. You really need to check your source material when you debate with me Mark, because you once again are embarrassing yourself.
    Haley Halverson who wrote that article is a far right religious nut job who believes that an exposed breast in a cartoon anime drawing/game is degrading to women. She is a Puritanical freak, so anything she has to say is highly questionable.
    But putting that aside, you can annihilate her retarded stats that she clearly pulled out of thin air by demonstrating them for yourselves by going on the Internet and sift through the legally available porn sites like Pornhub. If what she says is true, then any 8 video clips that you randomly pick WILL have depictions of violence/aggression against women. Why 8 clips?, because that will correspond with her statistical figure of 87% of ALL pornographic vids that will have aggressive acts against women in them. Actually it is closer to 9 video clips which is her 87% figure, But I’m taking the lower figure to give her the benefit of the doubt……So go on, I dare you to take her challenge up. There’s nothing more than solid hard verifiable FACTS that overturns someone’s position!!

    Long story short, Haley Halverson is a liar who loves to throw around useless stats to bolster her far right religious agenda.

    Like

  57. I don’t know who Haley Halverson is. But I do know that porn is bad for people.
    I almost just said, bad for women, which would have been true by itself.
    But then I would have left out the part where it’s bad for men, because that is also true but in different ways.
    In addition, porn is bad for marriages.

    Like

  58. I haven’t followed every comment, but just to echo the above one, allow me to say the following :
    I’m not sure how this discussion ended up being about the pros & cons of porn, studies say this..studies say that etc. If indeed porn was good (for anybody) then the last few decades should reflect that. One doesn’t need to have a PhD in Social Science to ponder that any good is absent, and, in fact, the opposite is (obviously?) the case.

    Like

  59. Kathi – I’d like to ask that we move back to the point of the original post on where the author thinks the focus of the wife’s heart should be.

    I’ll bite! In the previous chapter you reviewed I commented on an inconsistency Peace has at her blog on glorifiying her husband, and giving glory to God. Well the text itself says ‘woman is the glory of man’, which is not quite the same thing as saying her purpose is to glorify man (or her husband).

    Surely the balance is seen in that giving glory to God in a marriage occurs when a wife attempts to be a wife within the various apostolic instructions given, and likewise a husband when he fulfills his duties as a husband from the relevant instructions. That is what is glorifying to God. Disobedience to it isn’t.

    When Peace seems to talk about wanting to be respected and treated considerately can become an idol, does she mean that a wife ought to continue to do her half of the bargain even when a husband fails in doing his? These are not rights that she can claim and so something she should set her heart on, her aim ought not to be to get her husband to do his half of the bargain but rather she should do her half. That seems reasonable to me, with the proviso if the husband is blatantly acting like a lustful heathen she is not expected simply to put up with that and smile.

    Conversely, if a wife is lazy and undomestic or whatever, this doesn’t let the husband off loving her as Christ loved the church.

    As for her second list about what a wife should do “That I may delight in Him.
    That I may seek Him with all my heart” …. am I the only one who finds this to be little more than evangelical pious platitudes? Largely meaningless, but sounds good. Isn’t everyday Christian life more earthy, even mundane than that?

    Like

  60. Women are visual creatures. It’s a sexist view held by a lot of men and Christian gender complementarians that only men are visual / only men want sex.
    Why am I still single: in part due to Christian teachings I received in youth. Also there is a gender imbalance in churches, where there are more single females than males of marriageable age. But these days I do not care if the man I marry is a Christian or not.
    Anyway, instead of complaining your wife ain’t giving you any, just go back to your bedroom and use your hand, and take a bottle of lotion with you. You don’t need to view porn to get off.

    Like

  61. You said, ” None of us should be making sweeping generalizations for either gender.”

    But that’s kind of what you’ve been doing. And making assumptions about both sexes that are based on gendered stereotypes.

    Like

  62. KAS, “Conversely, if a wife is lazy and undomestic or whatever, this doesn’t let the husband off loving her as Christ loved the church.”

    Why is “being domestic” supposedly the wife’s duty?

    Gawd, what decade are you posting from the 1950s? We’re in 2019 now.

    The man is an adult. He’s old and mature enough to clean house, fold laundry and so on.

    Every man I’ve known other than my father and one uncle of mine are lazy. They don’t hold jobs, but the wife does, and they won’t do housework.

    All they do is sit about all day watching TV while the wife is at work, then the wife comes home and then has to do housework because the lazy SOB husband won’t do a thing.

    Housework is not “woman’s work.” It’s just work that needs to be done by people regardless of their biological sex.

    Sometimes men live alone. They never marry. They are 50 years old and don’t have a wife or mommy to come to their house to clean dishes and so on.

    Like

  63. CYBERSITH195 said,
    “Haley Halverson who wrote that article is a far right religious nut job who believes that an exposed breast in a cartoon anime drawing/game is degrading to women. She is a Puritanical freak, so anything she has to say is highly questionable.
    But putting that aside, you can annihilate her retarded stats ”

    I wonder how long it is before Cybersith gets blocked on this site?

    This blog seems to attract the MRA / Incel / women-hating, sexist fruit loops. And this one is defending porn, to boot.

    I wasn’t aware that having sexual standards and being opposed to women being degraded sexually in entertainment (regardless of format) was being a “puritanical freak”

    Re: “retarded stats” -?

    Anyone out there with a mentally disabled relative surely appreciates your using that term to insult a point of view you don’t like, I am sure.

    Like

  64. The bottomline, or so it seems to me, is that…those who are ‘into’ porn and sing its praises can never ‘rewind’ their experiences. They
    may indeed find themselves affronted, and even offended, by the mere suggestion that their relationship would have been EVEN BETTER without it

    Like

  65. Cybersith said
    If it looks like I argue for the complimenentarian position in my debate with MARK, it is because his reasoning when it comes to his anti-porn stance is highly flawed that I just couldn’t let it go unchallenged.
    — end quote —-

    Ohhh, I get it.
    You are more than likely an avid porn user yourself, and you resent anyone speaking out against porn.

    You want to be able to use a lot of porn with no judgement from other people, and you don’t want to feel shame or guilt about it.

    Therefore, you defend porn (or any man who uses it) out the ying-yang to people who speak out against porn.

    You want to believe that there is justification for a man to use porn, like a wife not wanting to have sex.
    You’re a porn apologist, and you don’t want to admit that porn is degrading towards women.

    If you are using a bunch of porn (and you probably are, why else are you so vested in defending it this much?), I don’t know why you would come on to a blog like this to defend porn use by married men…
    It’s as though you want the approval and validation of the people who post here to say, “It’s okay if you use porn.”

    Like

  66. KAS, “These are not rights that she can claim and so something she should set her heart on, her aim ought not to be to get her husband to do his half of the bargain but rather she should do her half.”

    Why do you think not? Do only authorities have the right to respect? Do only authorities have the right to not be mistreated?

    Why do you think marriage is different than every other form of contract, where the two parties agree to terms and conditions, and the party that does not fulfill their “half” of the bargain is in violation of the contract? As I said, if I agree to pay $50 a week to have my house cleaned, and the cleaner never shows up, I don’t have to continue paying $50 a week regardless of whether the cleaner fulfills their part of the agreement. I have every right to “set my heart on” the house being cleaned, because that’s what we agreed to do.

    A husband who refuses to do his part in the marriage has forsaken the marriage covenant. The covenant is broken. In every form of Biblical covenant, there is an agreement and there are punishments. When Israel forsook the covenant, God punished them. He was gracious and worked to restore them, but that was grace, not a covenant obligation. “And I saw that for all the adulteries of faithless Israel, I had sent her away and given her a writ of divorce, yet her treacherous sister Judah did not fear; but she went and was a harlot also.” (Jer 3:8)

    The terms of the marriage covenant are more than sexual fidelity (Jesus) and willing cohabitation (Paul).

    Why do Peace and her ilk then require wives to be more gracious than God himself? The wife has the right, under the marriage covenant terms, to dissolve the covenant – divorce her husband – for his breaking of the terms of the covenant.

    Like

  67. CYBERSITH195,
    You indicated that u were once a ‘woman hater’. Would it be helpful to state succinctly in a couple of sentences how this came about..?

    Like

  68. @KFFARLEY

    “Would it be helpful to state succinctly in a couple of sentences how this came about..?”

    Probably not as I have no wish to be abused by DAISY and the rest of the man hating feminists in here.

    Like

  69. This blog is actually spiritually abusive to men, as it encourages vicious, man hating feminists like YOU to parrot their hate unimpeded.

    Cybersith, I’m a man, and I’ve never found this blog to be abusive to me, spiritually or otherwise.

    You’re the one who started making comments that seemed to blame wives for pornography use by their husbands. I see this reasoning in much the same category as blaming women’s clothing choices for men’s wandering eyes, or (much worse) for being molested or raped. In short, I see it as nonsense, and others here have been calling you out on it.

    Your choice of words needs work as well. “Retarded” hasn’t been acceptable as an insult for decades (if it ever was), and accusations of “bitterness” and “man-hating” won’t go over well here, either. Your use of “feminist” as some kind of dirty word is also highly questionable.

    Only Julie Anne and Kathi can decide who winds up in the doghouse. If you decide to leave before that happens, that’s up to you. But it won’t mean that you’ve won anything, and it certainly won’t mean you’ve learned anything.

    Liked by 1 person

  70. Thanks for the tip, Mark. It looks like cybersith195 is our old acquaintance, necron48 who hates women and who has stirred up trouble here before he was banned. Good-bye, necron48/cybersith195!

    doghouse

    Like

  71. Why is “being domestic” supposedly the wife’s duty?

    Gawd, what decade are you posting from the 1950s? We’re in 2019 now.

    The apostle Paul addresses older men, older women, younger wives and young men. He tells the older women to train the young women to love their husbands and children, to be sensible, chaste, domestic, kind, and submissive to their husbands, that the word of God may not be discredited.

    Domestic, ‘keepers of the home’ – elsewhere ‘manage their households’. This does not apply to singles, but is explicitly applied to wives. You don’t have to have ‘strict’ gender roles let alone be legalistic about it to see the bible indicating the main emphasis of activity of husbands and wives. There is, however, one gender role that is absolutely strict: women have babies, and men don’t!

    As for it being 2019, people don’t change, the same needs and wants experienced by the early church, and obedience and righteousness apply today. It is not culture bound. Indeed the NT is remarkably timeless. And we now live in a society that apparently doesn’t know the meaning of words like father, mother, boy or girl, let alone marriage as something permanent.

    As for the 1950’s, I don’t believe in a previous golden age, but I do wonder if people then (and in earlier generations) were perhaps on average more contented in their marriages than now. As far as healthy, loving, stable relationships go, we don’t seen to have made progress since then. Quite the reverse.

    Like

  72. Thanks for the tip, Mark. It looks like cybersith195 is our old acquaintance, necron48 who hates women and who has stirred up trouble here before he was banned.

    It jumps through his every comment that he hates women. Problem is there are so many more where that came from. Anyways, Thanks JA!

    I was amused by his ‘don’t slander me/say it to my face’ comment when what I said was actually full of hedges….this is why I don’t take ‘not all men’ing seriously, because I’ve often seen it directly to a comment that had very clear caveats.

    Liked by 1 person

  73. (Although I have to admit to being amused to see someone on this site encouraging another to do ‘research’ by looking at everything on pornhub. ummm)

    Like

  74. Mara: But I do know that porn is bad for people. I almost just said, bad for women, which would have been true by itself.

    I was listening to a podcast about addiction the other day that specifically talked about how porn use in women was detrimental because it often degraded women, and that was associated with sex and messed them up. The person talking started with hentai, which is apparently usually older men in a position of authority and young girls…

    Like

  75. Why do you think marriage is different than every other form of contract

    I also wonder about that generally Mark, especially when people start blathering on about ‘covenants’ which the dictionary literally defines as an ‘agreement’ or contract!

    Like

  76. I removed one of cybersith195’s comments. It was too vile and accusatory to remain. I’ll leave the other comments that some of you have responded to. I find it interesting that he intentionally came back to the blog. Weird!!

    Like

  77. KAS, in Westminster-speak, instruction/laws in the Old Testament fall into three categories, moral, ceremonial and judicial/case: “Besides this law, commonly called moral, God was pleased to give to the people of Israel, as a church under age, ceremonial laws, containing several typical ordinances, partly of worship, prefiguring Christ, His graces, actions, sufferings, and benefits; and partly, holding forth divers instructions of moral duties. All which ceremonial laws are now abrogated, under the New Testament. IV. To them also, as a body politic, He gave sundry judicial laws, which expired together with the State of that people; not obliging
    under any now, further than the general equity thereof may require.”(WCF 14)

    For example, there is no longer a “bride price of virgins” that was a judicial law that was an application of the moral law, specifically for the nation of Israel. Another example was military service. Now we have a paid army and a draft, which fills the same purpose of common defense.

    What baffles me is why the New Testament scholars do not apply the same lens to interpreting instructions to the NT church. When Paul says “to be sensible, pure, workers at home, kind, being subject to their own husbands, so that the word of God will not be dishonored.” (Tit 2:4-5) the scholars simply assume that this instruction is equivalent to the moral law – applicable for all people everywhere, when in fact this is delivered specifically to Titus. We see how Paul explains the moral underpinning of judicial laws, for example “For it is written in the Law of Moses, “You shall not muzzle the ox while he is threshing.” God is not concerned about oxen, is He?” (1 Cor 9:9)

    So, this is a Biblical pattern, to give instruction that appears universal, yet is actually specific to a given situation. We see that with Paul’s instruction to slaves. It took millenia for the church to realize that Paul’s instruction was not universal – i.e. a perpetual justification of slavery. In the same way, I don’t think that Paul’s enumeration of wifely duties should be assumed universal, simply because it agrees with our cultural biases. We need to understand the context and the application of the moral law. The context is more about an expectation that the older members shouldn’t “check out” by self-medicating or resorting to worldly pursuits, but that they have a vital role to play in the church – both older men and older women – to encourage wisdom and righteousness in the younger generations.

    Like

  78. Feministdestroyer tried to leave a comment.

    Feministdestroyer, aka Necron48, aka cybersith195, stop pretending you are not Necron or cybersith. WordPress gives me tools to tell who you are. LOL

    Nice try, though 🙂

    Like

  79. Lea said: (Although I have to admit to being amused to see someone on this site encouraging another to do ‘research’ by looking at everything on pornhub. ummm)

    Yes, ummmm, indeed. Well, that was . . . interesting.

    Like

  80. Feministdestroyer

    You know what’s funny, Julie Anne, although I always believed women were equals I tended to resist the term ‘feminist’. Angry men on the internet and complementation types have kind of swung me around lol. ‘Man hater’ also seems to be any woman who pushes back. Fascinating stuff.

    Like

  81. Lea, I, too, dislike the feminist term. For many Christians, it means you don’t care about the unborn. That is not true for me. And I also dislike the idea that all feminists hate men. I don’t hate anyone. I hate abuse.

    Like

  82. KAS – “I’ll bite! In the previous chapter you reviewed I commented on an inconsistency Peace has at her blog on glorifiying her husband, and giving glory to God.”

    I remember you pointing this out KAS. If she has changed her view, then she should do an updated version of the book and make changes to any of her theological beliefs. The last update was 2005.

    This is the book that women are being given to read. This is the book that has affected the lives of many women. I would venture to guess that most people aren’t going to read a chapter then hunt down her blog to verify if she changed her position. I know I wouldn’t go through all of that trouble.

    Like

  83. The tactics were pretty familiar up front, but I didn’t know how to search old comments to find the old handle. I finally had to give up and look for a post awhile ago with LOTS of comments.

    Like

  84. KAS said

    He tells the older women to train the young women to love their husbands and children, to be sensible, chaste, domestic, kind, and submissive to their husbands, that the word of God may not be discredited.

    Domestic, ‘keepers of the home’ – elsewhere ‘manage their households’. This does not apply to singles, but is explicitly applied to wives. You don’t have to have ‘strict’ gender roles let alone be legalistic about it to see the bible indicating the main emphasis of activity of husbands and wives.
    —-end quote—

    We’re not live in the 1950s anymore, in Israel 2,000 years ago, or ancient Rome.

    Men can and should be “domestic” and “keepers of the home.” Your wife is not a maid, KAS.

    You do get that not all of the Bible is meant for everyone today, that some of it was culture and time specific, yes?

    _SEARCH RESULTS FOR: KEEPERS OF HOME_

    Like

  85. Lea said,

    (Although I have to admit to being amused to see someone on this site encouraging another to do ‘research’ by looking at everything on pornhub. ummm)
    —end quote–

    The guy who was put in the dog house, he has a Twitter account.

    When I glanced his Twitter page over months ago, IIRC, he had posted a few links either to porn stuff or to articles in defense of porn.
    He had some kind of pro-porn stuff on his Twitter account.

    Like

  86. Mark – lest I be misunderstood, both parties to a marriage should aim to fulfill the requirements or duties scripture lays down for them. Look at any traditional wedding service and many of these overlap. Since we are all imperfect, no-one ever does this perfectly, that’s just common sense. My point is though that when one party fails to do what they should, it doesn’t let the other party off from doing their half – and this applies equally to husbands and wives. Both genders should concentrate on what God has said to them, not their opposite number!

    When one party breaks the contract in effect by their behaviour, such as immorality or various types of abuse, then the question of ending the marriage comes into play if the faithless party won’t mend their ways. This is an extremely serious step and should be last resort. (I currently still hold the view that death alone actually dissolves the marriage bond, regardless of modern legal technicalities. Not very popular, and a pastoral nightmare looking at today’s society.)

    As for our good friend Titus, what Paul wrote was to him in his situation, that’s true, but also for us in ours. There was a reason I wrote You don’t have to have ‘strict’ gender roles let alone be legalistic about it to see the bible indicating the main emphasis of activity of husbands and wives as the bible needs to be thinkingly applied to us today.

    I don’t believe we are under the OT law at all, though not free to disobey its moral commands. We are in Christ, living in the Spirit, and under grace. If you go back to law, you go back to condemnation.

    Since both OT and NT do make some differentiation in roles within marriage, we should do likewise, and apply what is said of husbands to husbands, and conversely wives to wives. We should neither ignore any distinctions as is the temptation of egalitarians, nor build a legalistic framework going beyond the text as is the habit of some complementarians.

    Above all, we mustn’t follow the culture around us. The English-speaking world was previously heavily influenced by Christianity, but this is much less the case today especially in the UK, and serious levels of deception can and are entering the church by following modern fads and theories, and indeed idols.

    All problems in the end come down to human sinfulness, not an ‘~ism’.

    Like

  87. I currently still hold the view that death alone actually dissolves the marriage bond, regardless of modern legal technicalities.

    KAS, this is a dangerous, and at the same time silly view, that doesn’t hold up with historical or modern thinking on this topic. What does marriage even mean to you, if nothing can dissolve it????

    I suppose abusive husbands can murder their wives to get out of their marriage and they’d be good to go, but if I were an abused spouse I’d rather take steps and live with a dissolved marriage than death.

    I suppose a spouse can cheat all they want and the other is supposed to stay, because of your not even antiquated but singular views on this.

    Like

  88. a pastoral nightmare looking at today’s society

    Are you under the impression that spouses didn’t cheat or abuse or neglect in the past? I hate this idea that any of this is new. It’s not.

    The difference between today and the past is that more women were trapped by society and circumstance in bad marriages. I’d count that a win for modernity.

    Like

  89. KAS, “As for our good friend Titus, what Paul wrote was to him in his situation, that’s true, but also for us in ours.”

    I think this is a plain assertion. When we look at the Old Testament, we first have to understand the culture, then understand the moral law to then apply the instruction to understand what is applicable in our situation. So, for example, Paul takes the OT law “don’t muzzle an ox”, understands that there is a general application of benefiting from the fruit of labor, and applies that to the right of those who minister to benefit financially from their ministry. So, that becomes a basis for, as an example, employee discounts – a similar application of the same principle.

    You are already making the general application, you are just refusing to defend why. In other words, you are trying to assert that “keeper of the home” is God’s design, rather than an artifact of the OT and NT culture.

    It’s easy to prove that… there are many NT instructions that we no longer follow today. We don’t “abstain from meat sacrificed to idols and from blood”. We don’t follow: “Is anyone among you sick? Then he must call for the elders of the church and they are to pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord”, nor “Slaves, in all things obey those who are your masters on earth, not with external service, as those who merely please men, but with sincerity of heart, fearing the Lord.” (although some try to apply the general equity to employee/employer relations) Only the most reactionary believe “But every woman who has her head uncovered while praying or prophesying disgraces her head, for she is one and the same as the woman whose head is shaved.”

    So, we must already admit that we look at these passages in light of their historical and cultural context and that simply asserting the universal truth of a passage (e.g. as justifying slavery) can lead into danger (e.g. elders/oil) and sin (slavery).

    We need to be very careful to avoid forcing the Bible into our own cultural lens, because historically, it has been a pretext for great evils.

    Like

  90. Lea – What does marriage even mean to you, if nothing can dissolve it????

    It’s veering a little off topic, so I’ll keep it as short as possible. Jesus himself reinstituted the original ‘one flesh’ relationship of man and woman for life as in the beginning for his followers, and told them not to ‘put this asunder’. Not an ideal, but a requirement. Marriage produces a new kinship, dissolvable only on death. Cf. Rom 7, 1 Cor 7.

    Jesus said Everyone who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery, and he who marries a woman divorced from her husband commits adultery in Luke, and Mark applies this to wives if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.

    This is the rule if you like of marriage (“everyone”), and God does not recognise the divorce as ending the first marriage, as adultery, which is ongoing, is a sin of married people. It’s what he thinks of it that matters, even if you get a decree absolute humanly speaking dissolving the marriage.

    Paul reiterates Jesus’ command forbidding divorce, and does not permit remarriage even in the event separation were to occur. (There may be circumstances when physical separation is essential for safety.)

    There has been endless discussion, often trying to get round it, of any exceptions to this, and if so does any exception apply to divorce only, or divorce and remarriage. I think yes to the former (fornication, desertion) but no to the latter. My views are not set in stone, but would take a lot of shifting, not arrived at quickly. The exceptions can very quickly end up abolishing the rule.

    The death of a spouse does of course permit a second marriage.

    The reason I say this is a pastoral nightmare today, is that if my understanding is correct, this removes the common belief and practice of divorce and remarriage going on far too many evangelical (and especially charismatic) churches today, let alone the world outside. People haven’t been taught this, and if they contract a second marriage, how do they put this right in the sight of God? Very far from easy. Then there’s ‘surely God would want everyone to be happy and give them a second chance’, ‘it’s too strict’ ….. .

    This view of marriage, understood more clearly in say my parents’ generation and earlier, when Christian thinking was more widespread and divorce was extremely difficult to obtain, means marriage should not be entered into lightly (as per 1662 Prayer Book), and once contracted needs to be worked at.

    Like

  91. KAS said
    I currently still hold the view that death alone actually dissolves the marriage bond, regardless of modern legal technicalities.
    — end quote—

    ^That’s not what the Old Testament teaches about marriage.
    The New Testament isn’t more stringent than the Old, it’s actually less stringent, odd that you’re interpreting it to make the New more strict.

    Enjoy this, Kas:

    Preacher Murdered His Wife Because Divorce Was Considered Unacceptable In His Denomination – What Does This Say About Legalistic Christian Teachings On Divorce?

    Like

  92. KAS said
    I’d better get on and let her know that without delay …
    —end —

    I don’t think that you know it.

    You are OK with women and girls being indoctrinated with sexist biblical interpretations that can harm them mentally or physically.

    Take your daughter, for example. You mentioned her on previous threads.

    I can about guarantee you that teaching your daughter to drift through life lacking boundaries because boundaries are supposedly un-feminine and are supposedly “hogwash” has likely contributed to her suicidal ideation, and to her depression, if she has depression.

    That was sure true for me.
    Not only did I and do I deal with suicidal ideation, I also had clinical depression for many years due to having been taught that garbage…
    -all that Christian garbage about traditional gender roles (the very bullsh*t you promote here, you can never leave it alone, you pop up on almost every thread to peddle it and defend it),
    and that notion that having boundaries was “selfish” or “worldly” kept me trapped in behaviors and mindsets that prolonged and intensified depression and anxiety for years.

    Women are not “more domestic” than men,
    God didn’t design women to be “more domestic,”
    and New Testament commentary was not intended to be for all women for all time,
    when the disciples were addressing problems experienced by particular people or particular churches in another culture 2,000 years ago.

    _“BUSY AT HOME”: HOW DOES TITUS 2:4-5 APPLY TODAY?_

    Like

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