Clergy Sex Abuse, Sexual Abuse/Assault and Churches, Voddie Baucham, Well Done, Church Leaders!, Wives or (ex) of Pedophiles

Well Done, Church Leaders: Grace Family Baptist Church Pastors Handle Sex Abuse Case of Alleged Pedophile Pastor Stephen Bratton Appropriately

Steve Bratton, Grace Family Baptist Church, Sex Abuse, Pedophile

Photo: Harris County Sheriff’s Office

I’ve written a lot of sad stories of how church leaders have mishandled sex abuse cases in the church. It appears that the elders at Grace Family Baptist Church in the Houston area have handled it the right way. Yes!

According to the Inquisitr, Stephen Bratton, then-pastor at Grace Family Baptist Church confessed to his wife in May about the abuse. She, in turn, contacted the co-pastors at Grace Family Baptist Church. Bratton “admitted to his co-pastors at Grace Family Baptist Church that same day that he had “sinned in grievous ways,” according to court documents.”

The Houston Chronicle detailed the sequence of events the co-pastors took after hearing about the sexual abuse. They did it right. Reporting was done on the same day! That is excellent. Kudos to them.

The investigation began on May 16 after Bratton allegedly confessed to three Southern Baptist clergy members that he abused the child, according to court documents. Two of Bratton’s co-pastors, Aaron Wright and Erin Frye, called the Harris County Sheriff’s Office to their church on Bammel Westfield Road to take a report that same day, while the third pastor, David Shiflet, said he referred the complaint to the Department of Family Protective Services.

Additionally, the church did well by releasing the following public statement on their church website:

Date: June 15, 2019
Subject: Public statement regarding Stephen Bratton’s crime

We are aware of the situation regarding Stephen Bratton and the charges that have been filed against him and of his arrest on June 14th.

Stephen Bratton confessed to Erin Frye and Aaron Wright, both pastors at the church, of sexually abusing a minor in an ongoing way for a number of years on May 16th.

This is the first time this had been brought to the attention of the pastors.

This activity is wrong according to Biblical and civil law and the church condemns the behavior as abhorrent.

The elders immediately filed a police report with Harris County Sheriff’s Office the same day, May 16th. As the weeks followed the pastors continued to make contact with the detective because they desired the case to be brought forward so that justice would be served. Once the case began we continued to cooperate fully throughout the investigation.

The elders have called upon Stephen Bratton to accept the full responsibility for his actions and to place himself at the mercy of the criminal justice system.

Stephen is no longer in a position of leadership at the church and is no longer receiving a salary.

Stephen Bratton was also excommunicated by the church the following Sunday, May 19th. Therefore he is no longer a member of the church.

Currently we are working to meet the needs of the family and the victim.

We have deep grief for the victim and have sought to respect the privacy and identity of the victim throughout this process.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QuLlq1Xd-4APtwfSYWo4rozybrek-6P_/view

The Inquisitr reported that Stephen Bratton sexually abused a teenage relative:

Specifically, according to the criminal complaint against him, he allegedly sexually abused a teenage relative over the course of two years. Specifically, their sex acts ranged from kissing all the way up to sexual intercourse. These acts allegedly took place multiple times per week or even multiple times per day.

Who is Stephen Bratton?

I searched online and found some items of interest. Stephen was pretty close with Voddie Baucham. In fact, Grace Family Baptist Church is the church Voddie Baucham used to pastor. Voddie named Stephen in the Acknowledgements in his book, Expository Apologetics:

Stephen Bratton signed The Statement on Social Justice & the Gospel. That’s not a big surprise since Voddie Baucham has been involved in the statement.

Bratton must have had the keys to Voddie Baucham’s public Facebook page because he took over administration duties from time to time:

Source
Source

And finally, the Inquisitr also reported Stephen Bratton’s local political efforts:

Bratton, who is a father of seven, was outspoken in support of a Texas bill that would have abolished abortions and charged women with homicide if they underwent the procedure. That level of offense can be punishable by the death penalty under Texas law.

I appreciate how the focus of the elders is now on victim and the victim’s family. This is a breath of fresh air to see:

Currently we are working to meet the needs of the family and the victim.

We have deep grief for the victim and have sought to respect the privacy and identity of the victim throughout this process.

There are also eight other victims that I hope the church will consider: Stephen’s wife and seven children. If anyone from GFBC is in contact with Bratton’s wife, there are two women who work with me at the blog and support wives of pedophiles. They have helped over 100 women who have found Spiritual Sounding Board and the articles/personal stories of wives of pedophiles. Mrs. Bratton, if you are reading this, my heart goes out to you. You do not need to walk this journey alone. Please contact me at spiritualsb@gmail.com if you would like me to put you in touch with these women.

87 thoughts on “Well Done, Church Leaders: Grace Family Baptist Church Pastors Handle Sex Abuse Case of Alleged Pedophile Pastor Stephen Bratton Appropriately”

  1. “Bratton, who is a father of seven, was outspoken in support of a Texas bill that would have abolished abortions and charged women with homicide if they underwent the procedure. That level of offense can be punishable by the death penalty under Texas law.”

    The next step is for Grace Family Baptist Church to acknowledge the abominable hypocrisy between male headship / gender roles and the support for said Texas bill:

    –women are agents to service the man’s sexual needs

    –women who become pregnant as a result of being forced to service the man’s sexual needs and who then choose an abortion are solely responsible for the crime of homicide and bear the punishment alone

    –the man escapes all responsibility

    male headship at its finest.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Yes, Pam, I have some issues with some of the beliefs/teachings there. But I also like to point out when I see a church report sex abuse the right way, and it appears that they have done so.

    Like

  3. But I also like to point out when I see a church report sex abuse the right way, and it appears that they have done so.

    That is a good thing. But I can’t help but notice that he confessed…I wonder what prompted that. We can hope the church would have done as well in the face of ambiguity but we don’t know. Hm.

    Like

  4. While it is very troubling to hear about yet another clergy abuse story, I am so encouraged that this church stepped up and did the right thing. I hope all victims involved, including the family of the abuser are able to get the help they need to walk through this dark valley they have been placed in by this abuser. My heart goes out to them all.

    Liked by 1 person

  5. Reporting the same day and cooperating with the investigation. Bravo!

    This is much better than the multitude of reports where church leaders have sided with the perpetrator and harmed the victims even further. I hope this helps open the pathway to healing for all the victims.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. i agree, Julie Anne, this is a good thing. A very good precedent and example. but i cannot get past the self-serving and cruel idiocy of male headship insisting on the harshest of penalties for women who are required to satisfy men’s sexual needs.

    i challenge comp/pat men: Draft one of your Statements that you blackmail everyone to sign. The text of the statement:

    “Where the full force of the law comes against a woman for choosing an abortion for a pregnancy resulting from servicing a man’s sexual needs, the man shall give himself up as a ransom for her and lay down his life for her, taking the punishment for her.”

    i mean, i don’t think this has occurred to them, but this is the logical conclusion of male headship, is it not?

    Liked by 1 person

  7. I will be blunt Julie, this article feels a lot less than humble in the respect that we are all sinners deserving of death and no one, including you, would want their thoughts daily broadcast on any social media platform.
    I will also be honest and say that my bias is towards Elders handling this kind of discourse and meeting out the required Biblical justice from the Church as that is their God given role for a reason. (difference in genders and difference in responsibility’s given them by the Almighty) If we need any further proof of the lack of moral superiority in women just look at their willingness to kill the life placed in their womb by God. So being morally equal we only have God’s defining role for women and men and men have been given the role of leadership in the Church.
    Maybe we men are to blame for the rise of the female voice in leadership because we are not leading or maybe feminism has swept through the Church just as it has in society?
    I do not disagree with what you said for the most part but a little less “tone of superiority” in regards to the needs of the victims would reflect Christ more since you and I both know Christ is working in the hearts of the most wicked and vile humans on this planet and He is surely working in Stephen’s heart to redeem for Himself.
    I for one having been married for 20 years and being 50 years of age know there are two sides to every story. (especially in marriage)

    Paul

    Like

  8. Paul – your comment makes no sense to me. Men have to blame for the squelching of women’s voices. It would serve the whole Body of Christ better to have women use their God-given gifts just as Jesus encouraged.

    As far as less tone of superiority with regards to victims? Again, your comment makes me shake my head. Do you understand that you are reading a blog for victims of abuse? I follow Jesus. He loved the oppressed with action and truth. I will not sit idly by and do nothing.

    To claim there are “two sides in every story” in marriage referring to an article in which a pastor is a pedophile and insinuate that the wife had anything to do with his sin is absolutely nuts.

    SMH!!

    Like

  9. Dear Paul,

    I have to agree with Julie Anne here. I’m trying to make sense of your comment, and understand how it relates to the article, but I just can’t figure it out.

    I will also be honest and say that my bias is towards Elders handling this kind of discourse and meting out the required Biblical justice from the Church…

    Even when one of their leaders has committed a crime against a minor, and against society? Are you suggesting that this matter should be handled only within the church, and not by the authorities?

    Christ is working in the hearts of the most wicked and vile humans on this planet and He is surely working in Stephen’s heart to redeem for Himself.

    Hopefully. But I fail to see how that justifies the tendency of many churches to insist on prayers for the redemption of criminal perverts, and not for the healing of their victims. Grace Family Church’s focus on Bratton’s victim is, as JA notes, sadly uncommon and worth noting.

    …there are two sides to every story.

    ????

    Why on earth did you say this? First of all, it’s not universally true. Second, I don’t see how it can be true in Bratton’s case. He confessed to molesting and raping a minor. Nothing has been presented to contradict that. What “other side” do you see to this story?

    Liked by 1 person

  10. Paul sounds like he found julie anne uppity for being a woman and… speaking!

    Maybe we men are to blame for the rise of the female voice in leadership because we are not leading or maybe feminism has swept through the Church just as it has in society?

    Maybe men with power have treated women badly throughout history and that is why feminism was needed both in society and in church. Whenever a group in history is given or takes power for itself over another group, that power is used to abuse that group in some way. This is not complicated. We are all equals and should be treated as such.

    Do better.

    Like

  11. To claim there are “two sides in every story” in marriage referring to an article in which a pastor is a pedophile and insinuate that the wife had anything to do with his sin is absolutely nuts.

    It is especially as this is not about a marriage problem but about a man abused a completely different relative? That has nothing to do with the wife! Paul gives his game away here.

    Like

  12. Paul, “If we need any further proof of the lack of moral superiority in women just look at their willingness to kill the life placed in their womb by God. ”

    Aren’t you just following in the sin of Adam? The man impregnates the woman, but when the baby is aborted, the men say, “It was the woman you gave me!”

    “I will also be honest and say that my bias is towards Elders handling this kind of discourse and meeting out the required Biblical justice from the Church as that is their God given role for a reason.”

    This is simply silencing. First of all, when civil crimes are committed, it is primarily the responsibility of the civil authorities to prosecute the matter. When Jesus and the NT writers say, “judge for yourselves…” they are appealing to all peoples’ common sense. Jesus says, “my sheep hear my voice”, and we Christians have a God-given right to seek God’s voice. If the elders hide the discourse behind closed doors, that is not the voice of the Shepherd.

    Yes, there are two sides to every story, but if the church wants to hide one or both stories behind closed doors, they are complicit. It is a sad state in the church when this can be said about our leaders: “This is the judgment, that the Light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the Light, for their deeds were evil. For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light for fear that his deeds will be exposed. But he who practices the truth comes to the Light, so that his deeds may be manifested as having been wrought in God.” (John 3: 19-21)

    Like

  13. To say that a wife or husband has nothing to do with the sin that either would commit leading to adultery is absurd. It is either the lack of something or the introduction of something in a marriage that leads to its downfall. If a husband ignores his wifes needs for 20 years and she leaves him for another man she is 100% to blame for her actions but we would recognize the circumstances that lead to it as being an underlying factor and blame the husband for 20 years of neglect in his marriage. He will answer to God someday for 20 years of not “loving his wife as Christ loved the Church”.
    In the case of Stephen Bratton he will answer for adultery in his marriage and for breaking the law in sex with a minor. But beyond that we can be certain that they did not have a healthy marriage sexually for these things to have manifest themselves the way they did. Obviously communication and intimately knowing each other was lacking. You dont have these kind of problems in a biblical loving marriage.
    – Loving Headship of the Husband in spiritual matters and as provider (teaching wife & children)
    – Honor & Support of a wife as a mother and homemaker. (not to the exclusion of all other things but making the husband and children a priority and not a career)
    – Obedience of Children
    These are some of the things that feminists inside the Church gnash their teeth at as they try to
    supplant their husbands biblical authority over the marriage and family. Which is no surprise since we are told in Genesis that it is the “natural desire” of the women due to fallen mans sin.
    You probably think me a chauvinist of the worst order but you and I both know I am just pointing out the elephant in the room that no one wants to talk about.

    Like

  14. “This is simply silencing. First of all, when civil crimes are committed, it is primarily the responsibility of the civil authorities to prosecute the matter. When Jesus and the NT writers say, “judge for yourselves…” they are appealing to all peoples’ common sense. Jesus says, “my sheep hear my voice”, and we Christians have a God-given right to seek God’s voice. If the elders hide the discourse behind closed doors, that is not the voice of the Shepherd.”

    I do not endorse Eldership Discipline over the laws of the land. I was speaking as far as Church discipline goes. The laws of the State have expanded to encompass God given roles that the Church or Family were given and we are stuck with that.

    Like

  15. “It is especially as this is not about a marriage problem but about a man abused a completely different relative? That has nothing to do with the wife! Paul gives his game away here.”

    What game are we playing at? This is a serious discussion of the incredibly high divorce rate inside the Church. These are all part and parcel to the behaviour exhibited by the husband in this case. People in healthy God led marriages do not exhibit these outcomes. Sin is at play here long before it came to the issue of adultery/sex with a minor.
    We would not look at a drug addict and say the point he took his first drug was when he went off the rails from a perfectly normal life.

    Like

  16. “Maybe men with power have treated women badly throughout history and that is why feminism was needed both in society and in church. Whenever a group in history is given or takes power for itself over another group, that power is used to abuse that group in some way. This is not complicated. We are all equals and should be treated as such.”

    If you can justify anything you said here from scripture please do so.
    Men and women do not have equal roles in the Church or in Marriage. They have complimentary roles.
    You are a feminist.

    Like

  17. “Paul – your comment makes no sense to me. Men have to blame for the squelching of women’s voices. It would serve the whole Body of Christ better to have women use their God-given gifts just as Jesus encouraged.”

    The feminist women in our culture and in the Church have turned their men into wimps. Well, lets be fair the rejection of God by those men led to the women rising up and desiring to take over the men’s God given role. Men need to be honored by women and women need the love of men. Women were given the role of childbearing and men were given the role of provider.
    You mess with those roles and you will see what you have in America today, the destruction of the family. Roman historians recorded the rise of the women in roles of authority as being the 3rd biggest reason (next to personal and state debt) for the collapse of the civilization.
    Hmmm…. where can we see those three things right now?

    Like

  18. To say that a wife or husband has nothing to do with the sin that either would commit leading to adultery is absurd.

    Paul, coming in with absolutely wrong opinions right out of the gate I see. \

    You are a feminist.

    Oh noes! lol. I believe we’re equal. There is no male or female, we’re all equal under christ. I betcha you dont count that as a scripture, and quite frankly, i really don’t care.

    If you can justify anything you said here from scripture please do so.

    There are plenty of examples of men treating women badly in scripture from David and his son, to the woman at the well, but there is also…a ton of history that didn’t happen in israel/the ME/bible times? So.

    Like

  19. Aren’t you just following in the sin of Adam? The man impregnates the woman, but when the baby is aborted, the men say, “It was the woman you gave me!”

    You cannot blame a man for the actions taken by a women to abort her child. In lots of cases the men wish to keep the child but the feminist mindset of todays women dont want to come under a mans authority. (of course that authority is grounded in marriage which is usually lacking in most abortion cases) The situation is already messed up with fornication long before we got to dealing with abortion.
    If its a women’s body as we are told by the feminists you cant have it both ways and blame a man when a woman has an abortion. That women made an equally stupid choice to have sex with a man and get pregnant. The law of the land says its a women’s choice so “man up” and except responsibility for aborting your child.

    Like

  20. Women don’t need honor? What is this role business? Yes, a woman has a womb to carry babies, but it sounds like you are saying that’s all they are for. What about single women? Are they in sin for not bearing children?

    You actually sound paranoid of women!

    Like


  21. If you can justify anything you said here from scripture please do so. “

    Apparently you have skimmed past Ephesians 5:21 in your Bible.

    “You are a feminist”

    You didn’t direct this comment to me, but I’d take it as a compliment. Jesus seemed to be the most pro-woman man in scripture. He elevated women. It’s a shame you seem to be drinking Patriarchy koolaid. Jesus did not hold to those standards of the day.

    Like

  22. Paul, sex abuse of a minor is not adultery. It is a criminal act. Adultery is two equal-level adults who consent to the sexual relationship. A child is unable to consent, period.

    Like

  23. “Paul, sex abuse of a minor is not adultery. It is a criminal act. Adultery is two equal-level adults who consent to the sexual relationship. A child is unable to consent, period.”

    Adultery is the act of sex outside of marriage by one partner or the other. If it was with an animal it would constitute adultery to you spouse. (bestiality)
    “Sex Abuse” – Since this is America lets just start with the fact that in different states you can get married at different ages. I believe with the consent of parents its as young as 14 so one would have to assume a 14 year old is mature enough to get married. Yes, I would be concerned about the influence an adult exerts on a younger more immature person. I have heard this argument in relation to King David and Bathsheba where His position would have rendered her helpless to resist. Baldercock, she was quite capable of bathing nude on her roof in view of the palace so that tells me she was at the least an indiscreet girl and most likely flirty in the worst way. Apparently she was about 18.
    I don’t advocate breaking the law and he broke the law having underage sex, is he a pedophile, maybe by some definition, but no I would not be concerned having him around my children. I have dealt with pedophiles and that is a whole different scenario than underage sex with the opposite sex.

    Like

  24. “Oh noes! lol. I believe we’re equal. There is no male or female, we’re all equal under christ. I betcha you dont count that as a scripture, and quite frankly, i really don’t care.”

    To declare equality over marriage regarding the headship of the man is to ignore the OT/NT and Genesis. Do you not believe the OT is relevant today?
    1 Corinthians 11:3
    “But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ.”
    God holds every husband accountable for the spiritual state of his marriage and children. He is responsible to teach.

    Like

  25. “You didn’t direct this comment to me, but I’d take it as a compliment. Jesus seemed to be the most pro-woman man in scripture. He elevated women. It’s a shame you seem to be drinking Patriarchy koolaid. Jesus did not hold to those standards of the day.”

    its not Patriarchy to lead spiritually in your home. I remember a Pastor sharing a study years ago done on Church attendance. If a Father attended Church with his children it was 80% likely that would continue attending Church when they grew up. If mom only attended Church with them it was something like 20% likely they would stay in Church as adults.
    I watched a you tube opinion piece a couple of years ago by a secular journalist who basically was asking the question ‘What do men get out of marriage”? He concluded that without headship and honor in the marriage there was no point in men marrying as they could get sex from prostitutes and provide for themselves quite nicely. Eve was created as a complimentary companion for Adam. Gods design for marriage works but the feminist desire to usurp the mans authority has already reaped its destruction on the family in America.
    Gen 3:16
    To the woman He said:
    “I will greatly multiply your sorrow and your conception;
    In pain you shall bring forth children;
    Your desire shall be [e]for your husband,
    And he shall rule over you.”

    This is the most basic precept of marriage because man sinned and it has not changed. Women now kill their children and they dont want a man to rule over them. (feminist) The flip side to this is if women don’t encourage their men into leadership by honoring and obeying them we end up with 30 year old men living in their parents basement. Societies get wiped out by more male dominant societies when that happens, study your history.

    Like

  26. “You actually sound paranoid of women!”

    Many Godly young men today are paranoid that the wife they marry is a wolf in sheep’s clothing and will succumb to the feminist cultural mantra when faced with the inevitable conflict of marriage. Divorce is so easy nowadays and society supports women throwing off the mantle of oppression that they think Biblical marriage is. Feminism tells young women that their ultimate power is found in a career and in empowering themselves. Biblical marriage is about serving each other and headship of the man is an antitype of Christs headship in the Church. If a woman cannot come under her huband’s God given headship she is not coming under Christs as much as she likes to try and convince herself.
    Ultimately women are reaping something that even they dont want in their feminist attitudes toward marriage. Men dont need to get married to have sex and many are opting out with the attitude of radical women today in culture. Homosexuality is on the rise and hate between the sexes is growing.

    Like

  27. Paul, stop changing the subject on the crime committed by Bratton. He had sex with a minor which is a criminal act.

    As far as Bathsheba, you are forgetting that David was in a position of authority over her. With that power differential, there is NO consent.

    Like

  28. “Paul, stop changing the subject on the crime committed by Bratton. He had sex with a minor which is a criminal act.
    As far as Bathsheba, you are forgetting that David was in a position of authority over her. With that power differential, there is NO consent.”

    I am not arguing your above point you are correct. I just dont get excited about todays definition of a minor as much as you are since it was only a 120 years ago in a very sensible society where things were different. It almost sounds like we are wanting to call this rape as if he forced her? I have not heard that stated by any of the legal information.
    Hmmmm…..So that’s the feminist justification. Bathsheba was powerless so we women need to throw off the yoke of men so we can rule from a much more noble and balanced position. Good luck, you are up against God’s design for marriage and history.
    I hear a lot of crying here from the female position that they are unaccountable for abortions they have or for sex they have. Nowhere does the bible insinuate Bathsheba was raped. Any women who baths nude in full view of someone watching is not innocent. Usually society would call her a Jezebel or temptress or tart or at least a flirt but no you want to exonerate her from all responsibility, absolutely amazing. Remember Joseph, the Bible clearly tells us he fled from a similar situation where Potiphar’s wife had power over him.
    My 21 year old, otherwise modest, daughter likes to suntan her legs in our front yard and she has heard from her dad more than once that her foolish behaviour could have unintended consequences. You reap what you sow.

    Like

  29. “Paul, you quoted Gen 3:16 – the curse. We are no longer under the curse because of Christ’s death on the cross”

    All creation groans under the curse of sin until Christ returns. You mean to tell me you don’t sin? NT tells us “none are good no not one”. When God created the earth it was Good.
    I suppose you are one of these people who thinks the OT does not apply anymore to us even though Christ Himself quoted from it multiple times as well as the Apostles after His death. Does the Ten Commandments still apply?

    Like

  30. I am not groaning under the curse of sin. I refuse to make Christ’s death on the cross null and void. Speak for yourself.

    Christ gave us the new commandment to love God and others.

    Like

  31. Wow. There is so, so much to address in Paul’s comment’s, I probably won’t even get through it all, what with work and everything.

    I guess I’ll start here:

    It is either the lack of something or the introduction of something in a marriage that leads to its downfall.

    Unless one of the people involved is a sociopath, or a pedophile who has deceived the spouse into marriage. In that case, only one is responsible for the downfall of the marriage, if there even was a marriage to begin with.

    If a husband ignores his wifes needs for 20 years and she leaves him for another man…

    ..then she is entirely justified in seeking a divorce, both legally and biblically. Paul allowed believers to divorce in cases of abandonment.

    Obviously communication and intimately knowing each other was lacking. You dont have these kind of problems in a biblical loving marriage.

    Or else Bratton always was a criminal pervert in the making, and his wife’s actions had nothing at all to do with it. Normal men don’t cheat on their wives with minor relatives, Paul. That’s just sick, and any man who does that has problems that no spouse can fix.

    You probably think me a chauvinist of the worst order…

    And a misogynist. And an ignoramus. But yeah, chauvinist fits too.

    Like

  32. Julie Anne,

    Women don’t need honor? What is this role business?

    I have a hunch, JA. Based on Paul’s own words:

    Men need to be honored by women and women need the love of men.

    …I suspect that he’s been reading too much of Emerson Eggerichs, and his book, “Love and Respect”.

    To those who haven’t read it (and to those who have), I highly recommend Nate Sparks’ most excellent analysis of Eggerichs’ opus of misogyny, ignorance and all-around dreck. Here’s a good place to start.

    https://natesparks130.com/2016/06/06/love-respect-and-consent/

    That’s all I can manage right now. Lunch break’s almost over. Must go.

    Like

  33. So according to Julie here we no longer need Gods grace and mercy because we are sinless once we have accepted Christs atoning work on the cross????
    Wow, what else can I say.

    Like

  34. The vitriolic response here makes me think I touched a nerve amongst the feminist crowd.
    Marriages take two people and if they fall apart it is because “two” people did not walk close enough with Christ to first make sure they married someone walking with Christ and second that they both lived a Christ filled life surrounded by Christians who could hold them accountable to Gods word and model marriage for them. Lone wolf Christians outside the accountability of the Church are prone to failure.

    Stephens case may have been the classic situation of other Christians for years assuming Pastors have it all together and even though there may have been warning signs no one speaks lovingly to correct poor behaviour.
    I have been privy to many Pastors not exercising the correct boundaries in counselling situations, then when they have struggles in their marriage as we all do, they have temptation with weak females right in front of them.

    I sense a “gleefulness” in those posting here that another “man” has been shown to be just another sinner like all the rest of the men out there. It has been shown that women start out respecting and honoring their husbands until they find out they have a sin nature and sin.

    Instead we should be mourning the black eye it gives the Church that this could have gone unnoticed in a Church by their senior teaching elder. Yes, they handled this correctly.

    Like

  35. Considering this is a website for abused women you all might need to get out of the echo chamber for a while.
    Christian Marriages can’t all be failing because of men.
    Wives can say horrible things and drive men to fits of anger. It would be nice if all men exhibited self-control under such situations just like it would be nice if wives did not say horrible things.
    I have never physically cheated on my wife in 20 years of marriage, by Gods grace, but we have fallen in and out of love and had lots of difficulties. Marriage is tough and those who say it isn’t have not been married or are on their second and third marriages.
    Men cheat physically on their wives and women cheat emotionally by not giving all of themselves to their husbands. Husbands denying their wives love/sacrifice and wives denying their husbands respect/honor is cheating themselves of all the great potential God put into marriage.
    I need to go love my wife more from just writing that!

    Like

  36. Well, there were a lot of left turns in all of that. Paul doesn’t really address the David and his son point, which was about a rape and coverup without even getting into debunking this bathsheba stuff. Abortion is a left turn. Equal in marriage and equal in person are different things (although I believe we are both). The most recent post is classic ‘men only hit women because they are ‘driven’ to it so obvs it’s their fault’ which we know is bunk because physical abuse is part of a pattern of control. Paul probably thinks coercive control is ‘godly’ though.

    But this is the one I want to address:

    Paul: He concluded that without headship and honor in the marriage there was no point in men marrying as they could get sex from prostitutes and provide for themselves quite nicely.

    What an incredibly sad view of men and marriage in general this is. Without being in “charge” men can’t benefit from a partnership, companionship, love? What do women get out of all this, exactly? They get to be a prostitute with a permanent boss and do the housework too? Fun.

    Of course, as we discussed in the single thread, it’s actually men who do benefit from marriage, physically they live longer and are happier. Women often do not benefit in the same ways. So this is not at all supported.

    Like

  37. Men dont need to get married to have sex

    Um, neither do women? And we don’t have to seek out prostitutes either.

    This is really only a threat if you think women don’t like sex. Seems like their are a lot more men upset about all this than women.

    Like

  38. Just to clarify, to date, I have not seen the words “complimentary roles” within the original texts of our Holy Scriptures.

    The vain philosophies of mankind have thus, polluted the purity of the teachings of Jesus Christ into proverbial hierarchal kingdoms on this earth. To read and understand the teachings and the Way of Christ within His context, it reveals a completely opposite way of life for those of us who choose to love and follow Him. When Jesus becomes the “pastor” of an individual’s life, the true “Head” of every individual, literally, becomes our LORD Jesus Christ.

    And when I choose to go and give blood at the local blood mobile, from my understanding, the “gender” of the blood cells makes no difference during the transfusion process. The process is a matter of life and death to suffering individuals; the gender, the “complimentary (?) role playing process,” nor any other “inclusive philosophies” of mankind, make any difference while one is sick and suffering unto the point of death. And there is no doubt in my mind, that a male or female, female or male specialist, can institute the transfusion process quite successfully, bringing life to the suffering patient.

    Back in Jesus’ day, He made those “religionists-Pharisees-legalists” quite angry with His teachings and His Way, as they plotted to kill our Master/Good Shepherd/Savior……and He is still making those same folks today, equally angry/depraved with their “complementarian(?)” worldly ways.

    There is nothing new under this sun. (Not my philosophy here…..totally Scriptural)

    Like

  39. “You cannot blame a man for the actions taken by a women to abort her child.”

    “To say that a wife or husband has nothing to do with the sin that either would commit leading to adultery is absurd. It is either the lack of something or the introduction of something in a marriage that leads to its downfall.”

    So, which is it? or… do you just want to find a way to make women culpable for everything.

    As far as scriptural support: “There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” (Gal 3:28)

    Like

  40. “Men cheat physically on their wives and women cheat emotionally by not giving all of themselves to their husbands.”

    I think that says it all. Jesus said, “If anyone comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters—yes, even their own life—such a person cannot be my disciple.” (Luke 14:26)

    This is complementary theology – that the wife who holds back from her husband that which should be given to God alone is “not giving all”. Are you her husband or her god?

    Like

  41. Paul – You’re going round and round all over the place. Let’s come back to the point of the post that lead you to comment.

    Stephen Bratton sexually molested a teenage relative for two years. He confessed what he did to his wife, who in turn went to her pastors for help. They reported him to the police.

    In Texas, clergy are mandated reporters, so the pastor did the right thing. The reason why this story has been highlighted on the blog is that we hear too many stories of pastors who do not report and protect children. We are commending this church for doing the right thing – which I would hope you would as well. Your Spidey “sense of gleefulness” is off here. We grieve for children who are abused. We grieve over sin such as this that is in the world.

    According to Texas penal code 22.011 (sexual assault), a child is defined as anyone under the age of 17. It doesn’t matter that you think children as young as 14 are ready to marry. Sexual assault of anyone under the age of 17 is a criminal offense. You can’t work around the law. And, Texas law is very clear on the definition of sexual assault (if you’d like I can list those out), so our “echo chamber” is not reading into anything that Bratton did or what you think society wrongfully deems as sexual abuse.

    Why are you so focused on “the sin of Adam?” This has nothing to do with what Bratton or the church reporting him. Why are you so focused on Christian marriages? This has nothing to do with what Bratton or the church reporting him did. In your opinion, should Bratton be held accountable for his sin? Or, since we all sin, should he just be forgiven and free to do as he pleases? What does David, Bathsheba, or Jezebel have to do with what Bratton and the church did? I’ll answer that — nothing, absolutely nothing!

    My point here is that you’re spending all this time and energy going round and round on topics that have nothing to do with Bratton sexually assaulting a minor and the church following the law and reporting him to protect the child.

    Liked by 1 person

  42. So, which is it? or… do you just want to find a way to make women culpable for everything.

    Pst, Mark. You’ve cracked the (not so) secret code. Please collect 200 Dollars 😉

    Like

  43. P.S. Paul – I love that you think our response to you are “vitriolic.” Please stop reading into what people are writing. No one here is being cruel to you. I’ll give you some grace in that perhaps you’re not used to having your ideas challenged. Or, perhaps your ideas are always challenged and you just don’t like that. Either way, fee free to keep commenting, but know we’ll keep responding.

    Like

  44. Yep, Mark and Lea.
    All this ranting and raving from Paul is nothing more than a long winded, Adam blaming Eve “the woman that Thou gavest me” tirade.
    It appears that Paul is more interested in placing blame and putting women down than in real, biblical solutions. He’s more interested in zeroing in on a smattering of misinterpreted scriptures that appear to give him authority over another. He is only interested in a few trees, the rest of the Bible forest be d@mned because those parts don’t support his ego and prop up his desired position of authority.

    Like

  45. The vitriolic response here makes me think I touched a nerve amongst the feminist crowd.

    Well, yes. That’s what happens when you post rank nonsense and display your ignorance of the dynamics of abuse. Especially in the presence of people who’ve actually been through abuse, or who’ve studied it. Show us that you know what you’re talking about, and people won’t have to call you out.

    There are so many examples in your comments, but it all started when you implicitly blamed Bratton’s wife for the crimes that he committed. That’s complete and utter tripe — no one made Bratton rape a teenager, regardless of anything his wife did or failed to do. You then went on to explicitly blame women who suffer domestic abuse, thusly:

    Wives can say horrible things and drive men to fits of anger. It would be nice if all men exhibited self-control under such situations…

    No, no, no, and no. I’d write ‘no’ out a thousand more times if I thought it would help. Abusive behaviour is never caused by its victim. It always comes from within the abuser, and is born of a mentality of entitlement and a desire to exert control. No one can make another person take on these evil attitudes.

    You also tried picking on Bathsheba, of all people.

    …she was quite capable of bathing nude on her roof in view of the palace so that tells me she was at the least an indiscreet girl and most likely flirty in the worst way.

    Read the passage, at least, Paul. It says that David was on the roof, not Bathsheba. And depending on how high the palace roof was, he could very well have played Peeping Tom without any help.

    Additionally, you seem to understand nothing about the law…

    It almost sounds like we are wanting to call this rape as if he forced her? I have not heard that stated by any of the legal information.

    Rape is not defined by the presence of physical force, or by threats of violence. It’s defined by the absence of consent. Legally, minors cannot consent to sex with an adult. Ipso, ergo and therefore, Bratton raped that girl.

    And, just because I have to finish somewhere before I go to bed, you seem utterly confused about the purpose of Julie Anne’s blog. It is not simply for abused women. It’s for abused people, and its focus is primarily spiritual abuse, although the content of articles often overlaps with abuse of other kinds.

    Your consistent victim blaming here, and your attempt to use the Bible to back it up, might very well meet the definition of spiritual abuse. That’s why you’re getting so much pushback here, in addition to your blatant ignorance. Seriously, Paul, if you’re going to parade your complete lack of understanding in the face of people who actually know their stuff, what kind of reaction do you expect?

    Liked by 1 person

  46. It says that David was on the roof, not Bathsheba.

    Hey SKIJ! You are absolutely right. It also says explicitly that at the time kings go off to war David was chilling in the palace and that the thing ‘DAVID’ did is what displeased God. These guys don’t even read the bible they claim to care so much about.

    Like

  47. Something interesting… At the Valued conference, Justin Holcomb mentioned that at his seminary when he started, most of the incoming students interpreted David/Bathsheba as being consensual sex and caused by her “immodesty”. Now, he said, most of the students interpret that passage as “sexual abuse by a person of trust”.

    Lea, also, David sleeping around when the soldiers were at war is contrasted to Uriah, who righteously refused to sleep at his own house when he was a soldier at war.

    One of the key words in the passage is “took”. This is used in many accounts, especially in Genesis, to signify the use of force or threat. Eve “took” the apple. Lamech “took” two wives. The sons of god (the mighty) “took” wives from the sons of men. Nathan said “You struck down Uriah the Hittite with the sword and took his wife to be your own.”

    Like

  48. “Something interesting… At the Valued conference, Justin Holcomb mentioned that at his seminary when he started, most of the incoming students interpreted David/Bathsheba as being consensual sex and caused by her “immodesty”. Now, he said, most of the students interpret that passage as “sexual abuse by a person of trust”.

    Hmmmm….Liberalism (feminism) creeping into seminaries, nothing new there.
    So by this definition if Bathsheba has no blame for bathing on the roof of her house and drawing David’s attention then you are part of the look but don’t touch crowd that ignores the teachings of Paul on being a temptation to your fellow Christian brothers/sisters?
    Females stripping down to their panties and bra (that’s what bikinis are) and going to the beach with males should elicit no different response from males? So why wouldn’t we dress that way at Church if its no different? What am I saying, lots of females at Church do dress that way.
    Hypocrisy, Hypocrisy, Hypocrisy. Females and the males that support them on this sexually immoral path are going to answer for the temptation they have caused to men.
    Once again back to Joseph in a similar authority position and he fled. Bathsheba could have fled.
    Seems to me that this absolution from responsibility for the female behaviour in abortions or adultery being displayed here is no different than the #MeToo movements outrage at the “casting couch”. They want the benefits from their actions but decry any responsibility. For shame!!

    Like

  49. “P.S. Paul – I love that you think our response to you are “vitriolic.” Please stop reading into what people are writing. No one here is being cruel to you. I’ll give you some grace in that perhaps you’re not used to having your ideas challenged. Or, perhaps your ideas are always challenged and you just don’t like that. Either way, fee free to keep commenting, but know we’ll keep responding.”

    There is a lot being said about the Saul Alinsky tactics being used by the Left today to project the very things the Left is doing onto the Right. (Democrats to Republicans)
    I am not the least surprised at the response I am getting nor am I cowed by your response.
    I do believe that you are projecting onto me the very things you are doing Lea?
    Many people are afraid of confrontation and so the elephant in the room gets larger.
    The bottom line to this conversation is that unless a women or man is forced into marriage it takes two to tangle and women by their nature can be very bitter and vindictive. (girl fights at school were nothing like boys fights) No marriage ever ended because one person was doing all that Christ required of them while the other person was completely in the wrong.

    Like

  50. “Why are you so focused on “the sin of Adam?” This has nothing to do with what Bratton or the church reporting him. Why are you so focused on Christian marriages? This has nothing to do with what Bratton or the church reporting him did. In your opinion, should Bratton be held accountable for his sin? Or, since we all sin, should he just be forgiven and free to do as he pleases? What does David, Bathsheba, or Jezebel have to do with what Bratton and the church did? I’ll answer that — nothing, absolutely nothing!”

    I am not sure what you are so upset about as conversation by its nature leads to further conversation and has roots in other areas. I do not believe these discussions are as isolated as you make them out to be and some discussions have led to discussion threads of their own.

    Let me sum up.
    I believe Stephen Bratton deserves the full penalty of the law in Texas.
    I believe Stephen Bratton had sex with a minor.
    I believe the Elders did the right thing in excommunicating him based on the evidence we are not privy too.

    Anything else you need to clarify?

    As for the other discussions they are on their own merit and pertain to many of the marital issues that were at play in this situation. You would be in denial if you think Stephen Bratton’s wife played no part in the state of their marriage that provided opportunity for this situation to arise.
    I think of King David dancing before the Ark of the Covenant and being publicly scoffed at by his wife Michael (Saul’s daughter – his first wife?) I imagine that lack of honor & respect would leave a wound on any man. Probably led to a dysfunctional bitter relationship between them, maybe even caused David to look for another wife. (I believe he had about 8)
    You pick who is too blame I will just say that dysfunction or lack of love, honor, respect in a marriage that leads to infidelity has deep roots and is not one sided.
    Had Stephen Bratton committed adultery with an adult would it make it easier for you to see this more clearly?

    Like

  51. “This is complementary theology – that the wife who holds back from her husband that which should be given to God alone is “not giving all”. Are you her husband or her god?”

    If you give to your spouse in marriage you are honoring God. God is very displeased with failed marriages.
    Since marriage is an antitype of the relationship Christ has with His Church no spouse should hold back anything from each other. So if your husband or wife sins (non-adultery) do you get the recourse to not have to honor your marriage commitment? I think Jesus telling a believing wife that she should stay with her unsaved husband because by her conduct she may win him to Christ goes a long way in establishing the “bonds” of matrimony over self.
    We do not do near enough training of our young people to be established in their understanding of Christ Biblically before they get married. They should be sitting down and going over all these scriptures on marriage to determine what they each believe. I would consider two people unequally yoked if they did not believe the same fundamentals on male spiritual headship in the home or till death do us part.
    Women who have brought feminist ideals of having equal authority in marriage into the Church have done themselves a great disservice. Just look at the state of sexual immorality & delayed maturity in our young men and women. Women want a “mans man” they can follow to the “gates of hell” but they don’t understand that to get that kind of man they actually have to submit and follow him, warts and all. (with lots of prayer for him)

    Like

  52. Well. There are some more hot takes.

    I do believe that you are projecting onto me the very things you are doing Lea?

    That was Kathi you are responding to.

    No marriage ever ended because one person was doing all that Christ required of them while the other person was completely in the wrong.

    This is 100% incorrect. It takes two to have a good relationship but only one to mess it up. It would be nice if we all had control over other peoples actions and could make them act decently just because we do but that simply isn’t the case.

    Women want a “mans man” they can follow to the “gates of hell”

    Eh, not really. More like kind, loving, intelligent, respectful…

    to get that kind of man they actually have to submit and follow him, warts and all.

    Honestly, this sounds like a bad deal to me. Nevermind that it’s wrong for most men worth ‘getting’, your theory is that to get a ‘mans man’ [whatever that is] you have to give up all autonomy even if he sucks? I suggest you avoid sales as a career if that’s your pitch.

    PS please actually read the david/bathsheba story sometime.

    Like

  53. Paul: “Women who have brought feminist ideals of having equal authority in marriage into the Church have done themselves a great disservice. Just look at the state of sexual immorality & delayed maturity in our young men and women. Women want a “mans man” they can follow to the “gates of hell” but they don’t understand that to get that kind of man they actually have to submit and follow him, warts and all. (with lots of prayer for him)”

    So many false and unsubstantiated assumptions. Women who want to be free of the oppressive and false doctrine of male headship are not doing themselves a disservice. But they sure are making men angry. At least the men who want to be the little dictators of their homes..

    So all this sexual immorality has nothing to do with all the pornography Hugh Hefner (and men like him) started publishing back in the 50s, before internet, before the sexual revolution? All that money the Hugh and company were making back in the day from all the money all those men were spending on all that porn is the fault of women? Yes. It started way back then. The objectifying of women in advertising by all the ad companies run by all those men is another thing that helped to opened the flood gates. And yet, you want to lay the blame at the feet of women, alone? You are so far off it is laughable.

    Who told you that women want a “man’s man” they can follow to the gates of hell? Have you been watching too many Hollywood action/adventure movies written and produce by men for men to determine what women want?

    And I can’t tell you how many women that I have met that have listened to the headship doctrine, submitted to and followed their husbands, warts and all, praying for them etc, only to have the whole thing come crashing down anyway. Either the warts turned out to be genital herpes because her husband was screwing around on her, or she submitted to his controlling impulses and it just made him more controlling and abusive as time went on, or he led them to absolute financial ruin, or…. I could go on and on. But this comment is already way too long.

    You think all the world’s problems are because women won’t submit? You are so misguided and you miss seeing so many other things that were stewing and brewing long before women finally got a belly full of being used, abused, silenced, and disregarded.

    Like

  54. Women who want to be free of the oppressive and false doctrine of male headship are not doing themselves a disservice. But they sure are making men angry. At least the men who want to be the little dictators of their homes..

    Nicely said, Mara! And thumbs to the rest of your comment. Just imagine thinking that immorality is both new and the fault of women entirely? You have to have zero grasp of history to think these things. No wonder they try so hard to shift the blame from men who have done wrong in the bible, as they cheerfully discount the 2k years since then as irrelevant, at least until ‘feminists’ came alone to ruin everything. You’re right, it’s utterly laughable. Have these men ever read either a history book or even a historical novel of any kind? Amazing what you can learn about the capriciousness of a patriarchal system where women are dependent on men from people like Austen and the Bronte’s.

    Like

  55. Lea “Have these men ever read either a history book?”

    I suspect that many of them have. But because they like the idea of being boss, it’s okay by them. And instead of understanding the importance of having empathy for those who have suffered under oppression, it is important to them to maintain the status quo, at least the one that puts them on top and puts others beneath them. Because, like the pharisees of old, they love the best seats in their homes and in the churches.

    Speaking of history, one of the most eye opening things I ever watched in an historical drama was one concerning the Tudors. It was bone-chilling to watch King Henry VIII rant about the natural and ‘biblical’ order of things and about his subjects losing sight of their positions and of his (Henry’s) divine right to rule as a king. It sounded an awful lot like men today ranting about the natural order that places men over women and women losing sight of that natural and ‘biblical’ order and rebelling against the divine right of husbands to rule over them.

    History shows how men finally got tired of kings oppressing them and therefore set up democracies..But it’s funny how some of these same men, who want democracy and equality for themselves, get all indignant and bent out of shape when women ask for the same things.

    Like

  56. Ah yes. That desire to keep someone stuffed in their place re-occurs in different contexts throughout history but it comes from the same root ultimately.

    I saw a great quote going around recently referencing this in the context of black and white but now I can’t find it ugh. It was basically that if black people have to be lesser to make white people feel more, that is a problem with white people. I think that’s mimic’d in gender as well.

    Like

  57. I definetely see that this a site for hurt, abused women.
    I think you would all be better off in a Church that follows Christs teaching than venting at everyone or feeding off other hurt people who come on here. Christs bride is the Church not social media.
    Gotta go but it’s been enlightening.

    Like

  58. Paul, “If you give to your spouse in marriage you are honoring God. God is very displeased with failed marriages. Since marriage is an antitype of the relationship Christ has with His Church no spouse should hold back anything from each other.”

    So, the church obeys and worships Christ, therefore your wife should obey and worship you. I don’t see how you’re contradicting my statement that complementary theology is idolatrous.

    “Females stripping down to their panties and bra (that’s what bikinis are) and going to the beach with males should elicit no different response from males?”

    No, I think respect is required regardless of what the woman is wearing or not wearing. It’s the Pharisees that pointed at the “sinners” and said that people hanging around with them were immoral. I’m sure the prostitutes of Jesus’s day wore “immodest” clothing, too, but I don’t remember Jesus saying anything about that.

    “There is a lot being said about the Saul Alinsky tactics being used by the Left today to project the very things the Left is doing onto the Right.”

    This is just juvenile Tweedle-Dee Tweedle-Dum partisanship. When Obama wanted to raise the debt ceiling, the Republicans projected themselves as fiscal conservatives. When George W. wanted to raise the debt ceiling, the Democrats projected themselves as fiscal conservatives. It’s not a matter of wanting to reduce the budget, but a matter of what gets the highest priority.

    “We do not do near enough training of our young people to be established in their understanding of Christ Biblically before they get married.”

    It probably doesn’t take much training. I think you’ve taken a lesson from Nebuchadnezzar… “As soon as you hear the sound of the horn, flute, zither, lyre, harp, pipe and all kinds of music, you must fall down and worship the image of gold that King Nebuchadnezzar has set up. Whoever does not fall down and worship will immediately be thrown into a blazing furnace.”

    Of course… that image in complementarianism is the golden penis.

    Like

  59. That’s all you’ve got as a response Paul?
    When the history of immorality and a few of it’s major, male players are all laid out before you exposing the flaws and gaping holes in your theology and world view, your only response is a weak, “Y’all need Jesus.”?

    Did you completely miss the part where I told you that I have met and dealt with many women who went to the kinds of churches you talk about that preached the kind of Jesus you worship. They were chewed up and spit out. It was those kinds of churches that wounded so many of these women. And your best response is to tell those women, wounded by your kind of church, to just go back to the place of their deep wounding?

    You are worse than the priest and the Levite who left the man bleeding and dying on the Jericho Road. They at least had the good graces to cross to the other side of the road and made a wide circle around the wounded. You, on the other hand, go to the wounded, tell them they are wounded, tell them that it’s their fault they are wounded, and tell them to go back to the robbers that left them that way in the first place. There is no oil or wine in your dealing with the wounded. Only judgement and scapegoating.

    It might surprise you to know that I agree with you that Jesus is interested in healing the wounded. But there is bad doctrine in so many of our churches. Instead of healing, these churches give women bitter waters to drink and call it sweet. You are doing the same thing.

    Unfortunately your little visit here has not enlightened you in anyway that is helpful to the true cause of Christ. You know, things like being a good Samaritan to help the wounded and make churches a safer place for them to heal.

    Like

  60. I definetely see that this a site for hurt, abused women.

    I always find it fascinating when men do these drive bys and then dismiss the site in this way, because it’s certainly no the first time. Not everyone here is a woman or has been abused and he really has no idea what anyones story is because he hasn’t bothered to find out. But he thinks any focus on abuse means we can all be dismissed in this way. He is writing everyone off as both women and damaged, which of course means he cannot respect us or treat us as equals.

    It’s part of this annoying gendered attempts to dismiss fundamental disagreement about important things as ‘anger’ and in this case I suppose ‘hurt’.

    No wonder abuse victims are so consistently dismissed and further hurt in churches like his. This is ultimately what disrespect for women leads to. Sad. I hope everyone trapped in these types of places (which are certainly far from a ‘Church that follows Christs teaching’ if they treat people like this!) knows there are other places to go and legitimately caring people to be found in the world.

    Like

  61. than venting at everyone

    Also LMAO at the idea that Paul didn’t just spent about 20 long comments ‘venting at everyone’ about all his feelings.

    Like

  62. @Paul Bryce,
    Since you are drawing your own personal conclusions based on your own opinions, I have often asked this question concerning the topic of “feminism.”

    Precisely, what is the “definition” of feminism, for I have not witnessed a definite, clear and concise answer to my question. Many have tried to define it, and the definitions vary from individual to individual, but there seems to be no one clear answer that hits the nail squarely on the head. And since “feminism” is often blamed for the “fall” of mankind’s sin, I believe it should be clearly defined so as to defend a woman’s honor.

    In my heart, which belongs to Christ, I do not personally believe in the “feminism” theory that these “discernment ministries” and unbelievers alike, rant and rave about, using it as a tool to hammer a certain people group into submission (that would be women). How sad it is that visible “christianity” is a mere reflection of many of the pagan religions they condemn.

    Like

  63. Hi Katy!

    When in doubt, we can always go to the dictionary for feminism as “the advocacy of women’s rights on the basis of the equality of the sexes.” That works for me.

    I know it’s generally a bad idea to accept definitions of a movement from people who come in with pretty clear biases against it, and in this case, an entire sex which might benefit from equality.

    Like

  64. In respect to feminism I do believe the issues I see of women trying to be men, or to take the power they perceive men have over them, in many respects is covered by the dictionary definition term of equality already posted.

    Eve was created as a companion a compliment to Adam. She was created from a physical part of Adam. Her desire is for her husband in marriage.
    These things are clear from scripture, full stop. However, sin nature now comes into play and we have “the battle of the sexes”.

    The UN recognizes that the family unit (nuclear/male-female) is the most efficient form of creating societies. If God gave Adam headship he must have equipped him with certain knowledge & skills to do the task, skills and knowledge he did not equip women with. Unless you think God just forgot?
    Feminism as defined by women’s desire to have power over men has been reinvigorated in the 20th century in America. (1920’ish with the “flapper” culture)
    The end result of that has been the incredible decline in marriages and the rise of homosexuality. (Sexual immorality)

    Secular culture has written many articles about the growing hate between the sexes at college level. Both men and women can be heinous sinners and marriages require lots of work and prayer. Women are tripping over themselves to blame something else for the obvious mess out families are in but history shows a pattern of this from many other failed societies.

    To cool off the anger boiling over from women reading this let me say that how we got to the point of women feeling the need for this power grab could be blamed on original sin or else men need to take a long hard look at whether they were loving their wives as Christ loved the Church.

    Like

  65. Paul Bryce,
    I do not nor have I ever identified as a “feminist,” but I still disagree with your views and consider you to be sexist.

    The conservative Christian church – not feminism so much – has played a role in declining marriage rates, and they do not respect adult celibacy.

    Paul said:
    “The UN recognizes that the family unit (nuclear/male-female) is the most efficient form of creating societies.”

    The Christian church has turned the family unit / marriage / natalism into idols.

    The Bible says in 1 Cor 7 it is better not to marry, that it is better to be single, and as the Bible calls single adults to celibacy, they will not be pro-creating and having children.

    The Bible does not teach that “society” will or can be saved by marriage, the family, or children (a pro natalism mindset). The Bible says each individual is a sinner, and the only “fix” for that is accepting Jesus as Savior, not getting married or having children.

    Paul said,
    “To cool off the anger boiling over from women reading this let me say that how we got to the point of women feeling the need for this power grab”

    Complementarian Christian men horde power, which goes against what the Bible teaches, as you do.

    Complementarian Christians wrongly believe it is God’s design for men to have power over women, but that contradicts what Jesus said, when Jesus said to his believers you shall not Lord authority over one another. (Matthew 20:25 – 26)

    Paul said,
    “Secular culture has written many articles about the growing hate between the sexes at college level.”

    That hatred would come from male incels,
    who wrongly believe they are all entitled to any and all women they want, and if they don’t get female attention or sex and dates with women, they will take guns or cars and kill women.
    That mindset and behavior is due in part to patriarchy in our culture, not to feminism.

    Also, you should read this paper:
    _Perhaps feminism is not the enemy_

    Like

  66. Is this a serious discussion board?

    “It is better not to marry”.

    With that logic being applied to the early Christian Church and society then mankind would have died off in a hundred years of Christs death.

    The ideal “is to marry”. And single individuals are to connect with families not live single lives.

    Paul

    Like

  67. Paul Bryce said,
    “The ideal “is to marry”. And single individuals are to connect with families not live single lives.”

    At this point, I now suspect you are likely trolling, and if this were my blog, I’d ban you.

    Was I mistaken in thinking you identified as being a Christian? I thought you said above you are a Christian and you presumably believe what the Bible says, yes?

    The Bible says (see this link for 1 Cor 7), excerpted:

    — start excerpt —
    “Now for the matters you wrote about: “It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman.”

    …Now to the unmarried[a] and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I do.

    ..Now about virgins: I have no command from the Lord, but I give a judgment as one who by the Lord’s mercy is trustworthy. 26 Because of the present crisis, I think that it is good for a man to remain as he is. 27 Are you pledged to a woman? Do not seek to be released. Are you free from such a commitment? Do not look for a wife.
    28 But if you do marry, you have not sinned; and if a virgin marries, she has not sinned. But those who marry will face many troubles in this life, and I want to spare you this.
    —end excerpts from 1 Cor 7 —

    As you can see via what apostle Paul wrote, he was not advising anyone to marry and/or to have children. Paul was saying the idea was to remain single, and hence celibate and childless.

    The apostle was actually encouraging people (specifically believers) to not marry.

    He did say getting married was not a sin, but he said singleness was better / preferable to marriage.

    What you have been saying is in direct contradistinction to what the Bible teaches, so you are supporting error and heresy.

    Churches do not want single adults, so single adults cannot “connect with families.” (See the book “Quitting Church” by author Julia Duin for more on that.)

    Also, many Christians practice something called the “Billy Graham Rule,” where they teach married men and women to NOT associate with single adult women, because they erroneously assume all single adult women want to have sex with married men, even though that is not true.

    Mostly, married people have affairs with other married people, single adults are not sexual predators seeking to sleep with married people.

    Like

  68. More from Apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 7, showing that the Bible considers singleness and childlessness the ideal, especially for Christians, rather than marriage and having children:

    _1 Corinthians 7_

    —start 1 Cor 7 excerpts —
    32 I would like you to be free from concern.
    An unmarried man is concerned about the Lord’s affairs—how he can please the Lord. 33 But a married man is concerned about the affairs of this world— how he can please his wife—
    34 and his interests are divided.
    An unmarried woman or virgin is concerned about the Lord’s affairs: Her aim is to be devoted to the Lord in both body and spirit. But a married woman is concerned about the affairs of this world—how she can please her husband.
    35 I am saying this for your own good, not to restrict you, but that you may live in a right way in undivided devotion to the Lord.
    —-end excerpts—-

    Listen to apostle Paul, who advised singleness over marriage, not Paul Bryce, who is sharing a Marriage Idolatry / Nuclear Family Idolatry.

    Like

  69. Paul Bryce is still spreading error.
    Paul B. wrote,
    ” If a Father attended Church with his children it was 80% likely that would continue attending Church when they grew up. If mom only attended Church with them it was something like 20% likely they would stay in Church as adults.”
    — end Paul B comments —-

    That study has been debunked, and it’s from the 1990s (it’s out-dated).
    This is based on a new study:
    _Moms Are Influencing Children for Christ. Dads? Not So Much, Survey Finds by M. Foust_

    Like

  70. Paul Bryce said,
    In the case of Stephen Bratton he will answer for adultery in his marriage and for breaking the law in sex with a minor.
    But beyond that we can be certain that they did not have a healthy marriage sexually for these things to have manifest themselves the way they did.
    Obviously communication and intimately knowing each other was lacking.
    —end Paul comments —

    Pedophilia cannot be healed, cured, or ‘put aside’ by the pedophile having sexual relations with another adult, no more than men who have Zoophilia can be cured of their sexual attraction to dogs and horses by having sex with human women / a wife / human woman.
    You reveal a profound ignorance about pedophiles and how they operate and what drives them.

    If someone has an alcohol addiction, having sex with a spouse is not going to cause them to stop craving the alcohol.

    Like

  71. Paul Bryce said,
    “Hmmmm….Liberalism (feminism) creeping into seminaries, nothing new there.”
    — end Paul B quote —

    Not only am I not a feminist – nor have I ever identified as one – I’m also not a Liberal.

    I’ve been a conservative over my entire life. I used to be a member of the Republican Party. I’ve never been a Democrat.

    All the Presidents I’ve voted for thus far have been Republicans.

    And Paul, you are still very, very wrong on a great many topics in this thread, especially about marriage, women, men, and sex.

    signed,
    someone who is a conservative and non-feminist

    Like

  72. Paul Bryce said,

    — start Paul B quote —
    Since marriage is an antitype of the relationship Christ has with His Church no spouse should hold back anything from each other.
    —end Paul B quote —

    Actually, singleness signifies and represents one’s relationship with God more so and more purely than marriage does or ever can,
    for Jesus said in the afterlife, people will not marry or be given away for marriage.
    Jesus said (_Matthew 22:30_),

    “At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven”

    Jesus himself never married and never had children.

    When Jesus was asked did He not want to talk to his (biological) mother and (biological) brothers, Jesus replied (Matthew 12:46-50),
    — start biblical excerpt —
    Someone told him, “Your mother and brothers are standing outside, wanting to speak to you.”

    48 He replied to him, “Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?” 49 Pointing to his disciples, he said, “Here are my mother and my brothers. 50 For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother.”
    — end excerpt —

    From Luke 14:26, Jesus Christ speaking:

    — start biblical excerpt —
    If anyone comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters—yes, even their own life—such a person cannot be my disciple.
    — end biblical excerpt —

    As you can see from such passages,
    Jesus of Nazareth did not share your Nuclear Family Idolatry or your Marriage Idolatry, Paul Bryce.

    Like

  73. Paul said: “In respect to feminism I do believe the issues I see of women trying to be men, or to take the power they perceive men have over them, “

    What exactly are you talking about here?

    P: “Eve was created as a companion a compliment to Adam. She was created from a physical part of Adam. Her desire is for her husband in marriage. These things are clear from scripture, full stop. However, sin nature now comes into play and we have “the battle of the sexes”.”

    No, they are not clear from scripture. There are many different interpretations of this.

    P: “To cool off the anger boiling over from women reading this let me say that how we got to the point of women feeling the need for this power grab could be blamed on original sin or else men need to take a long hard look at whether they were loving their wives as Christ loved the Church.”

    Again, it’s not about power grab, it’s about equality – unless you are making the assumption that all leadership positions should be male, then I can see why you are saying this. If that is what you believe, I believe you have a very low view of women.

    I sense that you think headship means to “rule over.” You are wrong. It is not a position of authority. https://web.archive.org/web/20190522071851/https://www.cbeinternational.org/resources/article/other/i-believe-male-headship

    P: “Feminism as defined by women’s desire to have power over men has been reinvigorated in the 20th century in America.”

    Wrong. Feminism is about equality. I’ve never met one woman who wants to have power over men. You must be listening to the nonsense from men’s rights groups.

    P: “The end result of that has been the incredible decline in marriages and the rise of homosexuality.”

    I disagree. The end result is women finally having the courage to leave abusive marriages. There is no rise in homosexuality. It’s always been, always will be.

    Liked by 1 person

  74. Oh, goody! Paul is back! And here I thought he’d left for good.

    I was actually hoping to ask you a few questions, Paul. Based on your words so far, I’m very curious how you would answer.

    Bathsheba could have fled.

    So if Bathsheba was even partly to blame for David’s actions, then why did the prophet Nathan confront only David, and not her?

    My 21 year old, otherwise modest, daughter likes to suntan her legs in our front yard and she has heard from her dad more than once that her foolish behaviour could have unintended consequences.

    So exactly what “unintended consequences” are you afraid of here?

    Seems to me that this absolution from responsibility for the female behaviour in abortions or adultery being displayed here is no different than the #MeToo movements outrage at the “casting couch”.

    And do you feel that Rachael Denhollander also carries some responsibility for being molested by Larry Nassar at the age of 14? Are you under the impression that she enticed him somehow?

    Please answer whenever you like. I await your “biblical” answers with bated breath.

    Like

  75. Oh, goody! Paul is back!

    Right? We’re all thrilled 😉

    women trying to be men

    @Paul, this is such nonsense. Women aren’t trying to be men, they are women trying to be HUMAN, which includes a broad spectrum of characteristics that some men seem to have decided belong only to themselves. I’ve never seen women trying to be men by being feminists.

    or to take the power they perceive men have over them

    I love how you’re trying say this power is only ‘perception’ while at the same time thinking women should just accept that men have power over them and be happy about it, even if they are treated poorly. Because, iirc, you mentioned earlier they only deserve to be treated well if they allow men to have power over them in whatever ways men chose. I dont think i saw an answer as to why on earth women ought to accept such a raw deal in the first place. ‘Let men treat you however they want or else’ is not the grand marital selling point men seem to think it is.

    And thanks SKIJ for bringing up the daughter thing because i feel so sorry for her just trying to get some Vitamin D in her own yard and getting crap for it.

    Like

  76. Hi Daisy! Thank you for sharing that note about ‘who influenced your faith”. I found this result interesting:

    The study found that 68 percent of U.S. Christians who grew up with someone who influenced their faith say their mother’s faith impacted them. That was followed by the father (46 percent) and a grandparent (37 percent).

    This makes sense to me anecdotally with the fact that women are more likely to attend church in general and I have seen more men following their wives to church than the opposite. But nice to see a little data to counter the ‘man churchy’ narrative from folks like Paul.

    Like

  77. Paul,

    I have question.
    Are you of the Christian persuasion/thinking that there are no such things as brain disorders or personality disorders? You know, things like ADHD, Bi-Polar, Autism, Narcissistic Personality Disorder, etc?

    Just curious.

    Like

  78. Lea said,
    Hi Daisy! Thank you for sharing that note about ‘who influenced your faith”
    — end quote —

    You’re welcome.
    There is another site carrying the same or similar information, but I can’t recall where I saw it.

    It’s very popular for complementarian Christian men at complementarian meetings to keep quoting this, or to pose next to placards with the inaccurate claim on it about men leading families to Christ.
    They use this as propaganda to make their points.

    Which in a way is funny, because I’ve met complementarians who told me it was “wrong” or “unbiblical” for me to point out the context of why apostle Paul wrote what he wrote about women and marriage, etc.

    Some comps believe it’s wrong to quote or point to extra biblical sources to bolster their points, but you see these comp men quoting (inaccurate) studies saying it’s a man’s church attendance which saves the rest of his family.

    One comp guy at the other blog, who I referred to as “Flag Ken” told me that was “using extra biblical” sources, which he said was wrong, yet he went on to quote from extra biblical sources to try to defend HIS interpretation of the Bible about women, marriage, etc.

    See, I was doing nothing different from that guy, but he thought it was wrong when I did what he was doing.

    Anyway.
    I only skimmed over some of Paul’s B’s comments on this page.
    If I had the time (currently I do not have the time), and the inclination, I could’ve picked apart his posts in more detail.

    He has way too many sexist and bogus claims for me to be able to tackle. At least not now.

    Like

  79. Daisy: “If I had the time (currently I do not have the time), and the inclination, I could’ve picked apart his posts in more detail.”

    Glad you aren’t worrying too much about it. It is just the same old drivel.

    These poor guys seem to have only one tool in their tool box. The patriarchy hammer. And all the world’s problems are the feminist nail. Trying to boil the complicated mess of the human condition down to whether or not men and women are performing their prescribed (by patriarchy, not the Bible) roles is ridiculously simplistic. And they keep trying to force this issue when it has failed, time and time again. But they really like that hammer. That hammer give them Pharisaical power and prestige that they cling to a though it gives life when really it brings only death. It is about impossible to convince them that things might be a whole lot more complicated than their flawed and self-serving doctrine is capable of considering.

    Like

  80. These poor guys seem to have only one tool in their tool box. The patriarchy hammer. And all the world’s problems are the feminist nail.

    Nailed it 😉

    Like

  81. Paul said: “If God gave Adam headship he must have equipped him with certain knowledge & skills to do the task, skills and knowledge he did not equip women with.”

    Okay, that is a very compelling hypothesis. Let’s analyze this logically. IF God gave Adam headship, THEN he must have equipped.

    So, if the fabric of nature and our universe were designed with male headship, then we would see ALL men gifted with the ability to be the heads of their family. Yet, in practice, we see many men who are simply incapable of that. There are men who are born with degenerative diseases, there are men born with insufficient intelligence to ever be sufficiently mature, and there are men who have debilitating mental illnesses. There are also men who have things such as narcissistic personality disorder, which make them appear capable of being a loving head, but they are incapable of being loving. In fact, I’ve read many complementarian marriage books, and it is always assumed that men have the ability to love and lead their families, and I have seen pretty good evidence that this is not the case. If you google Sovereign Grace Ministries, there were fathers sexually preying on their daughters. Were those men you would claim to be equipped by God with superior knowledge and skills so as to be the heads of their families?

    All that to say that the “THEN” is not satisfied by all men, which leads to the conclusion that therefore, logically speaking, the “IF” is not true either. Since I do believe the scriptures to be inerrant, I have to then ask, does scripture really teach Adam’s headship – in the sense of Adam being the boss, or does it teach that Adam was the source of humanity?

    You may think that complementarianism/patriarchy is the simple truth of scripture – I did too – but I was only ever presented with straw-man arguments of the opposing view.

    Like

  82. Paul, “With that logic being applied to the early Christian Church and society then mankind would have died off in a hundred years of Christs death.”

    Interesting that you put logic above scripture here, but when it suits your purposes, you say “These things are clear from scripture, full stop.”

    I’m kinda confused because I thought you were trying to teach us what the Bible said, but here you are directly contradicting scripture because it seems illogical to you. Hmmm.

    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