The CBE Scroll

Blog voices from Christians for Biblical Equality

All’s Not Fair In “Love and War”

Filed under: Dating,Gender Equality,Marriage,Publications,Roles — Guest at 5:09 pm on Saturday, January 16, 2010

A book review by Anna and Ryan Snyder

This past fall, when we first learned John and Stasi Eldredge had written Love and War, a book on marriage, our initial reaction was negative, to say the least. Don’t get us wrong, we find the Eldredges’ desire to help people improve their marriages admirable. But having just finished re-reading large portions of Wild at Heart and Captivating, their books on men and women, respectively, we instinctively worried about the advice they would give. The Eldredges often claim God created men and women as almost complete opposites, and as a couple firmly committed to the idea that women and men have more similarities in their humanity than they do differences in their gender, we weren’t clamoring to see this type of approach applied to marriage.

The book, however, exceeded our expectations. At times, we actually found ourselves wanting to like it. Unfortunately, at its conclusion, the negatives still outweighed the positives.

Focusing largely on their own experiences, the Eldredges begin by asserting marriage is “fabulously hard” (p. 13). In fact, given that (1) men and women are complete opposites, (2) we are all broken people, and (3) Satan hates marriage, they say it is a “miracle of the first order” that any marriage makes it all (p. 14). However, despite these difficulties, marriage plays a crucial role in God’s story. We live in a world at war, they write, and God gives us marriage to provide us with companionship, and as a picture of his love. Thus, although marriage is excruciatingly hard, God is on our side.

With all this in mind the Eldredges proceed to discuss a number of important, marriage-related issues. From communication, to sex, to having a shared mission in one’s marriage, they offer input and advice, much of it helpful. For example, they explain how people’s brokenness contributes to problems with their spouse, and they encourage people to embrace the resulting conflict as a way of seeking transformation. Additionally, their discussion of the need for both spouses to seek fulfillment in Christ, rather than each other, was commendable. Much of their advice even borders on being pro-egalitarian; they advise a process of mutual decision-making and encourage couples to exercise authority together in matters of spiritual warfare.

However, despite its good points, we reluctantly found ourselves increasingly frustrated with the authors. Their extreme negativity about marriage was exhausting; a few of the more choice examples include comparing the exchanging of wedding vows to the special forces “vowing their lives to one another as they embark on a perilous mission in dark lands, the outcome of which remains quite uncertain,” (p. 4), and claiming “if you cannot admit the disappointment of your marriage, you have made an idol out of it,” (p. 67). They also resort to stereotypes, often attributing marital difficulties to irreconcilable differences between the genders. Sadly, by persuading men and women they are complete opposites and that marriage is almost impossible, they may well convince them their marriage is irreparable, the exact problem the authors are trying to correct.

The authors also treat Scripture carelessly, taking it out of context and providing incomplete quotations, without indicating they have done so. They use pop culture even more heavily than they use the Bible, reporting that human-made movies and stories prove how God intended the world to be. Also, throughout the book the Eldredges often muffle their own meaning with indirect, unstructured, and hard to follow writing. They are overly repetitive both with unclear and weakly constructed analogies and by restating nearly all of Wild at Heart and Captivating.

When we finished with the book, we were left wondering why our marriage is not as hard as the authors say it should be. We have never contemplated divorce, wondered whether we made a mistake in getting married, or threw our hands up in resignation to the fact that marriage is just so hard. While it is true we have only been married for roughly two years, according to the authors, we should have found ourselves wildly disappointed with our marriage by now, or even contemplating divorce, as they were at this point. Yet, while marriage is sometimes difficult, the overwhelming majority of the time we have found it to be better than we ever imagined.

So why do the authors insist marriage is so difficult? Has this been true of your marriage…or are we abnormal in experiencing a joyful and fulfilling marriage? (We doubt the latter is the case.) Why is everyone – Christians included – so down on marriage? Is this a self-fulfilling prophecy (the old ball and chain, etc.)? What causes divorce rates to hover at 50% both within the church and outside it? What are we missing?

88 Comments »

Comment by PSanafter-thought

January 17, 2010 @ 10:41 am

My marriage has been good except when we have gotten into our own selfishness. When we’ve learned to call each other out on this, things went from temporary tenseness to great. It sounds to me like these two people didn’t find a true soul-mate when they married but are making the best of a difficult situation. Too bad they can’t rejoice in their marriage.

Comment by Robyn

January 17, 2010 @ 11:04 am

“We have never contemplated divorce, wondered whether we made a mistake in getting married, or threw our hands up in resignation to the fact that marriage is just so hard.”

I’ve been married 9 years, and we’ve never done these things either. Sure, we’ve been angry at each other, been through some tough stuff (lost jobs, infertility, severe depression), but we have never questioned our love and committment to one another. But, then, we also have a very egalitarian marriage, and that may be part of the key.

In my opinion, many couples go into marriage with unrealistic expectations. Life is not easy, in general. It’s not a lifelong honeymoon. Being a grown-up is hard sometimes. But it’s not impossibly difficult or burdensome. Furthermore, the idea of a “soulmate” is very misleading. Marriage is a CHOICE; it is not fated. I have, however, seen many couples who have very dysfunctional communication patterns.

I generally avoid the pop-”Christian”-psychology marriage books. They are rarely helpful and often harmful. The one I really do like is The Five Love Languages.

Comment by Jasmine

January 17, 2010 @ 11:26 am

Agree with you, Robyn. I’m married barely 7 months, but mine is a marriage totally and prophetically orchestrated by God. For someone who was deathly afraid of marriage b/c of my parents’ divorce (after 20 yrs), grandparents’ divorce (also 20 yr in), and lack of good role models around, I am amazingly IN AWE of the goodness and fun of marriage. We also have an egalitarian marriage – wouldnt have married him otherwise, and my husband’s a Christian counselor, so that helps a bit. ;)

I agree with the unrealistic expectations thing. And the fact that in the younger generation esp, things are very me-focused. Bf’s and Gf’s are already sleeping together and setting up a pattern of failure for future commitment. Past Jentezen Franklin, whom I heard speak at Hillsong Conference this past yr says that we just give the total wrong picture/impression of what marriage should be. It’s not for personal pleasure, it’s for growth. If we look at it that way then we tackle every issue together instead of standing against each other.

Comment by Lin

January 17, 2010 @ 2:44 pm

“The authors also treat Scripture carelessly, taking it out of context and providing incomplete quotations, without indicating they have done so. They use pop culture even more heavily than they use the Bible, reporting that human-made movies and stories prove how God intended the world to be.”

This is why Eldridge is so popular. It is all fairy tale stuff and pop culture. It is the same reason the Venus and Mars stuff sold so well.

I think they are silly. Not all men want adventure or think of adventure. Some want to play chess. Eldridge has men in a vise that they have to prove their “manhood” in some way. Being wild at heart?

Not all women want to wait in their fairy tale castle with their ruffled gown waiting for the he man to come home and make her feel like a princess. (except when she is depressed. I got so sick of him talking about Stasi’s depression in the other books)

I see their viewpoints on gender and marriage as very shallow. Stuff like this hurts marriages. I could write a book about a great marriage and it would go like this:

Seek first the Kingdom of God and all these things will be given to you.

Comment by ls

January 17, 2010 @ 4:57 pm

“Seek first the Kingdom of God and all these things will be given to you”

I like ‘your book’ title, Lin, and agree with that ‘order’ as the ideal. Your thinking brings to my mind a few experiences and thoughts. First…marriage vows..not mine but those of a neighbor’s daughter…the two promising to always seek growth and forgiveness. I thought those words were very meaningful and will hopefully be applied to their lives.

Second,….a Beth Moore talk where she encouraged young women to seek God first, before marriage to work on important issues and awareness. I hope that young (and all) men are being encouraged this way also.

And then today on facebook….a friend’s status was a quote and thoughts from a movie “Penelope”…”it’s not the power of the curse but rather the power YOU GIVE THE CURSE” and then another idea she presented from the movie is ‘essentially that a mother apologizes for spending her life preparing her daughter for marriage instead of preparing her to live in her own skin’. I haven’t seen the movie but these ideas seem to have something in common with your book idea and I am looking forward to seeing the movie, not that movies are ‘the source’.

Comment by Deborah

January 17, 2010 @ 5:45 pm

This is a helpful and seemingly “fair” review, Anna–ty. I’d be interested to know some of the scriptures taken out of context.

LS, that movie does sound interesting. I’m also glad to hear Beth Moore exhorting young women that there may be issues to deal with personally before marriage and to focus on God, as she has so much influence. I’d never known a high percentage of women who would fit the “captivating” mold in their desires until moving to the south. A lot of the strength of gender polarity (as opposed to the much smaller and largely overlapping differences that science supports across cultures) is clearly mediated by culture. It still blows my mind to hear teens here so obsessively jealous of the young moms whose lives revolve around the home and husband. Up north, sure many women want to be alluring and romanced and might be eager for it sooner than later, but hormones aside, it’s generally somewhere far down a list of goals and aims, few of which involve leaning hard on a “hero” as opposed to developing themselves.

The clash in personality is harder in some marriage relationships than others, but I agree w/ those here who suspect that these expected polarities (and the shove toward our respective sides) only feed the difficulty, amplifying difference and making it harder to “meet” as you tune your heart to being the stereotype.

Comment by joanne

January 17, 2010 @ 6:22 pm

We passed our twenty-fifth anniversary last August and so far we’ve never discussed divorce, or seriously contemplated it. We hit some low spots, I’ll be honest. The first one was about money, we were in a very serious situation and I feared for the welfare of our children. The second one had come about because of his many business trips, and our difficulty in staying connected. The third overlapped the second, and stemmed from the church’s complementarian teaching on submission. These situations were very hard for us, and affected not only us but our children.

Thankfully, both of us were committed to our vows, and never forgot the reason why we married in the first place (God’s direct answer to prayer, our response of love to each other, and in Him).

I have met many women who have gone through much more awful experiences than mine. How could they have known, when they fell in love, then said “I do,” that matters would come to this – abandonment by their man for another woman, or another man; life with an addict (you name it, I’ve heard it all, gambling, sex, work, alcohol, drugs…), physical and/or psychological abuse, molestation and/or abuse of their children, and so on. Sin abounds.

I doubt I can take any credit for my incredibly good fortune. I happened to choose well, uncannily well, and I had no way of foretelling the future. He has continued to be a man of uncommonly fine character, a good man, faithful and true, Spirit filled. He has grown over the years, matured and deepened. He makes marriage a blessing. Plus he continues to be a hottie, which is just a bonus, if you ask me.

By the way, when we first got married we were egalitarian, but we didn’t know it. We didn’t even know that word. But the church we started attending, after a big move from the west to the east coast, taught complementarianism and an authoritarian approach to the church. That just about wrecked our marriage. Shedding that teaching, under cover so that we wouldn’t make waves, was one of the best things we ever did.

Hallelujah, God saves His own!!

Comment by Ryan & Anna

January 17, 2010 @ 8:14 pm

Deborah,

Here are a few examples of scripture being taken out of context. A disclaimer, we are no experts on interpretation, so it is possible they are correct on their interpretations, and we simply have never heard of them before.

On page 176 the authors quote Proverbs 30:18-19, which says “There are three things that are too amazing for me, four that I do not understand: the way of an eagle in the sky, the way of a snake on a rock, the way of a ship on the high seas, and the way of a man with a maiden.” They then attempt to argue all four examples (eagle, snake, ship, man) actually relate to sexual relationships. For example, the “eagle in the sky, high and lifted up,” demonstrates how “sex is transcendent”; the “snake on a rock…warming itself” demonstrates that sex is “hot and sweaty”; and the “ship on the high seas,” demonstrates we are “meant to be swept up into [sex], carried along by its power and majesty.” If this is a common understanding and interpretation of these verses, I have not heard it before, nor do I understand that interpretation.

On pages 49-50, the authors say “most of what you’ve been experiencing in the last twelve months is God’s attempt to get you to face your style of relating and repent of it.” Immediately following this quotation, they support it with 1 Corinthians 13:11, which says “When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me.”

On page 67, the authors say “men face a different sort of emptiness. We are forever frustrated in our ability to conquer life…A man aches for affirmation, for validation, to know that he has come through. This also explains his deepest fear – failure.” Their support for this claim? Genesis 3:17-18, which states “cursed is the ground because of you; through painful toil you will eat of it all the days of your life. It will produce thorns and thistles for you…”

On page 70, they state “then he gives to us this world that is breathtakingly beautiful.” They support this statement with Psalm 33:5, which states “the earth is filled with the love of the Lord.”

There are plenty of other examples, but these are just a few we found on a quick scan through.

-Ryan and Anna-

Comment by Ryan & Anna

January 17, 2010 @ 8:27 pm

Deborah,

Also, I know you didn’t ask for examples of the authors providing incomplete quotations as well as changing verses without indicating they have done so, but we thought we would share one of them as well.

On page 125 they write “One can put a thousand to flight, but two can put ten thousand to flight.” and reference it to Deuteronomy 32:30. However, this verse does not begin with the word “one,” end with the word “flight,” or mean anything like what the authors indicate. The NIV reads as follows: “How could one man chase a thousand, or two put ten thousand to flight, unless their Rock had sold them, unless the LORD had given them up?” (We compare it to the NIV because the authors state all quotations are from that translation unless otherwise indicated, and this quotation does not indicate a version other than NIV. In fact, not only isn’t it the NIV, it isn’t any of the 21 versions I looked upon on Biblegateway.com, including the TNIV, the Message, NKJV, NLT, or NASB.) Not only have they incompletely quoted the verse without letting their readers know, but they appear to have distinctly distorted the meaning of the verse. The verse appears in their chapter about a husband and wife joining together in spiritual warfare, and they use it to suggest that two can take on ten times as many warriors, when the verse obviously refers to our inability to conquer anyone without God’s assistance.

-Ryan and Anna-

Comment by Deborah

January 17, 2010 @ 8:48 pm

Ryan and Anna (sorry I missed you Ryan–Anna had mentioned on FB that she’d be posting this review), thanks for the examples. I’m in between on how I react to them and am glad you provided them. To say that this is the intended interpretation of Proverbs 30, versus one that they felt sort of personally inspired to extrapolate, is bizarre. As for the others: I can jive with the 1 Corinthians 13 one perhaps–growing up into love. I don’t have a clue whether they are trying to make the pg 70 refer to the world of marriage or the physical world, the latter of which would seem like the normative interpretation. And beauty is part of what He offers us in His mercy and love.

As for the Genesis passage, this seems to be a common interpretation among complementarians (and since the woman “desires” her husband, at least as our current translations favor, this is supposed to be her set up to become relationally enmeshed and focused on emotions). But this is a revelation seeking its justification in one’s own enthusiastic view of the world, not one that is supported by clear reason that the text demands or suggests it. Nonetheless, in our corner of post-industrial culture in a fallen world, it does tend to bear out in this fashion, so I can sympathize w/ their temptation to “make it biblical.” I’m not sure whether I object to the interpretation or more to its participation in comp “doctrine of separate spheres.”

The interpretation of 2 chasing 10,000 as applicable to the joined forces of two people in the power of God is an established interpretation–I think w/ a fairly long history. I have used it in writing myself. The verse seems to indeed reference 1 person and then 2 people. But the usage of it is for 2 people coming against a people forsaken by the Lord, rather than 2 people going out in the power of the Lord. It is inspiration that has lead commentators to suggest the reverse. Thanks for bringing your debate over it to my attention. I’ll keep an eye out for where else the concept appears, as I don’t think it is the only spot in scripture.

All best,
Deb

Comment by Deborah

January 17, 2010 @ 9:20 pm

P.S.–Offhand, I see Leviticus 26:7-8 as the supporting text for reversing the verse describing those God-forsaken into a verse describing those God-empowered w/ exponential strength…. Additionally, looking at the Deuteronomy 32:30 context, we see that the God-forsaken can be either another people or are Israel in a time when it forsook God. It is a generalized statement. It is very confusing to parse out if the context is Israel’s unfaithfulness (as the chapter began with) or Israel’s victory over others (as Matthew Henry, for instance, posits and as vs.31-32 might support… this chapter follows the pattern of the previous chapter in mentioning ills interspersed with blessings, and the start and end of each can confound). In the case of another people, the one who chases this great number and the two who chase this astronomical number of people (it reminds me of the feats of David, of Johnathan, and of Ehud and Samson) are God’s chosen Israelites. And I am among those who believe that we can get spiritual applications from Israel’s battles if they concur with the gist of scripture. I would say the application works–perhaps not as *the* most direct literal reading but, even if not, as a spiritual sense supported by other scriptural precepts (Aquinas’ Summa Theologica is a good breakdown of these).

Sorry, I’m really on your side! Quotation marks should not have been used though! Of course there is a 50/50 chance this was the editor’s fault, not the Elredges’ (I know enough authors to tend to assume such problems are the publishing house’s fault more than not). Just trying to be fair.

Comment by Jane

January 18, 2010 @ 3:38 am

” They then attempt to argue all four examples (eagle, snake, ship, man) actually relate to sexual relationships. For example, the “eagle in the sky, high and lifted up,” demonstrates how “sex is transcendent”; the “snake on a rock…warming itself” demonstrates that sex is “hot and sweaty”; and the “ship on the high seas,” demonstrates we are “meant to be swept up into [sex], carried along by its power and majesty.” If this is a common understanding and interpretation of these verses, I have not heard them before, nor do I understand them.

ROFL LOL LOL LOL LOL

I am so glad to browse tonight—I needed the laugh. I don’t know who these authors are as I don’t read many Christian books [I think 80% of the whole market-culture of Christianty in this nation is bunk and one big fat $$ joke} but nethertheless,

that,right there, proves my point. Good Grief, can people like come back down to planet earth-the section in Proverbs about the eagle, snake, ship, man) being about Sex!!! Uh, what about the part that follows that, yea, I've read it, and remember it well, why? Because I'm somewhat of an environmentalist-nature lover so those scriptures stand out to me---but about sex? LOL, Typical hung up on American Raunch Culture, never fails,

IF it was meant to be metaphorical about sex, uh, then I suppose the following verses explain the coming down after the whole climax, LOL, [Prov 30:31-33], I suppose the following references in the negative have sexual meanings too?

You know, American Christians, save your money, if you’re going to get marriage advice like these books, go to any used book store and pick up a trashy Harlequin book. Seriously, you’d save your money and get about the same type of content, throw a few scriptures with it and there ya go,

I mean, seriously, I’ve read some really stupid things before, but the eagle and ship being about sex–and then of course this determinism about males-females being totally opposites [like yea, I mean I glow green ya know], I mean,

no wonder so many Christian marriages are in the state they are in today, meanwhile, the Missions and Relief work, are mostly secular,

Duh, I wonder Why?

:0

Jane

Comment by Deborah

January 18, 2010 @ 11:43 am

Jane, imho, I thought it was bizarre too, even if they were to try to claim it as a secondary meaning–or even as a tertiary meaning of their own devising, as in “this scripture reminds us of…..” There is certainly no way it could be accounted for as the literal meaning.

Comment by Deborah

January 18, 2010 @ 3:47 pm

Boy, I didn’t even think I’d be commenting on this one, and here I am a board hog. I just wanted to clarify one comment above. Namely, I do not necessarily (though I am cautious) disagree with the Eldredges’ reflecting on the Genesis passage and saying that post-fall the man will be frustrated by the work of his hands, and that this will tend to inordinately monopolize his mind relative to women. I DO have a problem w/ presenting these separate spheres of concern as something that (a) SHOULD remain normative for the genders, even if it is likely we will generally disproportionately battle it some until the Lord returns, or (b) should not be combatted as ungodly sources of identity when idols and as ungodly worry as we mature in Christ.

Comment by ls

January 18, 2010 @ 4:21 pm

Ditto for me….bizarre.

Jane, the movie “Penelope” is a pretty good little movie….makes more sense to me than the “love and war” book sounds like to me. But it is entertainment..not reality.

Thoughts: if John Eldredge says men’s deepest needs are affirmation, etc….and their greatest fear…failure…. how are those not important to consider for any human, male or female? It’s just not all about sexual activity,…duh? It reminds me of a chapter in Chuck Colson’s book “How Now shall we live” (I liked Frances Schaeffer’s “How then shall we live ” better..but) Colson’s chapter was about the WORLDLY worldview of salvation through sex.

And the way my heart works is to be encouraged and directed by two scriptures that all this ‘stuff’ …after the reactions….moves me to and I wonder why some men, do not seem to arrive here, too:

2 thess. 2:16-17 Now may our Lord Jesus Christ Himself and God our Father, who loved us and through grace gave us eternal comfort and good hope, comfort your hearts and strengthen them in every good work and word. nrsv

and Romans 5:3-5 And not only that, but we also boast in our sufferings, knowing that suffering produces endurance, and endurance produces character, and character produces hope, and hope does not disappoint us, because God’s love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit that has been given to us.

There is another book that all this brings to mind. “Healing the Masculine Soul” I can’t remember the author, Dahlby or something similar I think. It is, I believe, a good read for both men and women. Some ideas I remember from that book are: the need for men and women to have healing relationships…it doesn’t seem so heavily focused on the marriage relationship. Men need male friends, for example. It is a book that seems to me to ‘speak the truth in love’ of various kinds of problems that exist and has vision based on scripture for the remedies. One clear point I remember….is that….what men/women/people really want…..is…self-control….the healthy kind that only the Spirit can give. Integrity. I don’t think that has that much to do with a lizard or snake on a rock.

ls

Comment by Jane

January 18, 2010 @ 6:35 pm

Hmmm, funny, on this part: “And not only that, but we also boast in our sufferings, knowing that suffering produces endurance, and endurance produces character, and character produces hope, and hope does not disappoint us, because God’s love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit that has been given to us.”

How that is Turned to keep women in abuse, is just unreal but worse-they Don’t get ‘hope’ from being abuse, Hardly–they rot, and die. I just read 10 comments by Christian women on another blog after years of ‘suffering’ and their endurance and character, how many of them are 1. thinking of suicide, 2. of leaving and who now hate men, 3. who have said they no longer laugh nor will again.

Gee, I don’t know, I guess, this is why I take more of a Marxist approach to marriage, and simply don’t believe in love or marital love, anymore. I think its a lie and a sentiment-a benefit [slavery and sanctioned-legalized prostitution for men, pretty much] and why we Do have the problems,

it’s the ‘ideal’ of this love marriage that is just not realistic. It serves a purpose, nothing more, men get easy sex, a cook, and well, society and mass labor gets children.

And its funny how its those scriptures that MEN will not heed in marriage but that are used to keep the women Enslaved to horrid abuse in the most intimate of ways [she is no different than the prostitute, only that, the Prostitute KNOWS she's being defecated on like a toilet..the 'wife' still believes in the LIE], admitted, there ARE a few, EMPHASIS ON A FEW, men who might feel something for their wives, etc., but my point is,

those same scriptures used to persuade men to be humane, are the Very ones, used to keep women and the powerless in bondage.

Makes you wonder–and those in Bondage, don’t have hope–they just

rot, slowly and die. And no one is redeemed as a result of.

Jane

Comment by Deborah

January 18, 2010 @ 7:30 pm

Jane, I can only imagine what you’ve been through to have that low a view of marriage. And yes I do know some of these women who have turned the other cheek so many times that they couldn’t recognize their own “face.” It is a sad abuse of scripture to keep women in these dynamics and not to challenge the men.

But I hope you find grace and peace to believe that both God and men can love and love well, however few the models you have seen. I don’t think an institution God has made is a farce even if it has been broken… badly broken. My heart goes out to you….

Comment by Jane

January 18, 2010 @ 9:32 pm

Oh, I believe in ‘love’ Deborah,

just not in the interpretation of love as its been construed, it is here that I lean more towards a Marxist definition of love, in that in the Practicum,

meaning, we are all here, we all need each other to survive–love thy neighbor as thyself, if not, its the devour one another. Its purely function

I wonder, that maybe before the fall, that humans were really created to be servants, nothing more–and that the Fall, brought with it the emotions and the ‘ego’ and the whole warped love thing…and that God, in His mercy, went ahead and used our definition to reach us…

I realize this sounds like Spock like, but it’s the only thing that makes sense to me, when looking at the Why God used analogy of marriage, between Christ–church/or us, individual

when clearly, evidence shows, women are more likely to be abused IN Christian marriages; that it’s not much different than Islam.

Something off there—so, it has to be, the definition of what Love is–I think, somewhere, we got Love in the pagan ideal,

Romance—root word, Roman, a.k.a. Roman paganism.

I don’t believe in romance anymore or emotional love, but in the practicum, on a materialist level…simply a ‘function’, nothing more.

And that Heaven, is really about Service, being in ‘our’ place, serving our Function, with no rebellion, etc…..

I was told this is nihilistic, maybe it is, but it was seeing the truth, reality compared to the ‘fantasy’ that lead me to this….I’m a pessimist, sure, but I think, there is more Truth, in that, than in the illusions, esp. being peddled by today’s Christian church, which is all influenced by capitalist bourgeoisie ideals. I’ve come to this conclusion, that where marriage [the lie] is concerned, that yes, on that, Marx was right,

it’s nothing more, than a biological function, women getting the raw end of the deal…

OR, it could be, God cursed Adam, had mercy on Adam, God cursed Eve, and slowly, Eve dies, meaning, all of female. IF you look at the world today, that would definately be the case, Eve’s sentence, was extinction, maybe that is why, it says, Heaven, and Sons…

[sometimes I do wonder about the latter]…

Jane

Comment by ls

January 18, 2010 @ 9:33 pm

Jane,

I am sad that what you describe has, in fact, happened. I was not thinking of those things when I was drawn to those scriptures that have helped me. In fact, taking a stand against abuse, drawing a boundary line against abuse… and the suffering…..the consequences of doing that, among other pressures and losses is what comes to my mind with the word ‘suffering’.

But everyone’s circumstances and perspectives are different and it is a very personal process. I’m not an expert nor would all the ‘experts’ agree as to how to handle a dilemma, nor would they agree on what abuse is or isn’t in some cases!!

Those scriptures helped me in terms of personal growth and giving in areas of ministry that made more ‘sense’ to me…felt more synchronized with God’s leading to me, especially parenting, but also other areas. I’m not married anymore, nor am I in a hurry to pursue it again, although I value the God-honoring institution that it is. I agree, or want to agree, with Hebrews where it says “Marriage should be honored by all” But I can read a lot into every word there and have a lot of personal speculation. God’s marriage should be honored by all…that is easier to think about when it is worded that way.

I hope that true knowledge of Jesus is what is communicated in our churches.

Peace,
ls

Comment by ls

January 18, 2010 @ 9:44 pm

Jane,

My last comment was in reference to your 90639

Comment by Deborah

January 18, 2010 @ 9:50 pm

Jane,

When I look at Jesus, I see love that is humble service. I also see His emotion. I look at passages in Hosea and the Song of Songs whose secondary meaning I believe, along with many historical commentators, to be of Christ and the Church, and I’m amazed at HIS “romancing” of our hearts. So I am still sad to read what you have to say, but I’m very glad for the explanation. I think I understand better.

Peace,
Deb

Comment by Jane

January 18, 2010 @ 10:13 pm

See Deb I only ‘saw’ that when seeing through the teachings of others, never in His word…meaning, how much of this belief that Jesus romances hearts is truly, from a lens influenced by Roman ‘romance’ belief?

I see Jesus, as practical, good, don’t get me wrong, but very to the point==you obey, or fry in Hell, and in Service—He referred to service, more than anything–our duty one to another but more so, to God. And He gave the example, obedience unto death…

service, and on that part, in heaven we are not given in marriage but are like the angels. Jesus woos the heart, where repentance is concerned, but I don’t think, Jesus/God is all wrapped up in romantic love, He may ‘refer’ to it, but even in reference to it, in Isaiah for instance, it was always duty based,

loyalty based on ‘place’ one is ordained to, etc.

I think if anything, it’s that lens through romance, that trips us up in service to Him, more than anything, because then it’s based on emotion, rather than ‘no matter what commitment’. Out of duty, obligation, etc., and why, I think, people in the eastern nations, tend to be more diligent in service, where as, in the West [influenced by Roman ideals] we are fickle, tossed to and fro, and well, just fickle.

I think, it’s really about this belief in love and being all wrapped up in it, rather than just taking life as it is-and just plugging along, and facing reality,

sure, that’s nihilist, but well, half of the world lives in the reality of hell and nihilism, its in America, that we still are believing in ‘dreams’. What if those dreams, [love, etc] are nothing more than lies?

Jane

Comment by Robyn

January 19, 2010 @ 11:51 am

If I understand you correctly, Jane, I agree with a lot of what you are saying. The mistaken belief that love = romance/emotion is the downfall of many. When, in fact, true love = service and “no matter what commitment.” Because when life gets down and dirty, when push comes to shove, it’s not the “feelings” that are going to get anyone through it with relationships intact. It’s “duty, obligation” and “just plugging along, and facing reality” that will stand the test of time. It might sound dismal, but it’s the truth. Feelings come and go. People are “tossed to and fro, and well, just fickle.” And that, IMHO, is one reason so many marriages fail. I believe in love: no greater love has anyone than she lay down her life for her friend (this in the sense of ongoing self-sacrifice, not death).

Comment by Deborah

January 19, 2010 @ 3:12 pm

Jane & Robyn–I’m a both/and girl. As for scriptures indicating God’s romance of us, I was actually not taught these things. I was taught more the “God of expectations.” Harsh expectations. In private times with God, He started to show me these things. I was amazed to realize that there actually were churches that were preaching it already and that saints in centuries past had focused on the song of songs. I was also kept from secular movies, etc.as a child. So I don’t think culture gave me those ideas particularly…. Anyhow, both/and girl over here (woman, I know, “girl” can be derogatory, but I choose to use it for myself sometimes) still wishes you the both/and. But I am “hearing you,” I think.

Comment by Liz

January 19, 2010 @ 7:42 pm

I have just re-read the questions at the end of this post and would like to offer some answers to 4 of them.

“Why do the authors insist that marriage is so difficult?”

I can’t answer for other people’s reasons, but I will say that we read a book by John Eldredge which was about his walk with God and it was the same story…..life is hard, being a Christian. It would seem that they have somehow missed the whole point of our redemption in Christ – a new and better way to live, in humility and ceasing from our own efforts.

“Has this been true of your marriage?”

No…and after 44 years we still believe in ‘love’, yes even romantic love…but, it is all because of God and his leading us together in the first place and our depending on God for our ability to consider each other and be ready to forgive. Our favourite marriage verse is Ephesians 4:32 “Be kind to one another, tender-hearted, forgiving one another – even as God in Christ Jesus has forgiven you” We are incredibly grateful for these years of companionship and sharing and fellowship with God and each other.

“Why is everyone so down on marriage, including Christians?”

I imagine it’s because there are very few examples of happy marriages around so people blame ‘marriage’ rather than how people conduct their lives together.

“What are we missing?”

One of the things which is missing is the whole concept of ‘one-ness’ which of course is a nonsense unless there is true equality in every sense of the word.
Wherever there is any perception of one person being more important or valuable than the other, then there is ground for conflict, dissatisfaction and an open door for deceit, abuse, pretense and a whole host of other lifestyles.
we often use the term ‘merger’ for marriage, rather than ‘partnership’ – two people merging to become one.

Comment by Liz

January 19, 2010 @ 7:46 pm

Jane….I am so sad that you have had only bad experiences with men and see all around you the devastation of patriarchy. It is hard to watch, that’s for sure and we need to get to the heart of the issue to understand how things have become so distorted from God’s original purpose in creating people, female and male.

I believe it is possible for two redeemed people to enjoy an equal, fulfilling, romantic, self-sacrificing relationship. It is such a privilege and should be something to aspire to, but with so many abusive situations around, it is easy to lose heart and hope for anything better.

BTW, I have tried to email you but it came back – maybe your inbox is full?

Comment by Jane

January 19, 2010 @ 8:26 pm

Well, I won’t ‘sugar coat’ reality, with IDEALISM.

I think, a lot of the problem in dealing with the issues is there are Still to many people hanging onto IDEALISM,

the IDEALISM that a wife treated like a dog or whore is not really on the same level of a prostitute [which is a LIE, John or Husband, its still the same degradation AND I WILL bring this up because it is Rampant problem in CHRISTIAN marriages],

or the IDEALISM that the slow rotting death of women in marriages that are abusive has some Redemptive Value which is utter BULL,

or the IDEALISM that all the Reality’s and Horrors that are CLEARLY EVIDENT are not really ‘that bad’ or we can Gloss over them with sugar coated words,

because DARE WE EXPOSE IDEALISM IN CONTRAST TO REALITY.

I stand firm, marriage, most of the time, is Nothing more, than a cheap Legal sanctioned ‘owner-prostitute/slave arrangement’, nothing more and nothing less. IT is the Economic exchange for sexual services for income…as Marx said, and for millions of GIRLS [WORLD WIDE THAT ARE UNDER 15 EVEN] and WOMEN this is THE REALITY.

You can sugar coat it all you want, THAT IS THE REALITY, just because I have or they have a RING ON does not make them ANY DIFFERENT THAN THE PROSTITUTE WHO GETS SLAPPED AROUND BY THE JOHNS…its ONE MAN VERSES 100 MEN,

EXCEPT ONE MAN DOING ALL THE ABUSE/DAMAGE THE ONE HUNDRED MEN DO…to ONE WOMAN.

THAT, THAT, IS USUALLY, WHAT MARRIAGE IS, you can put LOVE on it till you are blue in the face,

THAT IS WHAT MARRIAGE IS. So there are a FEW, emphasis on a FEW that are lucky enough to NOT have THIS REALITY,

that does NOT CHANGE THE REALITY FOR MILLIONS OF WOMEN….

marriage, is a Fraud, its a Farce, its a PATRIARCHIAL INSTITUTION FOR MEN, BY MEN, FOR MEN, AND FOR THE BENEFIT OF ‘MEN’.

AT THE EXPENSE OF WOMEN, THEIR LIVES AND MOST OF ALL, THEIR SOULS.

The Christian IDEALISM that is being peddled to day by the Christian MARKETEERS FOR PROFIT $$$$$$$ and the PROFITEERS in the ministries AND businesses because lets face it, marriage is Big Capitalist Business–bridals, weddings and most of all, Divorces.

Marriage, is a LIE. The ONLY function it serves is the care of children and HALF ASS at that, in Christian homes, where DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND PORN AND MARITAL ‘RAPE’ IS RAMPANT, so is CHILD ABUSE–SO IS CHILD RAPE.

You can protect the IDEALISM, I will NOT and I will NOT SUGAR COAT IT, AND CALL THE REALITY, SOMETHING IT ISN’T.

Why? Because to do so, is to perpetuate A LIE.

I do not care, if the Bible says, Marriage is Honorable,

sure, its Honorable for men to lust and abuse within private doors one woman–IT IS NOT HONORABLE FOR WOMEN,

it may not be Public degradation–but its still debasement, degradation and a slow death.

IF, IF, IF THE IDEALISM IS SO DANG IMPORTANT TO CHRISTIANS, PARTICULAR THE PRO-MARRIAGE LOT, THEN THEY WOULD DO MORE, TO HOLD MEN ACCOUNTABLE, THEY DO NOT, ITS NOTHING MORE, THAN A FRATERNITY CLUB OF BOYS PROTECTING BOYS, TO DO WITH WOMEN, WHAT THEY WISH…

and Proof of this lies, in the Hundreds of Christian women who cry about submitting to sex with the man who just abused them [just like the prostitute baby--don't like it, Tough, its TRUTH] and it IS nothing more than exchanging Pimps-TRUTH. Hundreds of Christian women in shelters or who call shelters

and more, who call suicide lines.

THAT MAY NOT BE THE ‘IDEALISM’ but too BAD,

I will NOT, sugar coat it any longer….and to then throw out its all about LOVE is sheer CROCK,

many of us, KNOW BETTER. AND OUR REALITIES, ARE REAL, THEY ARE NOT

IDEALISM.

and This is why, YES, I AGREE WITH MARX ON THIS ISSUE, the EVIDENCE IS OVERWHELMING. The ‘other nonsense, good or bad, is IDEALISM. Or martyrdom worship–but then, so is suicide bombing in Islam, by women–WHY MORE AND MORE, THE TWO RELIGIONS, LOOK MORE THE SAME, WHERE MISOGYNY IS CONCERNED AND PATRIARCHY–
difference is though, ISLAMIC WOMEN–ARE TOLD, CHRISTIAN women are still buying into the lies and the

IDEALISM.

Thank you.

Jane

Comment by Deborah

January 19, 2010 @ 8:55 pm

Liz, that is a GREAT marriage verse. And it is good to bring up oneness. The Sumners’ marriage book, “Just How Married Do you Want to Be?: Practicing Oneness in Marriage” sort of hits it straight on w/ its title. We are in some sort of arrangement if we are not practicing oneness but are married, but we are modeling Christian marriage to the degree that we are truly one (and that’s not a man with a zero alongside him but a true, mutually exalting merger).

Comment by Ryan

January 19, 2010 @ 9:05 pm

Deborah,

We have no problem at all with you disagreeing with us! Like we said, we are no experts and enjoy the chance to grow and learn from the dialogue.

With that said, a few brief points.

First, I’m not sure I understand how you connect 1 Corinthians 13:11 with their claim. I’ve read and re-read the passage in the context of the discussion about love, and I simply don’t see any connection whatsoever.

Second, the Genesis 3:17-18 interpretation may be common among complementarians (although I haven’t actually seen it all that often in my readings), but that doesn’t mean it isn’t taken out of context. Personally, I find this verse to be unsupportive of their contention that man’s greatest fear is of failure. And even if I did think it supported their contention, the verse does not directly state such a thing, but rather requires a chain of assumptions to get there. Using that verse as the sole support for a claim about the fundamental makeup of men is – in my opinion – a careless use of scripture.

Third, I agree Deuteronomy 32:30 supports the idea that God can empower people with exponential strength. I remain unconvinced, however, that the writer meant to say anything at all about the relative strength of one person vs. two. Yes, the writer gives an example of one person chasing one thousand and two people chasing ten thousand, but these examples do not appear in a discussion about the power of one vs. two; rather as examples in support of the idea that Israel’s enemies could not have done what they did without the power of God behind them.

Now don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying two are NOT stronger than one; nor am I saying the Bible doesn’t support the idea. However, although it is possible the writer intended to express this principle in Deuteronomy 32:30, given the context I find it unlikely. I do believe, though, that reasonable people can disagree on this point.

Our problem, therefore, is not with the authors’ understanding of the verse per se (although I do disagree with it). Rather, our problem is with their distortion of the verse without indicating they have done so to try and make the verse say what they want it to say. At the very best, the writer in Deuteronomy was expressing a tangential point about the relative power of two vs. one in the context of a larger discussion. To read the Eldredge’s book, however, would make it appear the author’s PRIMARY point was that two people together are ten times stronger than one person on their own, which it simply was not. To change the punctuation and capitalization of a verse to make it seem like it is a stand-alone sentence, and to use an unknown translation that changes the verse from a question to a statement with the intention of making the verse look like it is saying something it is not is highly troubling to me.

~Ryan

Comment by Anna

January 19, 2010 @ 9:16 pm

Liz,

I agree with Deborah, that is a great verse to base a marriage upon! I also like what you said about people blaming marriage rather than the manner in which the individual people conduct their lives. That is a great topic the Eldredge’s hit on in their book, the fact that we are all broken people which doesn’t tend to lend itself well to the intimacy of a marriage.

I feel very fortunate that Ryan and I had wise and loving people around us prior to our marriage to help prepare us as individuals; opening our eyes to the areas in our lives which needed work and giving us the tools necessary to grow in those areas. I am certain our marriage has been such a positive experience in part due to our awareness of our own shortcomings and our commitment to oneness and equality.

It isn’t that marriage is “fabulously hard” but rather we are immersed in a culture of selfishness which has taught us to put ourselves first, a habit which does not end when we say “I do”

-Anna

Comment by Jane

January 19, 2010 @ 10:14 pm

“I also like what you said about people blaming marriage rather than the manner in which the individual people conduct their lives.”

Typical Insensitivity, but I’m not surprised. Yes, all those young girls torching themselves to death in Afghanistan to escape horrid marriages its all because of their Conduct!

Yea, Right.

Marriage Is too to blame, because marriage is an Institution set/and reinforced by social AND ECONOMIC mores and customs, and depending on the Legalities, marriage can mean a Death Sentence.

It would be ONE thing, if marriage were totally separate from our social systems and CULTURE [ROOT WORD CULT] but it isn’t, therefore, to say you can’t blame marriage,

is ludicrous. Its a flat out denial of Patriarchy and Male Privilege in of itself. But of course, if one Benefits from it, like economics, then its quite easy, to attribute the Reality of Horrors, onto the victims Conduct.

Typical American ideology, save the IDEAL AND THROW THE HURT ONES OFF THE BUS…AND RUN THEM OVER, BUT DON’T DARE, FACE THE REALITY.

And what is Worse, we parade this mentality around in our churches, leaving Countless VICTIMS alone and in despair, and we Think that God will just wink, wink, yea Sure,

they thought the same, in Isaiah too. Keep perpetuating the Lies, its Safer, than looking in the face of the Victims of such lies and IDEALISMS.

Jane

Comment by Deborah

January 19, 2010 @ 11:23 pm

Ryan, a very quick response:

I Cor 13—I think they are trying to say that the unhealthy manners we have of communicating are because we are immature in love, and so now we need to develop healthy communication and mature love—not childish but grown up. Perhaps they did not lay this out well enough in the surrounding context of the excerpt you listed. It would have been beneficial if they had.

Genesis—I do think it is inappropriate to make failure the key exegetical point off this verse. I do think one might say that after the fall the man will be tempted to focus on the very things God mentions in the curse—the fruit of his hands. Part of being preoccupied with finding identity in work (the thing which I’ve heard preached and bantered about from this verse) can be a preoccupation with failure. But there is a jump there. I think that he should have laid out the steps to making that jump if using it, and I think the jump itself is suspect.
Again on Deuteronomy, I’ve known so many authors whose publishers made last minute changes like that to misquote material, to put things in quotes that shouldn’t be in quotes, etc. that I hesitate to fault the Eldredge’s per se too much. But I do agree, as I said before, that it is wrong.

I think maybe the exegesis of this verse is just an agree to disagree thing. I see an exponential difference when you are adding more people—a difference not of addition but of multiplication. I see a similar principle at least two other times in scripture (Leviticus 26:7-8; Isaiah 30:17). I think it is something God is bringing to our attention here. But I appreciate that different churches, organizations, and schools have varying approaches to hermeneutics. I’m sort of a middle ground person. I am very wary, having sat through many charismatic meetings—that being my camp—of people going wherever they want to in the name of inspiration. This is harmful. And I have seen it profoundly harm lives. That said, I dig layers, provided our eyes are attuned to (a) the whole of scripture and (b) the simplest, primary intent of the author (though I don’t think we *always* need to lay that primary intent out when we mention the verse, and especially not here where (1) it would be quite distracting for the message to go on a tangent about Israel’s battles, (2) the primary intent is quietly incorporated in the secondary comment of two walking in *God’s power* together—the implicit context of their use, spiritual warfare in a godly marriage—and (3) since it is a verse which has been commonly used in this regards—at least common to my ears).

I’d also say that inherently many verses mentioned in this sort of writing context—this is not systematic theology, the exegesis of an epistle, or even a sermon in writing taking you through the steps of a matter—authors are not expected to draw all of the connections all of the time from point (a—the verse) to point (c—the chosen application) simply because it can bog down the writing. Additionally, it could confuse the Christian lite audience (but we do need to worry more about confusing the Christian lite audience with “biblically supported” ideas that are not in fact biblically supported!). I do, however, agree that it is important to make more of these connections than apparently the Eldredges did. It is also important for them as writers to make sure they are personally tracing back the connections themselves and being responsible about it even when they must make cuts and simplify for editors and tone and such.

The first misquote you offered was so “out there” that I was surprised by the others. It is interesting to have this discussion, as I am currently re-writing a couple of my own book manuscripts which rely heavily on figurative, layered meanings—but are explicitly presented as such with an appendix explaining my hermeneutics. Still, it makes me quake a little to see how hard an intelligent audience can be to please :). That’s not necessarily a bad thing….

All best!
Deb

Comment by Deborah

January 19, 2010 @ 11:33 pm

Jane,

I don’t believe Anna was being insensitive. Most CBErs are quite concerned about the plight of women in unhealthy marriages, all the moreso in countries where the women have fewer rights. That doesn’t mean that we can’t honor an institution that we genuinely believe God (not man) created for the good of both men and women–however broken it has become. You may want to see it done away with, but some of us want to see it transformed from the inside out. And the inside means the inside of the husband and wife’s heart and minds foremost. Then we can live it and write it and preach it and seek to find it duplicated. Is it too little help for women in the most dire situations? Yes. For many it is. And my donations to Haiti have been too little help there as well. But they are something. They will help a few. And it is the best way some of us see to do it. I question how ranting against marriage would help the same women anyhow. Most aren’t given any other choice in life by their culture. To be single would be most shameful to their culture and would often leave them no options of supporting themselves (something foreign groups do need to work to change–providing handicraft alternatives and so on as a start). Besides, a lot of women do want to raise children. These are complex systems.

Blessings,
Deborah

Comment by Jane

January 20, 2010 @ 12:12 am

“Most aren’t given any other choice in life by their culture. To be single would be most shameful to their culture and would often leave them no options of supporting themselves (something foreign groups do need to work to change–providing handicraft alternatives and so on as a start). Besides, a lot of women do want to raise children. These are complex systems.”

Exactly Deborah, case in point…you said, many cultures women do not have other means of support,

but let’s expand that a bit further…in the West, it is Statistically proven, women’s status/income goes up [though there are exceptions but we see This is changing in this eco downturn] when they Marry. Therefore, marriage is Still an institution that is set up/and especially reinforced to KEEP WOMEN IN THEIR ‘INFERIOR-SUBJUGATED’ PLACE UNDER MAN. IF we wait, for the hearts of ‘men’ to change Within marriage [and by 2010, if we haven't learned yet we never will] we will be waiting for years while many more women die, are abused, are Coerced into staying in abusive marriages DUE to economics and social pressures and Legalities [e.g. child custody, etc], and so forth.

That is the equivalent of saying to the White Masta and the Black Slaves, “rather than abolish slavery lets just wait for the Mastas to have a ‘change of heart’”.

Emancipation will never happen, until institutions AND the benefits of those institutions are destroyed. Do I believe marriage should be done away with [and there are those that believe that], NO, actually, I don’t,

BUT, I do believe, the LIES of the IDEALISM should be done away with AND that there should be Harsh penalties for those who Violate ‘marriage contracts’ as Well as penalties for those social institutions, yes, Churches, who support, perpetuate the abuses that Do go on in marriages. In Every contract, business, there is room to sue for Damages,
except in Marriages.

For abuse, marital rape, child abuse Especially, and Fraud, I believe, there should be Penalties and room, when there is Clear Evidence, of being able to File CIVIL AND CRIMINAL DAMAGES WITH REPARATIONS.

THAT, would change a lot of the Immunity, that men have, to do as they darn well please, in the Protection of Religion.

I also believe, those churches who Send women back into abuse, who do NOT confront men for abuse, who know darn well there is abuse, should be Tried to the full extent of the law for Criminal Accessory, if there is domestic murder–then, Felony Murder.

No ands, ifs, ors buts about it.

IF the ARM of the Law was to step in, there would be change…that is why, its the Far Right Christians who are up in arms about CHILDREN’S RIGHTS. I say, GOOD, let them squirm,

I hope, every one of these pastors and men who claim Christ who molest, rape, beat, abuse, enslave, are nailed, to the wall….that polygamy is made illegal esp where children are concerned [forced into in THIS country while the church lays SILENT--it took the atheists do try to do something there-BECAUSE if the church was to do anything, why THEY'D LOSE MALE ENTITLEMENTS...] and oh by golly, the Marriage ministries would lose Tons in Profit Margins.

I say, stop perpetuating the IDEALISM and deal head on with the Corruption, the immunity for Slavery [and for many it IS slavery] and the immunity for rape. We still have states where marital rape is Legal, and Why?

Because Christians have fought to KEEP IT THAT WAY, TO PRESERVE SOME WARPED ‘GOD’ ORDAINED INSTITUTION.

We don’t emancipate by talking, we emancipate by Action. IF, IF we were to just ‘talk’ about slavery of African Americans, we’d still have slaves in America today [though we do, they are Women, because of patriarchy, women are trafficked and enslaved with no or barely any recognition Because enslaving women is perfectly ACCEPTABLE, ITS DONE ALL THE TIME, VIA FRAUD MARRIAGES.]

Bottom line, by protecting the IDEAL, though we know its just that, an IDEAL, the church does more to Protect, Abusers, than to help the victims,

women and children both.

And the thing is, we all know it…we can talk around it, but those women and children are not just Statistics or Research or Book Material [for profit],

they are real, live, bleeding human beings…waiting, for freedom and deliverance.

WE, instead, are more busy protecting, IDEALISM.

[generally speaking]

Jane

Comment by Jane

January 20, 2010 @ 12:37 am

“There is NO PEACE, with NO JUSTICE”.

That is Just as true for women victims in fraud marriages as it is, for those who suffer oppression anywhere.

And quite frankly, there really is no Change, without Revolution,

the Power apparatus, Patriarchy, will Never give up, their abusive power, till they are Overthrown. To wait for ‘hearts to change’ [and why should they, they Benefit from it], is just tossing more women to the grave, though it might make US feel better.

In regards to the thousand of Christian men who abuse/rape/and do so with Scriptures,

“The greatest sin of our time is not the few who have destroyed but the vast majority who have sat idly by.” Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

Here it is, 2010, women and especially women in Religions, Christianity Included, have less RIGHTS THAN

DOGS.

They are treated worse than DOGS. Marriage Is, for too many, Slavery.

I am an abolitionist, Any institution [I dont' care Who invented it] that is the continual slavery OR the assisting of slavery in other forms [female subjugation feeds into Trafficking/sex SLAVERY and that IS what 'trafficking' a 'misleading term btw' IS, and feeds into class structures that are SLAVERY and other forms of oppression from racism to xenophobia. That is Why, your more hard core IDEALISTS FUNDIES are also usually, Racist and Nationalist and Class bigots.]

Marriage as it is, particularly within Christiandom, is in fact, a system of gender BIGOTRY, its as simply as that, and it protects the oppressing of women, in many forms. It not only protects it, it sanctions it, that is why, in majority of churches, men who abuse flock to them–its the number one REFUGE FOR ABUSERS TODAY SECOND TO ISLAM in this country.

In those ‘other’ countries you mention Deborah, the worst, for FEMALE ABUSE, SECOND TO ISLAM ARE

CHRISTIAN.

THAT IS FACT.

Ethiopia, 80% Christian and 80% believe men are entitled to beat women. Congo, 80% Christian, women are gang raped in high numbers DAILY as are little girls. FACT.

And that isn’t even a fourth of it…

Christian nations are the Number one Leaders in Porn, Trafficking and Child Porn. FACT.

And why, because like Islam, Christianity, protects Misogyny.

The Idealism….call it corrupt church, culture, what have you,

but the fact is, the IDEALISM, is KILLING WOMEN AND GIRLS, JUST AS MUCH AS ISLAM IS, but with one huge difference,

in Christianity, they do their killing, with their lips spewing Love.

In Islam, they just flat out honestly come out and say Allah deems women subhuman.

Protecting the IDEALISM, because the thing is, IF we challenge the IDEALISM, it then, really shakes up, and causes us to question if our God is indeed, a BLATANT MISOGYNIST.

and many by their DOCTRINES, DOGMA, BELIEVE GOD IS,

and that, is the problem. IF we protect those IDEALISMS AND THE INSTITUTIONS THEY ‘MAINTAIN’, then we are also, contributors, to the Systems of Oppression. It does NOT matter if we ask the ‘oppressors’ to have a change of ‘heart’,

as long as we protect the institutions where the oppressor has TOTAL AND PERFECT IMMUNITY, our attempts at diplomacy, are simply, hogwash.

We can go to the streets and demand laws that control women’s wombs, from ending birth control to abortion,

but we cannot, go to the streets, and demand harsher penalties, REPARATIONS TO VICTIMS by men who abuse?

That, in and of itself, speaks volumes, about just how misogynist, we truly are, as a church institution/culture, in this nation and elsewhere.

Jane

Comment by Liz

January 20, 2010 @ 6:46 am

As regards the law and abuse within marriage..I am not familiar with USA laws and I suspect it would vary from state to state. In Australia, there are harsh penalties for abuse within marriage as well as abuse by men to women in any situation.

I would also like to recommend a great organisation entitled PASCH – Peace and Safety in the Christian Home (www.peaceandsafety.com) This is one group which is doing what they can to address the appalling situation of abuse within Christian marriages.

“Better to light a candle than curse the darkness” (can’t remember who said that!)

Comment by Anna

January 20, 2010 @ 8:05 am

Jane,

I’m not sure how you came across this blog, if you’re familiar with CBE, but I wanted to make clear that we agree with you that abuse in marriage is horrendous. I agree that sex slavery and trafficking is very REAL in the USA as well as every other corner of the world. I do not support it, I am appalled by it and I am seeking opportunities to fight against it and bring freedom and healing to those harmed by it. I am a counselor in a juvenile detention center and I encounter girls who have been forced into prostitution and who have been sexually abused by their boyfriends/fathers/brothers/etc. My husband is in law school right now with the goal of finding a career which allows him to prosecute those who are involved in any form of sex slavery and abuse (whether in marriage or outside of it) as well as to help counties develop legal systems which will allow for this prosecution and punishment of criminals. One of the reasons I have joined CBE is that their mission statement aligns with the desires I have “CBE affirms and promotes the biblical truth that all believers—without regard to gender, ethnicity or class—must exercise their God-given gifts with equal authority and equal responsibility in church, home and world.”

I realize we are going to agree to disagree on the nature of marriage, but I would like to briefly point out that not all marriage is bad. I personally have experienced great joy and freedom in my marriage, and I know I can’t speak for others, but it has been more wonderful than I ever imagined it could be. My husband and I live free of stereotypes and expectations. He’s not just here to get free food and a clean home, in fact, he’s the one who does most of the cooking and we work together on cleaning and other areas of attaining our lives.

Additionally, if marriage is at fault, how can that account for the women (and men) who are abused, neglected and otherwise harmed in dating relationships – and I’ve seen many of them. Or, in ordinary friendships for that matter. It all comes down to the individuals who are not being “kind to one another, tender-hearted, forgiving one another”.

“Typical Insensitivity, but I’m not surprised. Yes, all those young girls torching themselves to death in Afghanistan to escape horrid marriages its all because of their conduct!” I am not saying the GIRLS were the ones at fault, but rather the men and the culture which permits (and encourages) the mistreatment of women. The failure of PEOPLE rather than the institution of marriage can be seen by looking at it from a different angle and example. I could make the statement that all schools are places of pain and suffering and should be closed, and site examples such as Columbine and Virginia Tech and countless other times in which there has been death and injury on school property. But the schools themselves are not at fault. They are simply the place in which a person(s) acted upon their sinful/selfish/distorted desires and harmed others. We can’t blame the school, but rather the manner in which the individual people conduct their lives.

Rather than arguing our differences, why not unite and work together to fight the oppression and abuse of people in all cultures, all races, all genders, all classes and all religions?

-Anna

Comment by Jane

January 20, 2010 @ 11:10 am

Anna I am encouraged that people, going into law, are in fact working to correct these horrors. I commend that,

and I believe, strongly, until the Secular Laws address these issues they will not change. I see what you are saying Anna, about people’s actions, etc., but I do see the issues being far more than people’s Individual actions or culture–the Systems in which they run. We can take schools, good example there,

and I’m glad you brought it up. While you are correct that schools in of themselves are not ‘bad’ you have to admit, the Administration and Educational System is indeed CONTROLLED AND MAINTAINED by a much LARGER ‘SYSTEM’ OF CONTROLS therefore, making Any changes in schools, for the welfare of children, is near Impossible. Because the EDUCATORS no longer control schools, the GOVERNMENT does, a.k.a. THE ELITES. Elitism is indeed a Part of PATRIARCHY, or is patriarchal,

its part of the whole dynamic of hierarchy. You would know how this works Anna since you Work in the System, I’m sure you are well aware of the Sexual Abuse these young women will most likely have or have had at the hands of AUTHORITIES and JUVENILE SYSTEMS and how Difficult to Impossible it is to Prosecute Those offenders within the upper echelons of the system. Why? Because like with schools, and the legal framework of Marriage, they are all under a much larger PHILOSOPHICAL [IDEOLOGICAL] AND PATRIARCHAL CONTROLLED SYSTEM.

And, they are somewhat Fascist, friendly fascist but fascist nethertheless, and they are Fascist because they have the ideological roots of Religious fascism backing them up AND financially keeping them in power, its what we call the INFRASTRUCTURE.

Marriage is an Infrastructure, just as much as schools and other systems are. The Personal Is Political and vice versa…is Very true indeed, Especially for Women.

It is for This very reason why abortion is such a controversial AND HUGELY POLITICAL issue, that should Really be private, as it deals with a woman’s own BODY. Government in our bedrooms, so to speak, yes I’m well aware of the arguments about the ‘unborn’ but I don’t buy those arguments, if children’s welfare was the issue they be marching to hang these pastors and priests who molest children, they don’t, nor do they protest and fight for healthcare, food or childcare for children either, hell they don’t even fight for Child support enforcement, so their hypocrisy right there is Blatantly evident—their Motive is about controlling women’s sexuality. BTW, I’m anti-abortion, I just can’t Stand the religious fascist right and their ‘hypocrisy and lies’.

But my point is, that is proof of the INFRASTRUCTURE and the CONTROL OF WOMEN AND ENSLAVEMENT OF, Include the legalities of Marriage. And Yes, there is abuse in relationships OUTSIDE of marriages, Granted, that is why too, that many states, now claim ‘live in’ as COMMON LAW MARRIAGE, for this Very reason. The Difference however is, in dating relationships, there are NOT those LEGALITIES that BIND ONE in a framework to where it is IMPOSSIBLE TO LEAVE WITHOUT THE GRANTED PERMISSION OF THE ‘STATE’.

And its in the framework of the STATE, where the Religious Idealism and Misogyny has had its Most influential Power and Control–this is Why the religious fascist right does All in their power to maintain Control, the Status Quo, the Economics [why they are Vicious about economy--its another means of Control] and Especially, Control over WOMEN.

Marriage was a ‘sacrament’ declared by the Church, to Control Women…based on the belief that women were Evil and needed to be secluded and controlled, FACT. [Catholic Church, early years] It was that as well as Witch hunts, and its not just the Catholics guilty, the Protestants were Just as guilty if not in actual hunts [early America] but in Attitudes carried out into LAWS AND THE LAWS FRAMING

MARRIAGE.

Because Marriage Is a Social and STATE institution.

That is Highly Misogynist, Classist and Patriarchal. Many may not be aware of this but in Early America, when the settlers were coming to build settlements, the numbers of women were low–they sent ‘ads’ to Europe promising women husbands, etc., land, freedom, to GET single women here,

those women, many of them were ‘domestic servants’ or were thrust out and why ‘houses for women’ were started–this was Also how the African Americans were brought here—it was the bringing of women here, that opened the door to the slavery of Africans. [cross the Atlantic] That is historical FACT. The Marriage and domestic slavery attached To marriage made it possible for the legal slavery of others…the Difference there was, women [white] could work OFF their debts or marry out of, the Blacks could not, their debts were for ever. That is how they justified [or one way] slavery in early America…[Inventing the American Woman: A Perspective on Women's History
By Glenda Riley]

NOTE: this of course not the Full reason for slavery, e.g. routes begun by Spaniards-Italians/Catholics including Genocide, the slave trade between Washington and the Arabs, etc] but it IS part of that has been Deliberately omitted in “His”tory and perpetuated-maintained by the ‘myths’ of Christiandom in America.

Liz, I think we need to remember, the Development of patriarchy-control via Religion is way more Deeply entrenched in American society and maintained with Far more religious political fascist controls than it is in Australia, though I am aware of the right wing controls in Australia, but there is a Huge difference, between the Anglican influence in Canada, Australia, parts of Europe compared to that of America–HUGE. It is FAR more systematic here as well as harder to overthrow via laws, etc., due to the political machinery of the ultra-religious patriarchs IN America. Same reason why there had to be Civil War to end slavery [rebellion, revolt, etc] in America, other wise it would have NEVER ended–even then, it Still took the revolts of the Civil Rights years to end Jim Crow laws–both peaceful AND violent [the right loves to forget the fact that it wasn't until Black man said, we gonna start Shooting that Whites in this nation started Listening, FACT, and it was After Luther addressed Economic Privilege in this country as well as opposing Vietnam, US IMPERIALISM, ALL BACKED BY NONE OTHER THAN CHRISTIANITY, when he was assassinated, is there a connection? You betcha].

We are not just simply dealing with male individuals within the church, when it comes to marriage, but we are yes, dealing with Systems, that thrive on the subjugation of women, especially when it comes to the mass labor pool/cheap labor OR when it comes to Race or WAR [needing war babies]. OR maintaining a Culture of privilege, mark my words

the oppression of women in America will get far worse, laws will be reversed when the cultural demographics shift, as they are now, when ‘white’ man gets afraid of losing HIS white male privilege, and That is why, we are seeing the rise in fundamentalism AND the whole QF CULTS. And the whole manhood/womanhood garbage…who are I would bet on it, KKK to the max, they even Look like KKK. [I used to live in the South so I know the corruption/racism of the Southern Christian political labyrinth.]

Do not kid yourselves, they have far more political pull than many realize, and that is why it took such a fight to GET domestic violence laws even on the Books in this nation.

Jane

Comment by Deborah

January 20, 2010 @ 11:28 am

Anna,

Really cool, if heartbreaking, missions you two have!! Am I imagining that you two wrote a mutuality article and are grads of Miami U.? That’s my alma mater.

Blessings all,

Deb

Comment by Jane

January 20, 2010 @ 11:53 am

To be fair here, on another angle to this problem, and I’ll include it as you mentioned part of it, the issues of violence in relationships OUTSIDE of marriage and we are seeing this in the GLBT communities, esp with women against women [domestic violence and even rape],

feminists [yes, I am a radical feminist advocate and worker] also have the problem of another part of infrastructure that is NOT religiously influenced, BUT is the result of Years of internalizing patriarchy and self-hate Due to religious influence, and by influence I include the media, economics [advertising, etc to sell goods] and what we call Culture, that has been, influenced and at times controlled BY the church–

and that is the confronting of another type of misogyny–internalized and defeminizing women Due to the hatreds of the patriarchal Religious systems. Or we can call it ‘forced de-gender’ and That presents mega problems too because the force de-gender is still glorifying male traits [violence esp and strength] while demonizing female traits [nurture, beauty, etc]. They do this under the belief that ‘traits’ are not biologically determined but are Conditioned based on religious doctrines-Culture, patriarchy.

I agree on some points of that, we Do see extreme gender boxes that are most surely the constructs of patriarchs–however, the interesting thing about de-constructing is that it Still is appealing to the favored patriarchal traits while Erasing ‘women’ or the ‘female’. So the two have more in common though they are opposed,

my theory [and others are also of this theory] is that much of this is due to liberalism that is economically conservative [capitalism] and that the feminization of poverty, slavery and its influence on people’s perceptions of human worth, are to blame. Human worth according to their labor that is…

and I suppose here we really get more into race and class systems of oppression. Interestingly however, Biblically included, they all come from the same thing,

the ruling over women.

And That, that does leave us with one huge problem [if we are Honest that is], IS religion, in of itself, a construct of man, to justify ‘controlling’ and ‘enslaving’ others?

I won’t LIE to you, I have and am asking this question, SERIOUSLY, a lot. Because in all honesty, when I peel away the layers, it could Very well be true—I cannot discount this argument. No way, not unless I deliberately ignore the history of slavery and oppression AND how its more often the Religions that do the most oppression and ESPECIALLY OF WOMEN.

The whole story of Eve has been the BACKBONE of the worst Human Right Abuse Justifications from the Holocausts to the Sharia Law to the Gendercides in numerous countries to the butchering of women all over the globe. As for the ‘sentence given to Adam’ men have Cleverly shifted their part onto women even, in many parts Africa, women do 90 percent OF ALL THE WORK, that is FACT. [fact, women Do grow the majority of world's food, NOT MEN].

Men have relieved their ‘part of the curse’ so to speak, by dumping it onto women and others of other races, not only that, they Continue to do so, even After Christ–the New Testament Reinforced women’s curse while lifting the mans, though it IS subtle in how it was done. IT gave the backbone reasoning to support witch hunts, marital rape, domestic violence, etc….to support or turn a blind eye too.

So it would be very easy to See how the statement of God [looking at this in logical reason, critiquing here] saying, man, you are ruler, etc. and the Favoring of man [Eve was twenty times more cursed/punished than Adam EVEN though Adam OUTRIGHT DEFIED GOD, Adam was only told he would work, Eve was told she would be made sorrowful, ruled, in pain, AND also, die, work, etc and all the man's part...Plus some--though SHE was deceived, ADAM was not, therefore, it reads like God favors man and regretted creating Woman--most Read it that way],

so, IF you look at that, then you Could see how man Created God, to justify HIS oppressive rule.

IT IS A VALID QUESTION. And relying solely on how Christ acted on earth [again, looking at this with logic only] that isn’t enough either because Immediately, Paul reverses this—and the clincher there is, men are saved, Women, IF, IF they continue in childbearing…that part of scripture sends a very strong Double message, women, you are saved BUT…well, Maybe saved, BUT,

see it Presents problems–a lot of them. And not enough really want to Probe into this, because it Does make one question the Legitamacy (sic) of Christianity.

Its just Far too convenient for excuses to oppress women and undesirables. I believe that is why it is Impossible to change the church where abuse is concerned, and it will Take the legal system to crack down and crack down hard to END violence to women.

This may very well mean Ending the separation of church and state–which, I somewhat support [I'm undecided on this, but I'm leaning more towards removing the protections of religious control--though I realize it is dangerous and paves the way for fascism in other forms--but women are enslaved anyway so really, what Difference does it make? IT doesn't]

OR at least, removing the protections to where the State can move in and Do something to prosecute these Thugs and Criminals {MOSTLY MEN–BUT THE WOMEN WHO SUPPORT AND ABUSE TOO, AND THERE ARE PLENTY OF THEM IN THE CHURCH] who are abusing with impunity both spiritually AND physically, by creating Environments where oppression and abuse is sanctioned. I am going to fight for legislation on THIS matter—particularly where Children are concerned.

And I think its necessary due to the influx of Islam in the West as well–we will be Forced to, eventually, do Something, to remove religious protections for abuse, that is all there is to it.

As for my faith, I am questioning…the ONLY reason I have NOT embraced dumping it all, IS because of the knowledge of Sin. NOT love, I don’t believe in love, not in the way its preached in Christianity because I don’t see it, I hear it but I don’t see it–Sadly, I see more Love in Unbelievers, ESPECIALLY MEN.

Put it this way, I told God last night, IF I had my choice, I’d rather be in Hell with those who are NOT Christian and who ARE doing the works of Love, who are kind, who are gentle, who are doing the Relief work so needed in our world, than be in Heaven with these Christian men who abuse, rape, verbally abuse and those who support such, ANY DAY. That, right there,

IS sad, but its truth. I don’t want to go to a Heaven that is full of misogynists. That to me, would be one SCREWED UP HEAVEN.

And that’s kind of where I am in my faith now…I’m not eyeing the church anymore, IF I did, I’d be a full blown Atheist.

IF I want to see Christ, I have to look at Pagans and Humanists and Secularists, who are doing most of the Love works in our world today–hell I saw more Love in Communism when I was in the party,

that to me, BY THEIR FRUITS YE SHALL KNOW THEM.

Jesus said that…so I pattern my Life now, not after the Dogma of Christiandom, esp the gender constructs [the porn queen wife and all that garbage] but after the Relief workers and activists who are fighting to end suffering or to relief it–who are, mostly, non-Christian.

IF it were NOT for my knowledge of my OWN sin and sin nature AND the Word of God, I’d be a non-believer, that is the ONLY reason, I hang onto my faith,

that, and THAT alone.

kind of sad, isn’t it?

Jane

Comment by .elise.anne.

January 20, 2010 @ 12:21 pm

I’m just gonna jump in to the original questions in the post; i see there is a good discussion going back and forth here though. I pray that all will be encouraged and blessed through it.

I’ve been married for almost two years, too, Anna and Ryan, and we are encouraged/impressed with it too.

We worked out our biggest problems before marriage, though, and a foundation of individual and personal healing from them. Then we were able to work on healing our relationship (well, first deciding if we wanted to continue it).

I always recommed people to not move toward marraige/committing to spending a life together until all of life’s secrets are out and worked through. It prevents so much mess later. I think one of the reasons marraige is seen as so error-prone the way they discuss it in the book, is because people these days are encouraged to be intimate with each other but not let out their secrets and trust one another. So then they come crashing out later in marriage and trust is destroyed. Of course, some people are so steeped in their sin and deceit that they might convince their partner that all their secrets are out, when they aren’t…

My husband is fighting against a porn addiction, and since he told me that before we were engaged, and sought help, I was able to seek my own help and decide if I wanted to really commit to life with him. If that hadn’t come out until we had been married for years, so much of our relationship would’ve been destroyed.

Comment by .elise.anne.

January 20, 2010 @ 12:25 pm

oh, btw,

total egalitarian freedom to live and be exactly who I grow to be, and same for my husband, has saved our commitment and relationship also.

Comment by Deborah

January 20, 2010 @ 12:30 pm

Sad, but a point of honesty w/ God is a good thing even when sad, Jane.

I agree w/ you that there is form of internalized misogyny that defeminizes women, and I believe there are some ranks of feminist theory that, in deconstructing gender expectations, have actually served to give women a male normative to aspire to rather than freeing her to play w/ the trickier area of what valid gender differences there might be (both nature and nurture) and to value hers equally. This was a focal point in a debate I recently had w/ some CBErs who see more “sameness” than I do.

I also agree that non-Christian men have often made me feel more holistically valued than Christian men, although I think this was really more on the surface (b/c they had absorbed some more egalitarian ideas and so did not feel threatened by a brain) and that there were other respects (mostly re: sex) in which they devalued me more than Christian men if we dug deeper.

I am a believer in Christ and in the Bible as are most people here. So a lot of the questions you’re asking have already been settled for me. (I see a good God with a good Word that has just been misused and abused a lot.)

Again, I’m really sorry that you feel such deep incompatability between justice and belief. I imagine you are here so persistently b/c you would like to believe otherwise. I hope you’ll find grace to do so.

D

Comment by Mara

January 20, 2010 @ 12:48 pm

The Kingdom of Heaven suffereth violence and the violent take it by force.

The Kingdom of Heaven is like a great tree that the birds of the air make their nests in.

Jane, when reading your above post, these two scriptures came to mind. Wish I knew where they were cause I’d like to give their references but I can’t think of them now.

Anyway, the first one, of course, means to me, that God came to establish His kingdom of heaven. But men were right there to come in, take over and make it like any other religion, by force. Making Christianity just as much an opiate of the people as any other religion in some cases. Even though that was never the intention of God.

The other, I heard a preacher talk about. He said, when you consider that the birds in the parable of the Sower are representative of the devil/demons and apply it to this, then the birds nesting in the Tree (Kingdom of Heaven) is not a good thing. And the doctrines of demons, including those that would use the story of Adam and Eve to hurt women are like those birds.

Also, like you, I am appalled at how much evil has crept into the church. The only thing I would caution, though, is deciding that all the church is like this. That all the churches are controlled by the violent or entertain nesting birds(demons) that don’t belong. Many/Some places are not like that. Perhaps connecting with more of those places would help. Perhaps connecting with Anna and American CBEers and working toward change would help.

I still agree. Too many hold onto too much in the way of the traditions of men against women. But connecting with those who want to fight for the same things you want to fight for can begin to make a difference in your life and in the world, and dear God, I hope and pray, in the Church.

Comment by Ryan & Anna

January 20, 2010 @ 5:22 pm

For those of you who have identified your own marriage as egalitarian, would you describe it as:

A. Mutual authority and submission
B. Freedom from gender stereotypes and roles
C. Both
D. Other

Are there any specific ways you see these factors playing out which have led your marriage to be a positive, joyful experience?

Comment by Liz

January 20, 2010 @ 5:33 pm

There is much excellent work that has been done to expose faulty translations (yes…written by males over centuries) which support patriarchy. While sin abounds, there is much grace also even though the work is done quietly and without force.

Since early times in the history of the church, there have always been people who held to the true word of God and refused to compromise with corrupt rulers.
For over 40 years we have been involved with the persecuted church where believers and imprisoned, torured, denied schooling etc. just because they believe in God. While there is the ongoing need to petition governments and try to change laws, the immediate need is always to feed the hungry, clothe the destitute, care for the children which Voice of the Martyrs and other similar missions do admirably. Many times pressure has been brought to bear on atheistic governments and people have been released because of international petitions (not because they have changed their belief system at all)

In this area, we do all we can for the oppressed as well as pray for and witness to the oppressors, many of whom are converted by the witness of those they are persecuting.

I’m not saying we shouldn’t try to change unjust laws……just that there is work to be done in the meantime and we all have different work to do in this messed up world. What gives us hope is that one day soon, God will end this present evil system and mete out fair punishment – meanwhile we work to comfort, encourage, educate and hopefully make a difference to the world around us.

This is all so much easier when we have some like-minded Christians to share with so this is what I would be praying for you, Jane, and any others who may be reading this blog. We need to be supported and encouraged ourselves.

Comment by Liz

January 20, 2010 @ 6:49 pm

I recently reviewed a book for CBE, entitled “Shaping the Future, girls and our destiny” It is a compilation of reports from people working with girl children around the globe and is a great overview of what is happening in our world. Not a pretty picture by any means, but there is a lot being done to alleviate suffering and particularly to educate. The authors all see education as the single most important factor in bringing about change. Girls and women won’t aspire to anything else unless they have the awareness that things could be different and so those who work in this area are majoring on teaching that women can be far more than just domestic slaves and sex objects.

The same applies to teaching on marriage and this is where CBE is one of the foremost educators in showing people the way to a fully egalitarian one-ness union. So many people (women and men) just follow the crowd or their family history rather than looking to see what God intended and what the bible really says about marriage.

This coming month I have agreed to write an article for a very conservative women’s magazine. The title of the article is “Celebrating Marriage” so I have an opening to write about a one-ness marriage in all its possibilities and delights.
I won’t be saying anything against other ideas about marriage (like headship, roles etc.) but hope I can give hope and anticipation about the possibility of a fulfilling marriage. Working with these people requires a fine line but while they still invite me to write I am happy to have this window of opportunity.

Comment by Jane

January 20, 2010 @ 7:14 pm

I listed this site on the Ex Quiverfull, I don’t know if they are aware of you or not,

they are going full speed ahead in setting up shelters and such to assist women in Leaving patriarchal-churches/groups, leaving or escaping the abuses and the philosophies. That’s what the site said,

I Included you on a list of resources, that may have knowledge of exit counselors to help women, if you know of any, as I’m sure, not all of the women will want to abandon their faith.

For more info, see the Ex-Quiverfull blog. There is a lawyer who has taken somewhat of the lead there, to help these women, and many who want to escape but cannot as of yet. I’m sure, we will be seeing a LOT more court cases, to this regard.

anyway, Mara, thank you…and thank you Liz, I kept the email, I did finally get it.

AS to the issue of faith, I have like I said, been questioning, for many reasons, and like I said, the knowledge of sin, has been somewhat the ‘glue’ that has kept me from turning totally away. Anyway, I do still, believe in Jesus,

and after some thought on this…in all truthfulness to Him, because ‘truth’ is something I’ve been really asking about, the whole living lies and what lies are [and I do believe for the most part, today's church IS apostate, a lie, that the son of perdition IS sitting in the seat of the temple--we forget, the temple is the church, temple of the Holy Spirit is the body, etc...that came to me months ago, and its something that has been on the back of my mind]

but there were two things, that came to me today, One, signs and wonders and two, something in Daniel, about the end days. The removing of the Spirit, mentioned in Daniel,

why is it, that so many, will follow the anti-christ with his ‘signs and wonders’ and then, Jesus said, signs and wonders will follow my disciples, etc?

Where are the signs and wonders today? That aren’t false? Good question,

one that I think, many should be asking—Jesus said, those who worship God must do so, in Spirit and in Truth. What if, the issue is, there is no Spirit, in many today? [how about many of the teachings? explains a lot there, why So much SENSUALITY] I think, that right there, pretty much sums up, why there is no Signs and Wonders, and one of those Signs, is yes,

Love.

There is a Remnant however…a remnant is a small, small piece of fabric, out of a whole. Usually it is torn, there is a Remnant.

The obsession with roles and marriage, again that comes to me Mara, in the days it will be like the days of Noah [the violence and ever thought being evil, so violent that God was grieved He made man, so violent the Earth was polluted--Genesis], Jesus said, and they will be GIVEN IN MARRIAGE AND MARRYING. IN the days He comes they will be giving in marriage…

Why did He say that?

I think I know why, and again, They will have a Form of Godliness but will Deny the POWER [the Spirit] thereof.

That nailed it for me…seeking Truth, God peels away all the Pretense. There is a Religious Spirit, and it is False. It is more than legalism,

but I’m seeing it. Maybe, the reason God allows failure and pain [in contrast to the promises of utopia claimed by so many] is so that we See what is REAL, in contrast to what is False.

Anyway Mara, God lead me, I stumbled onto it, by accident,

just about twenty minutes ago, I’ve never heard of it or seen it before, on a website I rarely browse…

http://www.nacronline.com/emotional-issues/recovery-from-doubt-experiencing-god

Mara will know just what this means, as God has been using her, to help me, in so many ways…isn’t that something Mara? LOL, I broke down in tears when I saw that…before I even read the Title, where it says ‘doubt’.

Thought I’d share it…I needed a miracle today.

Jane

Comment by Robyn

January 20, 2010 @ 8:05 pm

“For those of you who have identified your own marriage as egalitarian, would you describe it as:

A. Mutual authority and submission
B. Freedom from gender stereotypes and roles
C. Both
D. Other

Are there any specific ways you see these factors playing out which have led your marriage to be a positive, joyful experience?”

BOTH. We have always had an assumption of mutual authority, equality. I can’t remember a time from courtship through the present that one of us has assumed superiority over the other. I credit our secular educations for this, honestly. Although both of us were raised “in the church,” I graduated from a liberal women’s college and attended seminary. I had worked through a lot of my issues with sexism in the church before I even met my husband. I knew who I was and the type of relationship I wanted. The “secular” Western world is far more affirming of the full equality of women than the church is, though of course there is still work to do.

But there was never an assumption that he, as the male, would be the “leader” of the relationship and I the “helper,” or that he would be the “provider” and I the “nurturer.” That assumption is extremely damaging, and I honestly would never have dated a man who held it. Instead, we took each other as we were, explored each other’s strengths and weaknesses as INDIVIDUALS outside of gender, and adjusted our relationship accordingly. Neither of us expected nor forced the other to fit a gendered structure.

We make all decisions together, based on consensus. There is no “tie breaking” vote. We communicate until we agree. Period.

Also, my husband has fought vigilantly against assumptions of male inferiority in parenting. He cares for our children in every way that I do, barring those biologically-based functions of pregnancy and breastfeeding. When people make stupid remarks about him “babysitting” or how great it is that he fathers his children, he is very quick to point out that he is just doing his job and that he loves it.

We’ve had trouble with other couples, particularly in small group scenarios, insisting that we “do marriage” incorrectly because I am not weak and my husband is not overbearing. That has made our committment to equality stronger as we have had to discuss how to respond to such accusations.

Comment by Deborah

January 20, 2010 @ 8:27 pm

Elise Anne,
I’m thinking all cards on the table is a good thing too.

Ryan/Anna,
Good question. In a broader survey, I wonder how many might respond to B by saying their roles outwardly fit expectations more or less (breadwinner/homemaker) but that they do not put artificial structures on each others’ personalities in relating. There are certainly egals who have traditional work/home breakdowns, but it does seem that a lot of the ones who get fired up and pursue CBE and the like were driven to it by how the Church questioned their outwardly non-traditional roles.

Liz,
That is an awesome opportunity, howevermuch you might crave to say more, and it sounds like an awesome book.

Jane,
So happy for the miracle you needed today! You can find a link providing CBE connected counselors here: http://www.cbeinternational.org/?q=content/directories Additionally, SKF counseling does professional counseling over the phone for individuals leaving hyper-patriarchy movements: http://www.skfcounseling.com/templates/System/default.asp?id=48922

Robyn, it does seem that out of hierarchal marriages I’ve observed there is a higher rate of healthier soft-comp among more educated couples than those who are less educated. So I can believe that a secular education saved you, as you say, from a lot of these issues.

Comment by Liz

January 20, 2010 @ 8:35 pm

Jane…thanks for sharing all that and especially the blogsite which is just wonderful! Barbara’s story will be so helpful to many. I have copied it and hope to use it well. So glad you found the site – God is good! I’ll answer it soon.

Comment by Jane

January 20, 2010 @ 9:29 pm

Well, I just want to say real quick, before closing my web…I did attend college, that Probably does have a LOT to do with why I in my heart didn’t embrace the church teachings,

though, I have seen a type of patriarchy though its more ‘subtle’ within academia, that may be depending on what type of political climate, where I attended it was somewhat progressive [though sexist/pro-porn, etc] and/or Marxist [which can Be very chauvinist while spewing liberalism, depending on the degree of Nationalism, the alliances with Islam there have made this mentality far worse.]

My husband now is an academic, extremely intelligent, anarchist though Orthodox Jewish background, misogynist to the CORE, though he didn’t show that side while in college [non-traditional students both of us], his misogyny has a lot to do with Judaism, but, its FAR worse,

when they are academics, they hide it better, its way more mental and power games and more subtle–narcissist, so,

my point is, Education, is no guarantee and many feminists and Professional women find this out

the hard way, so you’ve been fore warned.

Jane

Comment by Trevor

January 21, 2010 @ 8:56 am

In response to your questions Ryan.

A. Mutual authority and submission
B. Freedom from gender stereotypes and roles
C. Both
D. Other

We too fit into the BOTH category but the authority part doesn’t come into the equation, just mutual submission. We always confer with each other over everything and there has never been anything, in almost 44 years of marriage, where we have felt the need to over-ride the other. Usually when decisions require a solution that may affect one of us more than the other we defer to the most affected person and work from there, all the while seeking consensus.

In respect to gender stereotyping we are not aware of it being an issue with us personally. As others have commented it most often shows up when either comparing with others or them comparing, unfavorably, with us because they are more comfortable with accepted stereotypes and roles. While I’m your fairly typical handyman male who loves outdoor and mechanical (fix it) opportunities I don’t mind giving a hand wherever it is needed, inside or outside the house.

The key for us is having the same goals, aspirations and expectations of both life and marriage. We were fortunate in that we did a lot of letter writing during our brief courtship and really got to know one another’s heart. We have always been able to appeal to the deeper, inner desires that drive us in our shared conviction to be pleasing to God in all that we say and do. We still find it pretty amazing because we come from totally different backgrounds and yet God has put us together as incredibly compatible people.

The other thing that occurred to me as I think through this is that I have a profound respect for Liz’s sweet innocence, spirituality and devotion to God. I also have a profound respect for her mental and emotional capacity. Added to this I have a profound respect for her musical ability recognising that those beautiful, nurturing hands can lovingly caress a keyboard in the same loving way that she has caressed both me and all of our children and grandchildren.

Knowing that there’s no way that I want to mistreat this gift (gifted person) that God has given me with whom to share my life. So gender stereotyping or role playing doesn’t come into it. I don’t expect her to do certain things because she is a woman and my wife I just love seeing her be herself in all the situations in which life (God) has placed her. I just love watching her continue to grow and develop as God stretches her and equips her for everything He has planned.

And the wonder of it all – we get to do this together! Oneness is wonder filled.

Comment by Jane

January 21, 2010 @ 10:53 am

Trevor, was reading this morning,

this is really to everyone, but to me, reading what you wrote, about Liz,

was surreal, its so unthinkable to me that it’s surreal.

I mention this, because maybe, it might shed some light, to just what abuse does–in one’s life. To even read that, is just so unreal in my world and in many other worlds that, can’t even imagine it, much less understand it.

That, that is what abuse does to people–to the comps who have no idea what they are doing to women,

that is what abuse does, that is what controlling and suffocation and micro-managing a human being does to their soul…

to read Trevor’s post, is just surreal. I wouldn’t even really know how to respond to that…

maybe, why I don’t really understand how to respond to God.

just a thought…for you comps and patriarchs out there…

Jane

Comment by Jon Trott

January 21, 2010 @ 2:15 pm

Ryan and Anna quote the book:

“On page 67, the authors say ‘men face a different sort of emptiness. We are forever frustrated in our ability to conquer life…A man aches for affirmation, for validation, to know that he has come through. This also explains his deepest fear – failure.’”

I’m a man. My deepest fear has to do with abandonment, not being loved. Failure? Maybe way down the list of anxieties… but all these would come before it:

1. Fear re my wife’s health (she’s had cancer 2x).
2. Anxiety over very close relatives who do not know Christ and live carelessly.
3. A sometimes fear (and this is confession) that all I believe is illusion, an elaborate self-deception.

Have I violated some code of what men should fear by having these fears instead of a “fear of failure” first? I wish we could all just be human and lay off the stupid gender stereotyping. I’m sure some good can still be done with this book… but for me, I groan at the damage it will also do.

Comment by Anna

January 21, 2010 @ 3:45 pm

Jon,

As you can imagine, I don’t think you have violated any “man-code.” There was another quote in the book that bothered me in a similar way:

“Now, add to our personality differences the fact that he’s a man and I’m a woman. You get two people so opposite from one another they are often a complete mystery to the other…I like to relax in a hot bath, with lavender bubbles. This doesn’t appeal to John at all, not one bit. Sometimes when he’s stressed I’ll suggest a hot bath and he’ll look at me like I suggested he paint his fingernails. I enjoy watching cake decorating shows. John is hooked on Man Vs. Wild. He likes the occasional cigar. I don’t like the smell. I love scented candles. John abhors them. A treat for me is getting a pedicure; an amazing day for John is going bow hunting.” (p. 43)

Personally, I side with Stasi instead of John on almost all these. I like bubble baths, cake decorating shows, and scented candles; I’ve never watched Man Vs. Wild, smoked a cigar, or gone bow hunting. When I read this portion of the book, I had a hard time not drawing the inference that they were suggesting I’m not enough of a man.

~Ryan

Comment by Deborah

January 21, 2010 @ 3:54 pm

Great to hear more from the guys. And as Jane’s post shows, I think so many women have been in or around abuse so much that it’s a good sort of punch to the gut to hear men speaking from their heart. Trevor’s thoughts were beautiful, and Jon, no need to be obsessed with failure here :). The basis, I presume, for their making that statement is the idea that Gen 3:17-18 indicates that men, in the fall, will be focused on their work. That in itself becomes a painful expectation–that the first thing men necessarily must say to each other is, “Hi, I’m a lawyer,” or “Hi, I’m a garbage man.” While it does tend to happen that way, guess what happens to suicide rates among men in times of financial duress. Being fully human–both parties–is a good thing.

D

Comment by Deborah

January 21, 2010 @ 3:57 pm

Cross-posted w/ you Ryan, didn’t mean to exclude you from the guys. Yeah, I’m fairly limited on “feminine” interests. Mention scrapbooking, and I want to run the other way. I’d gladly hike around a mountain in orange on my dream day dodging the bow-hunters though ;-).

Comment by .elise.anne.

January 21, 2010 @ 4:02 pm

re: Ryan’s questions ~

C. Both.

BUT…I (more than him, ironically) am recovering from comp/rigid gender roles teaching. When we got married, I did research to try and find out what it meant to be a “good wife” now that I was one. I couldn’t understand – God made me loud, outgoing, speak-my-mind, leader, etc. Did I really have to change who I was to fit this “good wife” model? My husband let me go on the journey of questioning that, mainly by saying, “I dont want you to change who you are…where are you getting that message? Let’s investigate…” It really has been a journey.

While my husband always pushed me to escape the confines of those roles, he had a life-changing moment when he read the book Transforming A Rape Culture which I had from college. Now he can see the patriarchy in all our societal structures, and he actively fights against them. His newfound knowledge and activism has freed me even further to express and discover my feelings and thoughts.

I thank God that I am free now, with his full love and support. And thankful that he is secure in who he is, and free to be who he is, with my love and support.

He cooks, we both clean. He makes more money but I am more involved in my job/ministry and our life operates around my work. I manage the money, he fixes the cars, but because he wants to and enjoys it.

It’s nice. :)

Comment by Liz

January 21, 2010 @ 6:10 pm

Ryan asked what led marriage to be a positive, joyful experience. What is most precious to me is being accepted for myself and not being ridiculed or belittled for my actions or opinions. This is not to say that I should be gently rebuked if I am being unkind or thoughtless, but the separation of behaviour from the person.

In our relationship, I can count on the fact that Trevor is so appreciative of all that God has done for him in Christ, that he wants to keep those ‘short accounts’ with God, and therefore with me. We both don’t enjoy any sense of distance between us and look for the first opportunity to make things right when misunderstandings occur. We always encourage couples to expect the best and not to settle into poor coping methods when disappointed or frustrated. It can seem easy at the time to overlook things, while burying hurts which in time can turn to bitterness.

Ideal? surreal? maybe to a world which has been so destroyed by deception, abuse, power etc. Sometimes it seems as though our very happiness can be a stumbling block as people watching expect misery (as the books suggests) and could construe we are faking it or ignoring problems. How sad that Christian leaders and authors (people of influence) seem to think that living in struggle will help people!

Two becoming one is a journey and not without learning curves, but the journey can be made enjoyable as we treat each other in a respectful, loving way and genuinely want the best for each other. Listening to each other’s heart is a huge key and giving the other person the freedom to express their heart without fear of ridicule or trivialising what to them is important.

Comment by Jon Trott

January 21, 2010 @ 6:41 pm

Ryan…

The Stasi quote made me laugh. Cigars are manly? ACK!!!!! Cigars are DISGUSTING! Sigh…

Sure, I do fall into some classic “male” (allegedly) categories. I like football. Carol endures it. I’m more “on” about sexuality than Carol. But I like chick flicks as much as, maybe a little more than, Carol.

Carol, too, is a mix of tradition and non-tradition. She certainly is the “hostess with the mostest” in thinking of others’ needs — lessons I’ve spent our whole marriage trying to have her disciple me in. She’s ahead of me as well in cleaning and dishes and the like, again I do some but am behind her significantly because I’m not *fast* enough to jump on it before she does. But she likes hanging out with other people (the mythical man doing man things with other men?) while I want to hang out with her, almost obnoxiously I suspect.

Again… wish John and Staci would just let us be human so we can learn from each other ways in which we can be conformed to Christ. Wouldn’t that be nice?

Comment by Jamie

January 21, 2010 @ 7:42 pm

The verse appears in their chapter about a husband and wife joining together in spiritual warfare, and they use it to suggest that two can take on ten times as many warriors, when the verse obviously refers to our inability to conquer anyone without God’s assistance.

I think a far better selection would’ve been Ecc. 4:9-12. Not sure how they could’ve missed that and chosen this one actually . . .

Thoughts: if John Eldredge says men’s deepest needs are affirmation, etc….and their greatest fear…failure….

Oh my, so many women fear “failure”. I’m thinking of my mom right now especially. That stereotype then just isn’t true.

Now someone here mentioned “abandonment” as the greatest one for men? Yes, I can see that!

so, IF you look at that, then you could see how man created God, to justify HIS oppressive rule.

God created man in his own image and likeness . . .

And man has been returning the favor ever since!

If ancient, Holy Spirit-inspired women could read and write and have access to quill and scroll — I just wonder how “different” the Bible would be . . .

Comment by Jane

January 22, 2010 @ 5:07 pm

Well, that’s just it isn’t it? No woman Wrote any part of the Bible,

which, dumping the Meth like poison of Religion and using common sense, we See that there is some deeply embedded Misogyny in Religions. No one asks, if its such a Shame for women to ‘speak in the church’ then what the hell will Heaven be like? And all boys club with silent women as decor, or worse?

And why do women even pray or sing, if speaking is such a Disgrace? I say, don’t sing in church, sing in Bars where its NOT a disgrace, seriously, if one is going to follow the misogynist religions.

Been thinking on this a lot and the thing that kept coming back to me, for Those of you who have these good marriages, you all have one thing in common,

Education. IF, IF you had not that education and Only the Bible doctrines I don’t think you’d be so Enlightened…

there is a Reason they called the ‘religious ruled years’ the Dark Ages and the Science years, the Age of Enlightenment.

And it was that Enlightenment, when Human Rights became conscious—

not in the Dark Ages, where thousands of thousands of WOMEN were Butchered, by none other than

Religion.

Like Meth, it’s toxic, it poisons the body, destroys the soul,and Both make sleepless slaves/sex slaves out of Women esp [Prov 31 is used like Meth to women]

but the difference is, Meth, horrible as it is, is easier, to ‘detox’ from than Religion.

And I think, the brain actually, damaged as it becomes on meth, probably has a better chance, of restoration–because religion with its fear of hell and rejection of question and the belief that human reasoning is evil [how convenient for the power apparatus eh] and that submission to ‘self death martyrdom’ esp to women is the road to Heaven [or suicide bombing-not that different really] and the psychological FGMS and Burkas that ‘doctrines’ do to women,

no wonder, prozac doesn’t even work to free the religious soul–but will help, the ex Meth addict.

Ain’t it something…

if one doesn’t question these FACTS, then one obviously is denying the poisonous results, kind of like denying there is a cancer,

you can deny it, but it still kills ya.

Jane

Comment by Deborah

January 22, 2010 @ 5:40 pm

Well, Deborah, Hannah, Miriam, and Mary got to sneak some songs in :). As quoted by others… but I thought I’d point it out. It’s something, but it doesn’t address your whole gist. I’m just rather attached to being the namesake of onesuch ;-).

Comment by Mara

January 22, 2010 @ 6:52 pm

There is also speculation, not at all proven but neither disproven, that a woman may have written Hebrews.

Funny think about Hebrews. It’s still a letter, like all the other epistles. It has a closing like the other letters. But it’s opening and greeting has been completely severed off.
Wonder why?

May have absolutely nothing to do with the possibility of it being written by a female.
Perhaps it was written by a male who fell from grace (afa the church was concerned).
But I still wonder.

We may never know until we get to heaven.

But it’s fun to speculate here.

Comment by Jane

January 22, 2010 @ 9:30 pm

I’ve heard that speculation Mara but I seriously DOUBT IT. Paul would have never allowed it and surely not the men of the first church, many of the Jewish scholars. If women were not even to speak–they sure weren’t allowed to write, they made it very Clear in the Bible then [or whoever translated] that a woman’s role was to bear children, etc. Nothing more…IF she was single–she could assist the brethren in the church, I’m sure it was a typical errand-coffee 101 type of thing. [like it is now]

I know one deaconess was also a slave, which I find interesting–how they reconciled that because female slaves in Roman Empire were usually ‘sex’ slaves…but hey, under misogyny anything goes right?

No, the thing about Hebrews is that whoever wrote it had a deep knowledge of the Hebrew Priesthood/Hebrew law, so I’m thinking it may have been a former Lawyer/or higher up within the Jewish community who had converted and they kept his name quiet for safety reasons Maybe?

Not only that, but its interesting how Anna, served in the Temple day and night but after Paul–women were told to be silent and Ask husbands at home, so, quite a reverse there, if I may say,

again, whether that is due to translations I don’t know, but the reverse is so blatantly obvious…especially where it says that women will be saved IF she continues in childbearing, etc.,

and then another part, where Paul said a woman that leaves service to marry [widow] has Damnation,

men get ERROR, like the man who slept with his father’s wife, women get Damnation. [typical Double standard]

IF THAT ISN’T CLEAR MISOGYNY,

I don’t know what is.

No, there is no doubt–there IS a lot of misogyny that is just blatant, in much of the New Testament After the four gospels, so I find it hard to believe that a woman would be allowed to write anything. Women were encouraged to assist the poor but, of course, if a woman is to submit to her husband in everything–that means, ONLY if the man allows,

which, we know, that probably wasn’t the case. Like it is today…why more Christian women [most, there ARE exceptions to this rule] are mass consumers [you know, better homes and gardens, shop till you drop, wear I'm a hottie shirt for Husband and be all prissy and never say no to sex, with all that, Who has time to help poor Right?] and so forth–because it would mean the service taking time away from their husband’s 24 hour slave, er, I mean wife service. [jealousy, you know no other gods before husbands type of thing LOL]

Which is probably a good thing, we have secular organizations, today to take up the slack there…

Jane

Comment by Liz

January 22, 2010 @ 9:48 pm

Just on my way out to lunch but…have to say again that all those verses which seem as though Paul is ‘against’ women have been poorly translated or taken out of context. The next post we put up has to do with the issue of women being ‘silent’ so wait for it…….

Comment by Mara

January 22, 2010 @ 10:01 pm

Jane: “Paul would have never allowed it”

You don’t know that. You know the Paul that tradition paints.

The real Paul praised Junia [a woman] as one among the best of the APOSTLES.
Scriptures from Paul used to silence women have been severely tampered with.
Tradition and translation even refuse to call Phoebe a deacon, translating it servant when they translated that exact same word used for men.
Paul called her a deacon just like the men. Translators were inconsistent.

There are many, many more things that these CBEers can tell you about the real Paul verses the traditional version of him.

But one of Paul’s teachers was Priscilla. He says that many places, and in some places puts her name first BEFORE her husband’s.

Don’t swallow hook, line, and sinker what the traditions and translations of men tell you to swallow.

I can’t say that Hebrews was written by a woman. But if it ever is proven that it was, I’ll be laughing pretty hard. Not at you, but the attempt of men to silence women.
If it is proven that it was not, then, oh, well. I’ll get over it. As Deborah said, we have the words of other women recorded (Don’t forget Lemuel’s mother in Proverbs 31)

Also know that a more correct way to look at the women will be save in childbearing is that she will be saved THROUGH it.
Childbearing was far more dangerous back then than it is now. Women were not always confident they’d make it out alive, or that their child would. It was a more fearful thing back then than now.
Just because some idiot somewhere wants to add works to salvation for women by misteaching/translating that verse doesn’t make Paul a misogynist. It means the idiot trying to make Paul say it is a misogynist.

If you don’t agree with me, fine.
All I ask is that you keep your mind open.
The traditions of men bring death to the soul in so many ways. If I’m wrong about Paul, I’m wrong. But if I’m right, don’t you miss out on the benefit of knowing it yourself.

:)

Comment by ls

January 22, 2010 @ 11:35 pm

Didn’t the authors of the Bible, especially in the gospels, write unfavorably of the male disciples frequently and write of Jesus’ relating to women in radically positive ways and significantly important ways?

That has to be the Spirit! not fallen man

I’m amazed at the story of Judah (fourth son of unloved Leah, who ‘praised the Lord’ when she had him after longing for the love of her husband with the first three sons) And then Judah’s dealings with Tamar, his daughter-in-law…resulting in ‘this woman is more righteous than I since I did not give her to my son’ Is that amazing or what!!? What kind of man would write those things? And Judah grew to be able to take personal responsibility for matters risking his younger brother , Benjamin. And his blessing from his father …….and Tamar in the geneology of Jesus in Matthew! What kind of man would include her name? My sensitivities really helped me enjoy the story of Judah and Tamar…it was a lot of fun to study with a group and get all of our ‘takes’ on it.

Jane, with my own trouble with fallen men, I was very sensitive to the public statement ‘this woman….’ Others seemed to just brush by this and think negatively of Tamar for what she did. I ‘picked up’ something else (a man admitting his wrong, right there in the OT, publically, too!). I’m very grateful that the group I’m with welcomes my ‘different takes’, I need that! And then to be able to see the growth in Judah, too, I was glad that I picked up on that , too.

God cares!

ls

Comment by Mara

January 23, 2010 @ 7:33 am

You know, LS, people brush off Job’s wife too.
But guess what?
She wasn’t like Job’s friends who could point the finger at him and say he must have sinned.
No. She lived with the man. She knew what he was.
In her eyes, when all hell broke loose, the great and mighty God started looking like an arbitrary, pagen diety with the whims of fallen man.
She didn’t know any better. They didn’t have a Bible back then.
God (appeared to) turned his back on Job. What was there left to do but finish the matter, curse God and die. Any women knows, how do you fight God and win. You don’t. Just resign yourself to the situation, God hates you now. So die. (If he died, she most likely would follow closesly behind and was probably looking for that in order to end it all for them both.)
And note, Job didn’t have to offer sacrifices for her. She never questioned God’s integrety or Job’s. Just in grief she said in effect, it’s over, give it up.
Yes, she spoke like a foolish woman. But at least she didn’t go on and on and on like Job’s (false) comforters.

No, she’s wasn’t incedibly noble. But neither was she the evil person some want to portray her as.

Comment by ls

January 23, 2010 @ 11:49 am

Thanks, Mara! I think I brushed Job’s wife off too as I never gave it much thought to see what you’ve noticed. It is interesting, especially that Job did not have to offer sacrifices for her.

I had noticed the changed man that Job became, giving the daughters of his second batch of children an equal inheritance as their brothers. And their names being noted. All in a male first-born dominated culture.

ls

Comment by Jane

January 23, 2010 @ 1:22 pm

I’m going to be laying low for a while—got some things with God to work through, between me and Him,

two things, popped up though, one, on this obsession with submission–last night, again it came to me, if submission [the way its taught] was So important then like it is today,

then why did Paul, totally revert when he told Timothy, tell older women to teach younger women to LOVE THEIR HUSBANDS, he didn’t say, teach them to SUBMIT?

Something not right there and I thought, what if you replaced all the words submit with Love?

It HAS to be in the translations—

I did also wonder about the part about the silence, why it says, What, did God speak only through you? Question mark–I did wonder about that one,

but its Hard to hang ONTO those things…because we SEE the total opposite–[this is one reason I'm going on this retreat with God because just I need to hear from Him]

anyway, on another thing…one reason I do question is when I first asked God flat out, ARE you a Misogynist, He lead me to OT, and in the OT I found Tons of things–that just blew me away, it was the NT and Paul, that I started having a LOT of trouble and anger–I got to some days I couldn’t stand Paul but I did wonder, too,

but once more, another thing just came out at me [I call it a type of illumination when the Holy Spirit brings something that just Screams out at me]

about Job’s wife, I never thought of this, I don’t think she was foolish–but Honest, not only that,

let me get my Bible here to make sure–that my observation is correct…yep, it Was [I've spent a LOT of time in book of Job, God showed me a LOT of things in there, and there is Something about Elihu, that people miss--El [God with us], do some Reading there–its VERY interesting]

but, God didn’t ‘condemn’ or say Anything about Job’s wife–just about the friends, about Job offering up prayer for them, God saying something about their ‘folly’….

God did NOT condemn Job’s wife for her ‘distorted’ view of God–in fact, later they had children…so for a woman to have child, remember, that was Blessing then, God opened up the womb…

God pointed that out to me–God did not scold his wife for her negative view of God…her Fear/resignation, He instead,

restored her.

Wow….

Jane

Comment by Deborah

January 23, 2010 @ 3:33 pm

Jane, et. al.,

Thanks for the thoughts on Job’s wife. I have some writing on Job sitting around (God has spoken A LOT to me through this book), and though I do not demonize her, I will return to these writings with your thoughts in mind to ponder.

D

Comment by Trevor

January 26, 2010 @ 6:42 pm

Jane

Just responding (belatedly) to your comment (90682 – Jan 21) about my comments on our egalitarian marriage seeming unreal or surreal and not knowing how to respond to that because of your experiences of abusive relationships.

I’d like to offer some hope. My own background is hugely dysfunctional. I’m the only child of my parent’s original marriage. I grew up not feeling fully a part of either of the new families and had a huge emotional deficit when it came to fully accepting a love commitment. But deep in my heart I believed and longed for something better than what I had experienced thus far in life.

As part of the journey I joined the Australian Navy and was heading down the same relationally dysfunctional path as my parents. I was drinking excessively and using women selfishly to to fill my emotional love tank. All the while I knew it was wrong and believed that I’d have to face God on this someday. Mercifully Christ met me in my unhappy circumstance and I had a radical turnaround.

Because of my disappointment with my own parenting I just read and read the Scriptures and fell in love with the faithfulness of God, which was in direct contrast to my own father who, in my experience, had trouble honoring his word. More and more I was confronted with the life of Jesus and the way that He conducted himself in all manner of relationships and I wanted to allow Him to help me, by His indwelling Spirit, to be just like that. I was never attracted to the church but to Jesus.

Wonderfully Galatians 2:20 became my life verse, and Christ has been honoring His word and promises in me from that time on. Like the Apostle Paul I used to constantly remind God that I was the worst redeemed sinner that He has had to deal with and that it was a huge uphill struggle but He has remained faithful to me and brought me to where I am today. So be encouraged. God is good.

Comment by Jane

January 27, 2010 @ 3:56 pm

Trevor thank you,

I so wish you could talk to my brother, he was Navy too…and his story is so similar.

Our dysfunction however, was not just our parents marriage, because we didn’t know our father, just our mother and Nana, who was alcoholic. Our mother, was ill…and very abusive, in every way, including sexual. The reason I say this, is not to dishonor her, but to reveal a very ugly reality that so many even in the area of dealing with child abuse do not face, mother to child abuse and esp sexual abuse, which is why I Do Tell,

because so many live with the horrors with no where to go or talk or get help.

And many simply do not Believe that this is possible because if flies in the face of the whole by nature pure Madonna mother ideal–

but truth is, it happens so much more than is told and not just to sons, but to daughters. So my struggle with not knowing love is not just marriage or lack of example,

but it starts with the relationship [that was death] from the womb. And that lasted until she passed away, and she did become a Christian but her abusive behaviors never stopped, I cut off contact with her the last two years, I simply could not deal with it anymore. My brother did not and he, once a youth pastor, in a legalist church, turned away from God, the damage,

was just too deep. So do pray for him. He hates women.

So, I deal with the abuse at the hands of men [ran away from home at 16--think you can figure from there]

and from childhood–so not only am I dealing with the not knowing really what Healthy is,

but the damage and poison that was/in ME that I leashed out onto others–including MY children, by my Inaction, submission included, on issues of neglect/abuse [verbal] that I took part in, by inaction due to My dysfunction…

my point is, that iniquity of abuse doesn’t just stop with the child–it carries down, in So many ways so I’m dealing with it on many fronts. In myself mostly,

because its not just ‘sins’ chosen but harm so woven in my personality–from the abuses and when I say abuses I’m talking real abuse.

One reason I doubted faith was because the ‘formulas’ and claiming scriptures and all that simply did NOT work, they worked only to push down truth and denial and that cancer just got stronger–the ministries and all that–they simply did not Work.

I did the forgiveness [and denying] and the not telling [because that whole dishonor parents thing] and living the lie,

only to see the poison get stronger and it would seep out, it does that you know,

so I am there now, finding out who God is, in His Word, but also seeing how not just damaged I am/was but how that I too damaged others in my life–and how to remedy that, to break the cord of iniquity that has been a stronghold in our family line and that has destroyed so many,

I decided, I do NOT want it to live it anymore. It has to die…and it does have a lot to do with the anger I do have towards the church when they push this whole authoritarian and submission model,

because I am a survivor of the poison, but I didn’t survive, I poisoned others.

Not on purpose–but damage works like that, hurts work like that…its not just our families and children, its everyone They interact with and touch–and it just goes down the line from there,

a legacy,

and I think, that is the True Fruits, that will be judged. What Legacy, do we leave, to others…like, yes,

a tree.

Where I’m at right now–is how do I, put to death, that death tree, and begin, to sow LIFE to others, and not Death.

Facing Truth–was and is, a huge part of that…and repenting, and putting it all, to death, where it belongs. With the Holy Spirit, that’s what I want to do.

Love, solidarity,

Jane

Comment by Trevor

January 27, 2010 @ 6:04 pm

Jane,

Thanks for sharing insights into your incredibly hurtful past and the long term damage that it continues to do in your life, and the life of your brother. So sad, as Liz and I often say, “The devil has done his homework well in knowing what it takes to screw up and perpetuate bitterness in relationships.” Tragically some, like your mother it would seem, don’t unlearn abuse behaviors, even as Christians.

Fortunately, as difficult as it is, you DO see it and are taking steps not only to allow Jesus to bring healing to you and your family but are reaching out in love and compassion to other abused and enslaved people, women in particular. We will uphold your brother in prayer as God brings him to mind.

Only recently we had a terrible misunderstanding with my sister, on my Dad’s side, who after all of these years took offense at a passing comment and accused me of always hating her and regarding my father as a monster. She has always felt it necessary to defend my father’s reputation against any form of criticism related to his first marriage failure and early parenting patterns. Her response was to say that she hated me and never wanted to talk to me (us) again. She is not a Christian and often resorts to accusing us of thinking that we are better than her, so communication, at times, can be very difficult.

This theme occurs repeatedly and our response is always the same, “We DO love you and will continue to do so despite how you presently feel about us.” Love always wins out and I am happy to report that after weeks of quite bitter, reactive emails and phone calls, that were very emotionally consuming for Liz and I, my sister finally rang and apologized for her hateful, hurtful behavior.

My father was a very gregarious, outgoing and well thought of person but, from my perspective, his version of truth could never be challenged. His take on my early childhood memories conflicted with mine and favored his emotional needs. For years he would put the family through hell after my visits (we live in another state) because he was disappointed that we didn’t spend more time together. The result was that my family despised me, and dreaded my homecoming, rather than helping Dad to deal with unrealistic, and very likely, guilt laden expectations.

With the Lord’s help I dealt with all of that excess baggage in my early Christian experience but my sister could never accept that as a reality. It grieved her that I appeared to be more in love with my heavenly father than my earthly one. My early childhood confusion, aloneness and disappointment were met in God so I couldn’t help but express that as the reason why I was no longer bitter.

Anyway Jane, my sister and I are talking again, thank the Lord, but emotional abuse runs deep and we will not be surprised if the anger resurfaces, as it seems to cycle through over the years. Our response of LOVE will be the same.

Comment by Liz

January 27, 2010 @ 6:09 pm

It often occurs to us that people who find God BEFORE getting involved in church often find things ‘easier’ as God is trustworthy, loving, compassionate, fair and when we come across inconsistencies in church life we know it is human damage and not from God.

Also, 2nd and 3rd generation Christians often have little personal relationship with God and this also distorts the true gospel. Thank God that you, Jane, and many others have survived and can see God in spite of it all and can help others. It’s a slow process often, but God doesn’t give up on us and we (with God’s strength and love) don’t give up on other people.

Comment by Deborah

January 29, 2010 @ 3:44 pm

Fyi–a woman from West Africa just commented on Captivating on CBE’s FB group wall, and what she has to say is worth reading.

Comment by Jane

January 29, 2010 @ 8:22 pm

Deborah, wish I knew where the link was,

Right now I am working on an Indepth series on the Status of Women, Poverty-children living in Trash dumps GLOBALLY, the ‘anti-birth control submission worship all boys club’ patriarchy–and how it is Killing more children than saving.
I’m going for the jugular, no holding back…referring to God’s Word, on His promises to Punish those who ‘assist’ and/or ‘ignore the plight of these victims’. [right now focusing on Amos]

so, if any are wanting to look more into the Results of Patriarchal Support, not just the whole ‘submission’ argument,

go to: http://homesewersneedleworkersunion-hsnwu.blogspot.com/

The Poverty Series will not just be exposing the links between Western Christiandom [economics/culture] to the Horrors and Human Right abuses of MILLIONS,

but Also, other factors such as resources, lack of, how rape of women [and the male entitlement ideologies] is the same as the mentality to rape the environment, nature, land, water, etc., and how WE have benefited and HOW we can make Changes, in our Lives, to Stop being a Part of the PRoblem,

and start being a Part, of the Solution.

Looking for alternative solutions outside of male polemics and economics, from a women centered view that has been for Far too long,

deliberately Ignored.

Peace, Love and Solidarity,

Jane

Comment by Lin

January 30, 2010 @ 8:15 am

Jane, Just know that another sister is praying for you.

Comment by Mara

January 30, 2010 @ 9:48 am

Praying, too, for a breakthrough in the denial the non-egal camps (from uber soft to uber patriarch) have concerning the link between subjugation of women and the abuse of women.

There are good-hearted people trying to live the Christian life who simply don’t know and are surrounded by people and teaching that wants to keep them ignorant.

Comment by Deborah

January 30, 2010 @ 10:26 am

Yes, praying, and thank you for sharing your personal story, Jane.

Here is the link to CBE’s group page:

http://www.facebook.com/#/group.php?gid=2204593138&ref=ts

The post, I now see, is made by a white woman in West Africa and is in response to a November 12th question (so you need to scroll down a lot). A simple post, but it is still good to hear more cultural perspective.

Comment by Lolly

January 31, 2010 @ 4:27 pm

Jane, I’ll address your points first, since they’re fresh in my mind. I sympathize with you because I actually agree with some of your ideas.

1. Most comps will never change. Why should they? They have all the power they want. To admit they’re wrong and actually treat women as equals would mean gaining nothing (in their eyes) and losing everything. (Even women comps have some power, since they’re not held accountable before God for their actions. As has been discussed before here on this blog, many comp women actually like this idea, which is why often they can defend the system as well as their men).

To my mind, the situation is exactly analagous to the old slaveowners/segregationists. There’s a reason why we had to fight a war to end slavery. There’s a reason why voting rights had to be imposed from the top down by Congress. If we had waited for white racists to gradually see that black people were equal, then black people today would probably still be doing our laundry and calling us “Master and Mistress”. This is one area where I disagree with CBE. Instead of wasting my time playing nicey-nice and having “dialogue” with the comps, I’d rather reach out to people like you, Jane, who have walked away from God precisely because of them. You’ll listen. They won’t.

2. Your point about “Paul undermining Jesus.” That’s another area where I disagree with CBE. When I first left the comp fold, I followed CBE’s line of accepting the Bible at face value, including the fact that Paul wrote all those nasty verses about women. I believed all the excuses they made for him. “He was adressing a local situation. It was a bad translation.” Etc. etc.

Then I read Elisabeth Schussler Forenza’s book [em]In Memory of Her[/em], and it really got me to thinking. I can’t remember the exact quote (I’d have to go dig the book out and look through it). However, she said roughly what you did, Jane. Here’s my aproximation. “Jesus came to earth with a radical message that offended the Establishment so much that they killed Him. Then Paul came and told women to be silent, keep out of the men’s business of running the church, and submit to their husbands. In other words, don’t ruffle feathers, try to fit in as much as possible so as not to offend the culture around you. That’s hardly the radical gospel that Jesus preached. In fact, Jesus specifically told His followers to expect conflict, division, and persecution.”

The more I thought about this, the more I came to agree with her. I read more books about the Bible and came to see the obvious: Paul is pretty darn schizophrenic when it comes to women. He praises certain individual women, but tells women in general to keep silent and submit to their husbands. Yes, you can make excuses for individual passages, but those passages are very obscure. If Paul wanted to clearly state that women were equal, then why didn’t he clarify those passages? Surely he would have known how open to misinterpretation they would be, especially given how extremely patriarchal his culture was? Instead, the appearance we get is of a typical patriarchalist, willing to praise certain women who were “above their sex” but in general thinking that women needed to stay home and out of sight. (History is replete with examples of this. During her lifetime, Queen Victoria was greatly revered by the British people, but this in no way translated into equal rights for British women. In fact, even Victoria herself didn’t think women should have rights.)

Now I have come to a view that is accepted by many scholars: that Paul didn’t write those verses. They were inserted by later mysoginist writers to invoke Paul’s authority for their negative views of women, which of course were culturally conditioned. To me that makes a whole lot more sense than trying to plug a gap here and a gap there in Paul’s thinking.

I also agree with you, Jane, that the OT (or at least the Bible up to Paul) is far less mysoginistic. In the OT you get all those great stories of strong women like Deborah and Esther (and if you accept the Apocrypha, then you get more strong women such as Judith and Susanna). In the gospels you get Anna, the Virgin Mary, and Mary Magdalene, to name a few. And then…silence. Yes, Paul names a few women, but that’s just it. [b]Paul[/b] names them, and that’s about all we get, names. With the exception of Priscilla, we know nothing about these women except that Paul likes them. He doesn’t tell us anything about them, and we never hear from the women themselves (unlike, say, Deborah and the Virgin Mary, who both sang songs). So I totally agree with you, Jane, that I don’t like Paul’s writing nearly as much as I like the rest of the Bible.

BTW, there’s an excellent book entitled [em]Priscilla’s Letter[/em], that advances the thesis that she wrote Hebrews. I’m not sure if I agree with the author; however, there’s a good reason to get it. When it was first published, the comps pressured the publisher to stop printing it, and the printer bowed to the pressure and yanked the book. You’ll probably have to do what I did, scrounge a used copy from one of those sites like Alibris. If you do, however, at least you’ll be telling the comps that alternative viewpoints can’t be silenced, even if they don’t want to hear them.

Comment by Jane

January 31, 2010 @ 6:19 pm

“So I totally agree with you, Jane, that I don’t like Paul’s writing nearly as much as I like the rest of the Bible.”

Lolly, I’ve seen this too but Only on certain scriptures, usually about women and slaves. But something Jesus brought to my attention one day when praying about Just this fact,

where he told the Pharisees, ‘render to Caesar what is Caesars and to God what is God’s.

When you go back with that in mind, and re-read all those texts by Paul [and Jude] on submission/slaves, women, etc., and where Peter also goes into-then you see a lot of other things too,

and the meaning is changed, a lot. ONE KEY here that I think, really nailed it for me, is how that one woman, Pearl or Purl, whatever, and some like her have been telling women to ‘submit’ to even sin, and that God won’t hold them liable [and personally, I think that one woman-don't recall her name- should be held liable under the LAW for attributing to child sexual abuse, because she quoted to One woman to Submit and take her husband back, to put her Children in danger, in my book, the LAW should arrest her ON the Spot. [its on Ex Quiverfull]

but anyway, they are Cults, make no mistakes about it, and Paul himself, would Rebuke them, because of Corinthians, where he talks of the man who was sexually immoral and they did not ex-communicate, see that is where a lot of these teachings on submission, have been So warped by lustful pedophiles and abusers, Wolves Paul called them and HE did warn us about them. Satan transforms himself into an Angel of Light, Jude calls them ‘brute beasts’ who feed their bellies, that is lust–not just food.

But anyway, what nailed it for me, is the one they always use in Peter, I went back, and God said, go back a few verses and Read, and it says, where it talks about Jesus obeying unto death–that Jesus DID NOT SIN. And where it says, after, that suffering according to the Will of God.

See, there is Huge difference there, in what submission is, it is Never to do Iniquity or to Sin.

OR, a really big one I saw–in Word, to cause another to Stumble [that includes Children] or to Offend.

See, balance, when the Whole Word of God is not taken then there is imbalance, and Satan always does this, he takes things, a little bit of Truth, and puts in a LIE into-and Always, to paint a horrible picture of Who God is.

So, I don’t think anymore its so much of what Paul wrote but how the translators placed it AND how they worded it. And remember, the KING gave permission so, I have wondered, how much of the translation was to ‘appease’ the King? I don’t know, but the thought has crossed my mind. [Catholic history and their relationship with appeasing Kings, even benefiting profit wise, just like the Pharisees did with the Romans, usually its for keeping power and Money].

So, I can’t say, like for sure, you know, I wasn’t There back then, but I do think, because Jesus said, the Holy Spirit would lead you into all Truth, not the Bible will lead you into all Truth,

that the only way of really Knowing, is getting on our face before God and praying, repenting, and praying,

and Staying there. Seeking non-stop, no matter what.

IT is not easy though, we like Guarantees, if like me, one has not lived a ‘good’ life, the enemy comes in with all the reminders of just how rotten we are [I am] and well, yea, doubts come in, a lot,

and then it doesn’t help when one goes to ‘teachings’ and sees this, that, and the teachings, Especially the Promises, don’t add up to Reality.

I got to a place where, am I wrestling with God or am I wrestling with doctrines of demons and I don’t really Know God? The Fruit in my self and in my life didn’t bear witness, NOT if I believe in God’s WORD. Oh sure, People will tell you, oh yea you’re fine and blah blah blah,

but Paul said, to test ourselves to see if we are Reprobate. And to do that, one must be Honest with God–ugliness and all, besides, He knows us anyway, right? Its kind of stupid to try and play Him but we do, out of Fear, I think…tell Him what we think He wants to hear, etc.

It was when I told God, I don’t believe in this crock anymore that He showed me, just how little I knew–but its NOT easy, because to Know Him, I am finding, is to sort of walk alone–it IS to suffer because LIFE does not fit in this world of Death–without Sorrow. This world Grieves the Holy Spirit,

as do we, you know…I see there is a ‘tearing’ sort of, a very painful one–Watchman Knee talked about this, in “The Spiritual Man”, that is how Entrenched that tree of Death is in us. Its not just in our beliefs but in our passions [emotions] and in our will and in our thoughts, you name it, its there…our lens especially.

And I am finding, Most of all, WE can’t get to that place, through the Eyes and Words of others, we have to Walk it, ourselves, like childbirth, we can Hear from others but until we Go through it, we don’t know that tunnel, know what I am saying?

So I think, its really, this: Getting Serious, about Knowing God, no matter What the Cost. And its in that Cost–that the flesh,
will rise up, sure, it wants to Live. That tree of death does NOT want to die,

but IF we are to truly live, it Has too.

And I am finding, its NOT easy, getting to surrender to that place, not easy at all, and dead works, ain’t it either,

one can be in the flesh and do all those martyr works, Muslims are Experts at this. But its still that death tree,

and in the end, if its still that, God says, it WILL DIE.

And Paul, wrote tons on this–so,

well, yea, glad I wrote this…needed it for myself really. :)

Jane

Comment by margaret

March 1, 2010 @ 2:37 pm

hi, jane iused 2 have the same radical feminist views on marriage, and judging from the state of most marriages past and present, that view is absolutely correct. but stop and consider that when God 1st created the world it was VERY GOOD–that means no dangerous animals or poisonous plants, no vast streches of wasteland, no killer earthquakes volcanoes or tsunamis, and no abusive people at all. We r so accustomed 2 a world messed-up by sin that we really have no concept of a perfect world. And Satan always desecrates the spot that has the greatest potential for blessing… just a thought–i like your posts–interesting views

Comment by Jaclyn

March 22, 2010 @ 1:18 pm

I’m entering this long conversation a bit late, but I wanted to thank Ryan and Anna for their work and the book review. I recall being disturbed by Wild at Heart and Captivating when I was in high school and they hit their popularity. (Yes, I read that kind of stuff in high school). I remember telling myself, “I supposed I’ll just never get married if that’s what a woman is supposed to be like; I’ll never be what a ‘real’ man wants, and I’m not going to change who I am.”

Thankfully, however, I stayed grounded in believing that marriage can be a good and fruitful partnership due to my parents’ 30 year marriage that stands as an egalitarian example. (That, and an eye-opening undergrad degree in religion & church history).

So I pursued my career and personal passions – traveling, becoming a medical doctor, advancing public health, international liberation of persecuted women, etc all with the gusto of my loud, energetic, passionate personality. And the man of my dreams fell into my lap – and he’s nothing like the man John & Stasi Eldredge describe (which I wouldn’t have wanted, anyway!) and everything that was perfect as my partner. We have loved (almost) every minute of our 5 year journey together, and I feel enabled, empowered, and encouraged to walk in my God-given gifts like never before.

To answer the question posted by Ryan and Anna:

A. Mutual authority and submission
B. Freedom from gender stereotypes and roles
C. Both
D. Other

We fit into the BOTH category but (as stated by Trevor), “the authority part doesn’t come into the equation, just mutual submission.” Submission birthed out of love and partnership isn’t ever obligatory and isn’t even very painful. It’s natural. Seeking to be the authority in an egalitarian relationship runs the risk of setting one partner as the one “in charge” – thus demanding submission from the other. We are both in charge, and if one person decides to submit to the other in a particular situation, it doesn’t mean the other partner is the “authority figure” or the “winner.” Quite the contrary. Sometimes when I choose to be the one that submits, I actually feel like the winner for having a partner that I so delight in serving/honoring with mutual submission. Hope that makes sense.

I already ache for the marriages that so many of my Christian friends suffer through – I truly believe that the missing “key” is an egalitarian approach.

Blessings to all and may we act out the truth of God’s design for marriage to the best of human ability so that it may be the reflection of His Kingdom, as intended.

Comment by Deborah

March 22, 2010 @ 4:29 pm

Jaclyn, cool testimony :).

Comment by Ruth Hoppin

May 24, 2010 @ 8:38 pm

Dear Lolly,

Thank you for your comments on the “disappearance” of my 1997 book. “Priscilla’s Letter” was off the market for three years until it was re-issued by Lost Coast Press. There is now a new printing, and the book
was translated into Spanish last year under the title “La Carta de Priscila.” The translator is Benjamin Alfaro, a minister in the Assembly of God Church.
I am thankful for these developments, and for your concern.

Ruth Hoppin

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Leave a comment

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

 

Bad Behavior has blocked 493 access attempts in the last 7 days.