The Marginalization of the Average Joe and Practice of Selective Compassion by Christian and Secular Americans

The Marginalization of the Average Joe and Practice of Selective Compassion by Christian and Secular Americans

I think conservative writer Ann Coulter’s editorial about Christians who shuffle off to assist ebola patients in Africa – which got her all sorts of vitriol by both left and right wingers, Christians and Non Christians – has been proven right.

I first wrote about that in another post or two:

(Link): Ann Coulter’s Article Hits Home — Literally, by S. Harris – And: further thoughts on U.S. Christian Priorities and Reverse Racism

(Link): Strawman Argument: “You’re Creating a False Dichotomy” – No, I’m Not (Re: Coulter editorial and U.S. Christians aiding foreigners)

After American, caucasian movie actor Robin Williams died from suicide a few days ago, on the one hand, there was, yes, a lot of sympathy and sadness expressed for him and his family online in the days that followed, as it should be.

But there were also some very insulting, unsympathetic views published, and at that, based on William’s skin color or his mental health problems, not only by guys like Bill McNorris and Christian Matt Walsh, but by atheist writer P Z Myers.

As far as I can tell, the Bible does not adhere to the concept of “privilege” as believed by liberals. The American progressives harping on “privilege” causes them to refuse to show care and concern for the groups they believe to be in power.

Jesus Christ taught that people’s sins comes from their hearts (from within), not from their environment, and he did not endorse the view that because you or your group has been systematically mistreated or oppressed at the hands of another group, that this excuses your sin, or makes it acceptable for you to hate your oppressor, or for you to refuse to show compassion to that group.

In Jesus’ day, ancient Israel was ruled first and foremost by the ancient Romans, and on a lesser level, by the religious ruling class (the priests and Pharisees).

A lot of American liberals will say it’s impossible for an American woman to be considered sexist, or for female dislike of men to be considered sexist, because men in American society hold all the power. They will say that because whites held all the power in the USA, that one cannot consider a black person’s prejudices against whites a form of racism.

Then we also get into the identity politics and hate crime laws, where liberals believe that someone should receive a harsher, or specific charge of hate, for, say, mugging someone in a certain group that they consider unprivileged.

For example, a crime that is motivated by hatred of skin color, where a white guy punches a black guy in the face, is supposed to be worse than, say, a white guy punching another white guy. A guy murdering someone who happens to be homosexual is supposed to be a hate crime, but the same act is not considered a hate crime if a homosexual or heterosexual murders a heterosexual guy.

I have never understood these positions, because, for one reason of a few, it doesn’t square with the Bible.

Jesus never once taught the Jews of his day that it’s okay for them to hate the Romans, nor did he excuse their dislike of the Romans, on the premise that the Romans held all the “privilege” or “power.”

Continue reading

A Response to Blogger Matt Walsh Regarding Depression and Suicide

A Response to Blogger Matt Walsh Regarding Depression

Before I address Matt Walsh’s post about depression specifically:

For anyone who wants to read a compassionate, balanced view about mental health problems, including depression, by a Christian author, please read a copy of the book,

Why Do Christians Shoot Their Wounded?: Helping (Not Hurting) Those with Emotional Difficulties – by Dwight L. Carlson.

Carlson is a Christian doctor who explains how much, if at all, personal sin, choice, or biology play in issues such as depression.

An excerpt from the book’s page on Amazon reads,

  • It’s no sin to hurt. Thousands of Christians suffer real emotional pain– such as depression, anxiety, obsessiveness.

Many other Christians, including prominent leaders, believe emotional problems are the result of sin or bad choices. These attitudes often only add to the suffering of those who hurt.

In this book Dwight Carlson marshals recent scientific evidence that demonstrates many emotional problems are just as physical or biological as diabetes, cancer and heart disease.

While he never discounts personal responsibility, Carlson shows from both the Bible and up-to-date medicine why it really is no sin to hurt.

Understandably and compellingly, Why Do Christians Shoot Their Wounded? brings profound help for those who hurt and those who counsel. For those who suffer, here is a powerful liberation from guilt. For those who care for the suffering, here is vivid proof that those in emotional pain deserve compassion, not condemnation.

MATT WALSH, ROBIN WILLIAMS, AND SUICIDE/DEPRESSION

In the day or two after it was announced that movie actor Robin Williams died by suicide, Christian blogger Matt Walsh wrote a blog post about it called “Robin Williams didn’t die from a disease, he died from his choice” (url: themattwalshblog.com). A copy of Walsh’s first post appears (Link): here on Barbwire (the link will open in a new window).

The very title of the post suggests, or assumes, that Williams was wholly in his right mind, capable of making rational decisions, and was therefore totally responsible for his own death, that he could have easily avoided his death (if only he had “chosen” joy and/or read a Bible more, etc), and, by extension, deserves no compassion.

Walsh would probably counter, “But I never specficially said he didn’t deserve compassion, or that he should just read his Bible more!”

Well, no, you didn’t say that exactly, but the wording of your blog post heading alone certainly implies it. The rambling in the post itself, which was intended to bolster the claims implied in the title, further suggests these views as well.

Walsh got so much negative feedback from that post, he wrote a follow-up post to it the other day.

I don’t know at this point if I intend on writing a full-scale rebuttal to Walsh’s post here – or, if I do, I may do it in the days or weeks ahead. I’m undecided.

I found Walsh’s commentary so revolting, I can’t bring myself to go back and re-read the piece again. Once was enough. I’ll try to re-visit the pages to grab some quotes, if I can.

I skimmed the Part 2 earlier today. Part 2 is entitled, “Depression isn’t a choice but suicide is: my detailed response to the critics”

The attitude of Walsh’s primary post was very victim-blaming, in spite of his protestations to the contrary.

Walsh evidently feels post # 1 was very loving and supportive of Robin Williams or anyone who deals with depression.

Perhaps Walsh is merely a very poor writer and failed to accurately convey his views in the first place, so that they came out as insensitive as they did, and now he’s upset so many people have taken his post the “wrong way.”

That has happened to me a time or two online – I fail to clearly explain my position on a sensitive issue, and folks take it the wrong way, and assume I’m a heartless jerk. (On the other hand, people are sometimes guilty of reading things into posts I’ve written that I never said or felt.)

If I am not mistaken, Walsh implied in part 1, and admitted in part 2 (again, I cannot bring myself at this time to re-read both to double check this) that he has had depression in the past, or some sort of problem.

Okay, I shall wade into the post again to find the exact quote. Here is what Walsh said in part 2 about his own experiences:

    I actually found myself getting emotional as I wrote it. I’m not suicidal but I have demons of my own, so I submitted that post to the public, praying others would find the same solace in the promise of hope and the power of free will.

From part 1, Walsh says,

    And before I’m accused of being someone who “doesn’t understand,” let me assure you that I have struggled with this my entire life.

I want to pause here to say I find that wording odd, from the quote from part 2. Walsh says he hopes people can find hope in “the power of free will.”

Christians usually feed depressed people the cliché’ that they can be freed of depression in “Jesus alone.”

Just as believing in Jesus alone cannot free a person from depression, neither can celebrating “free will,” or a “pick yourself up by your bootstraps and solider on” mentality.

I’d say often, a lot of people with clinical depression operate under one or both those paradigms for years to start with anyway, along with psychiatric visits or medications, until they realize none of it is working, they get mentally exhausted and want to stop fighting to live.

It is exhausting to live another day when all you want to do is stay in bed all day long with the sheets over your head, or take your own life.

That is, people with depression already have tried to “choose joy” and so on; they don’t need a Matt Walsh telling them to give that a go.

Having severe depression is not an automatic death sentence. There can be a way out, but it might vary from one person to the next.

But the vast majority of people I’ve seen who have made it through depression and lived to tell about it usually do not credit their survival with pure choice (ie, choosing to be joyful), Bible reading, attending church, or Jesus alone.

As a matter of fact, many of these recovering folks will tell you that one thing that made their journey MORE difficult was receiving well intentioned, yet hurtful advice, such as the very things Walsh was writing about and which is common among Christians: believe more in Jesus, attend church, choose to be joyful, etc.

Continue reading

Christian Ladies: Be Equally Yoked to Christian Men Who Like To Have Sex With Dogs! (Re: Jerald Hill news story)

Christian Ladies: Be Equally Yoked to Christian Men Who Like To Have Sex With Dogs! (Re: Jerald Hill news story)

Christians who lecture or shame Christian single women into marrying only other Christians are… full of, you know.

When you have CHRISTIAN men jailed for rape, murder, or initiating dog sex, you have nothing to lose by dating or marrying Non-Christian men.

Why settle for a Non-Christian pagan dude when you, fine Christian single woman, can get a gem like this: a Baptist guy who gets hot and bothered thinking of doing it with Fido. (gag)

I haven’t yet seen in these articles if this guy is married or is a father (see this link for why I mention that).

(Link): [Baptist] Church Leader Jerald Hill Suspected Of Attempted Dog Sex

    A church leader in Roach, Missouri, is out of a job after being arrested for allegedly trying to arrange a sexual encounter with a dog.

    Jerald Hill, 56, was arrested Tuesday on suspicion of attempted unlawful sex with an animal and attempted animal abuse.

(Link): Missouri Baptist leader arrested for attempted bestiality

(Link): Missouri Baptist leader arrested for allegedly seeking sex with a dog

(Link): Missouri Baptist church leader arrested for seeking sex with dog

    by Joe Kemp
    August 2014

    Jerald Hill, 56 — the head of the Windermere Baptist Conference Center — was collared after he turned to Craigslist to arrange sex with a dog and the ad was answered by an undercover police officer.

    A Missouri church leader was arrested after he turned to Craigslist to arrange sex with a dog, authorities said.

    Jerald Hill, 56 — the head of the Windermere Baptist Conference Center — was collared after a police officer spotted the online ad and offered to unite the man with a pooch at a Columbia park, local media reported.

    The undercover cop, an officer with the Boone County Sheriff Department’s Cyber Crimes Task Force, charged Hill with soliciting sex with an animal.

    He was released after posting a $1,000 bond.

    The conference center will likely choose a new president and CEO after Hill’s arrest.

    “We are concerned for the well-being of Jerry…and we are also concerned with the well-being of Windermere,” Chairman Arthur Mallory said.

    “Windermere will continue to function in a good way…It is a significant piece of God’s kingdom’s work.”

h/t to SCCL Facebook Group, which is where I think I first saw this story
————————
Related posts (YES SAD TO SAY THERE ARE RELATED POSTS ABOUT THIS TOPIC)

(Link): Married Southern Baptist and Calvinist Preacher and Father of Boy Exposes His Naked Penis to Teen Girl in Store

(Link): Married Couple Charged With Making Dog Porn (wife had sex with dogs while husband filmed it)

(Link): Being Unequally Yoked – should Christians marry Non Christians or only marry Christians

(Link): Pastor charged in wife’s murder was headed to Europe to marry boyfriend, prosecutor says – Single Xtian Ladies: Kick that Be Equally Yoked Teaching to the Curb! Also: Marriage and Parenthood do not make people more godly or mature or loving or ethical

(Link): Being Equally Yoked: Christian Columnist Dan Delzell Striving to Keep Christian Singles Single Forever

(Link): Another Example of Why the Equally Yoked Teaching is A Joke for Single Christian Women : Baptist Preacher Arrested for Allegedly Fire Bombing Ex Girlfriend’s House While She Was In It

(Link): Lists of More Married Preachers Arrested for Being Rapists or Child Molesters

(Link): Males and Females Raped at Christian College, College Doesn’t Care – Equally Yoked is a Joke

(Link): Christian Single Women: Another Example of Why You Should Abandon the “Be Equally Yoked” Teaching: 21-Y-O Christianity Student, Children’s Minister Charged With Murdering Fiancée He Was to Wed in August; Made It Look Like Suicide

(Link): American Teen Missionary Raped Several Orphan Children in Africa, One As Young As Four – Being Equally Yoked is a Joke

(Link): Christian Host Pat Robertson Tells Christian Woman Who Married Christian Man Who Turned Out to Be Totally Unethical That She has Discernment of a Slug – Single Women: toss Be Equally Yoked teaching in the trash can

(Link): Wife of Preacher Shoots, Kills Him, Recounts Years of Physical and Sexual Abuse– So Much for the Equally Yoked Teaching and the Notion that Christian married sex is Mind Blowing

(Link): Preachers Arrested For, or Accused of, Promoting Prostitution, Rape, Spreading HIV, Child Molesting etc – And Christian Single Women Should Only Consider Marrying So Called Christian Men Why?

Married Father and Baptist Preacher J D Hall – Another Example of How Marriage and Parenthood Does Not Make a Person More Godly or Mature

Married Father and Baptist Preacher J D Hall – Another Example of How Marriage and Parenthood Does Not Make a Person More Godly or Mature

(There is an update at the bottom of this post).

This involves a lot of back story I don’t want to get into because this blog post would be ten pages long.

I am blogging this primarily for adult singles who have felt marginalized or hurt by Christian denominations or churches that treat adult singles as though they have cooties.

I have a somewhat different motivation for blogging about this than other blogs do. There were a few other blogs who addressed the child abuse aspect of the story, that we have an adult (Hall) badgering a teen kid (Braxton Caner) on the internet.

J D Hall is a Calvinist preacher with a blog called “Pulpit and Pen,” a Twitter account, and a group of fan boys who follow him around online who actually refer to themselves as “Pulpiteers.”

At one time, Hall’s groupies were using the #pulpiteer (or “pulpiteers”) hash to follow each other around Twitter. I’m not sure if they still use the “Pulpiteer” label or not. I will continue to refer to them as such.

This group, and a few other people, have a long standing hatred of another guy named Ergun Caner.

Continue reading

Ann Coulter’s Article Hits Home — Literally, by S. Harris – And: further thoughts on U.S. Christian Priorities and Reverse Racism

Ann Coulter’s Article Hits Home — Literally, by S. Harris – And: further thoughts on U.S. Christian Priorities and Reverse Racism

Below you will find a link to, and excerpts from, an editorial by S. Harris I agree with.

One of the most annoying things about the backlash against the Coulter piece is how Christians arguing against it were tone-deaf or had tunnel vision. They totally mis-read her piece, or assumed things about it that she did not say.

Most of the criticisms I read were operating under the erroneous belief that Coulter said, “Americans should never, ever help foreigners.” -When she said no such thing.

Another variation on that were the idiots who thought Coulter was saying, “Americans should only help Americans, screw the world!” She also wasn’t saying that.

Look, if you are an American living in the USA and you have “Grandpa Joe” living under your roof, you’ve taken him in because he can no longer care for himself….

And good old Grandpa Joe has dementia and is in a wheelchair, and you’re not getting him proper medication, nursing visits, bathing him, -BUT- you are flying to Africa on a plane every four months to go build one room huts for Africans (and you pride yourself in taking these trips to help orphans in Africa), you are the selfish jerk with messed up priorities, not Ann Coulter for calling you out on that hypocrisy.

And sad to say, most Americans do indeed ignore Grandpa Joe, or guys and women like him, to go on humanitarian trips to places like Africa.

And they think this is so compassionate and loving. They cannot see the hypocrisy or insensitivity of it. If God wanted you to go help in Africa, he would have had you born there.

It makes no sense for the Africans to fly to the USA to help Americans, the French to fly to Brazil to help Brazilians, the Saudis to fly to France to help the French, the Russians to fly to Canada to help the Canadians, the Aussies to fly to Russia to help the Russians.

In an extreme situation, in a natural disaster type thing (which to me is different than an on-going disease outbreak that has a 90% fatality rate), I’m seeing a stronger rationale for action.

Where a nation gets blown off the map by a typhoon, or what not, by all means, let’s see the world come together and all nations mail food and fly in equipment and blankets, but the rest of the year, no, it’s a waste of time and resources for everyone everywhere to do these things.

According to several news reports I’ve read, the ebola disease is 60 – 90% fatal (depending on medical treatment), and the whole thing that kicked off the Coulter piece in the first place were these naive, American, evangelical do-gooder doctor and missionaries who flew down there to “lend a hand.”

Now these do-gooders have ebola and were flown back to the United States, and which potentionally exposes other Americans to this.

Someone on another site raised what I felt was a decent analogy – how people voluntarily go on mountain-hiking trips but then get stranded on the mountain, so that other emergency respondents have to risk their lives, and spend a buttload of money, to fly helicopters and what all to rescue them. It’s a similar scenario.

Here is the editorial I agree with:

(Link): Ann Coulter’s Article Hits Home — Literally by S. Harris

Excerpts:

    Ann Coulter’s recent article “Ebola Doc’s Condition Downgraded to Idiotic” really hit home — if you’ll excuse the pun.

    Coulter makes a good argument as she questions why American missionaries don’t stay home and help a country in the violent throes of spiritual decay. She accuses them of slinking off to Third World countries (and coming back with Ebola), while they abandon the most consequential nation on earth — their own.

    It’s a thought I’ve often had as I’ve watched church after church suck their congregations dry for overseas missionary work while the old lady in the house next-door struggles for food — physically and financially.

    These same missionaries are lauded as heroes for going to Africa when their hometowns are awash in drugs, pornography, murders, domestic abuse, pedophilia, and a thousand other byproducts of spiritual darkness.

    I would go even farther and liken the situation to child adoption in the U.S. Couples, often citing impossible U.S. adoption laws and red tape, have been going overseas to adopt children for years while nearly 400,000 American children remain in foster care.

    Roughly 102,000 of those are waiting to be adopted at any given time, and another 58,000 become available for adoption after their parents’ rights are terminated.

    I know a Christian couple who recently adopted five siblings from Bhutan. Another couple, misled about the health of a newborn, adopted a Russian baby who needed so many operations they nearly went bankrupt and ended up divorcing.

    All of this happens while a little boy or girl from Nebraska or Kentucky grows up in the uncertain love and insecurity of foster care. I’ve rarely met a couple who adopted an American-born child.

    The truth is, instead of staying and fighting, Americans developed a pattern of running to other countries — whether for missionary work, adoption, or cheaper labor and smaller overhead.

    …Ann Coulters article was harsh, but it needed to be said.

    … Still, Ann Coulter was right to raise such relevant questions: “…Why do we have to deal with this at all? Can’t anyone serve Christ in America anymore?”

I encourage you to visit the author’s editorial and read the whole thing, because in it, in a part I did not quote above here, she even has an example in there of a time she brought her India- born- and- raised friend to an American church with her as a guest.

Harris said she was a Christian wanting to find a home church. She said she invited her India-born friend to attend with her one day at a new church she was checking out, so he did.

Harris said that when the church people noticed her friend was from India and was a Hindu, that they swarmed around him to welcome him but they blew her off (she was, to them, an obvious American).

Harris said the next day, the church ladies visited the guy at his home – they had obtained his address the day before – and brought him baked cakes and other goodies, but they brought nothing to Harris.

And Harris was the Christian looking for a church – her Hindu friend did not give a rat’s ass about joining Christianity at all. He was delighted to get free cookies from the Christians but thought the church ladies naive (that was how I understood what she wrote).

I could be mistaken, but I would assume that Harris’ Hindu friend probably had brown skin, probably spoke with a heavy accent – so it was obvious to the church people he was foreign.

I have noticed that U.S. Christians are in fact inclined to do missionary work toward, or help, only certain groups of people – among them, dark skinned people, and especially ones who are pagan in religious beliefs (ie, Hindu, Muslim).

(Though evangelicals will at times make narrow exceptions in America to help suffering Americans, but usually only the most severe, “down and out” cases, such as homeless crack addicts and women who work as strippers in night clubs.)

There seems to be little to no concern by white Christians for white skinned, middle class, “average Joe” people in America.

It’s weird, revolting, and not at all biblical to play “pick and choose” in who you will show compassion to. Everyone is supposed to be your neighbor, not just orphan kids or ebola patients in Africa, or homeless crack addicts.

And no, I’m not a “white pride” person or “white nationalist” or whatever they call themselves. I don’t mind if whites help dark skinned people.

What I am saying is I am sort of turned off by how so many American white Christians view dark-skinned foreigners as exotic pets and/or as being more “worthy” to save or help than their white, native neighbors (and we also have dark skinned Americans in America who could use help). It’s kind of a form of reverse-racism, and Christians should have no part in it, but they do.

Years ago, during what seemed to be a trend of white Americans adopting black children from Africa (and greasing the wheels by throwing their money at charities in those nations), I saw editorials by dark skinned Africans* who wrote they found the white American do-gooder mentality towards Africans offensive and condescending – they say they don’t want or need a “white savior” to fly in and rescue them. You would think white Americans would get a clue.

*(some of the journalists either self-identified as being black people, and/or they had a staff photo of themselves accompanying their editorials.)
——————————-
Related posts:

(Link): Ann Coulter’s Very Accurate Ebola Post Being Criticized As Being Insensitive – But It’s Not; It’s Accurate

(Link): White Evangelicals, White Fundamentalists, and White Baptists: White Americans Don’t Need the Gospel or Compassion, especially not the affluent or middle class

(Link): Why Christians Need To Stress Spiritual Family Over the Nuclear Family – People with no flesh and blood relations including Muslims who Convert to Christianity – Also: First World, White, Rich People Problems

(Link): Radical Christianity – New Trend That Guilt Trips American Christians For Living Average Lives

(Link): To Get Any Attention or Support from a Church These Days you Have To Be A Stripper, Prostitute, or Orphan

General Observations Or Concerns About Stuff Christian Culture Likes Group and Blog

This is kind of a follow up to my previous post about SCCL (link at bottom – the group was recently mocking the T. Burpo book).

I found at least one blog post chronicling some of the abusive tendencies within the SCCL group (see link below) – this is so odd.

The SCCL like group members depict themselves as champions of the hurt and abused, but they sometimes bully and abuse other people themselves.

In addition, Drury (who is the owner and maintainer of the SCCL like groups, Twitter account, and blog), who tries to present herself as a feminist, and who also tries to come off as sensitive to homosexuals and more recently, transgendered people and their concerns, has made comments some of them have found offensive on several occasions on Twitter and/or Facebook, but she was reluctant to apologize.

You can read examples here:

(Link): For Surivivors of Christian Fundamentalism seeking refuge in Stuff Christian Culture Likes (group / blog)

A person (Shelly) on that blog left this comment (excerpt from her comment):

    Another couple of people [at SCCL] were triggery for me, as they did shit that reminded me of the abuse I received when I was younger, and I no longer felt safe staying there, knowing that

she was perfectly fine to call out the abuse within the church system but wouldn’t call it out within the page that was supposed to be a safe place for the abused.

So I unliked the page, unfollowed her SCCL Twitter (I had unfollowed her personal one after t-gate), and stopped following the blog.

I’ve noticed the same thing.

It’s a group that scolds churches or Christian culture for perpetuating certain damaging views, or for allowing or committing abuse, but pretty much allows the regular members to bash the new-comers to the group who may speak up and disagree with whatever topic is under discussion.

I never joined the SCCL Facebook group. I may have left one post at one SCCL blog page once a long time ago (I don’t recall), but something never sat quite right with me about the types of people who post at either the group or blog, so I didn’t join.

The majority of SCCL members can seem kind-hearted and supportive most of the time, but then turn like sharks the next instant on an individual who isn’t keeping with the group think.

(Speaking of which:
(Link): The Danger of Groupthink Part 1: Consensus and Power – post on “Blog on the Way” blog)

I once read a blog post about how even blogs / groups intended for survivors (survivors of church abuse or whatever) can turn out to be just as abusive as the church or cult the person has left. (That post may have also been on Blog on the Way, I can’t remember where I saw it).

If you have been hurt by a Christian, a denomination, or a church, be very, very careful which other groups you choose to align yourself with in the aftermath, or for support or healing.

The group you choose to make your “new home” or support system just may turn on you in the future.

I have seen some people post perfectly polite, fine questions or comments on SCCL Facebook page and get rudely ripped to shreds, ganged up on, by several SCCL members at once over it.

It’s not pretty, and some of the SCCL members, at times, act just as horribly as the fundamentalists, evangelicals, sexists and “homophobes” (what a stupid, inaccurate word, by the way) they complain about.

There are also some hard-core atheists who sporadically show up to SCCL to bitterly complain about theism, the Bible and Christians, and they are some of the most condescending, obnoxious jerks I’ve come across. They usually get shouted down by other SCCL members, but they do post there on occasion.

There is a Christian guy, an older gentlemen (his personal profile photo shows a white-haired guy) named “Warren” who participates at SCCL.

I’d say the guy makes good sense about 95% of the time, but he still gets shouted down and treated rudely by the SCCL regulars – because, in knee jerk reaction, they recoil at anything that smacks of Christian or traditional values.

Continue reading

Stuff Christian Culture Likes Facebook Group Yukking It Up By Mocking Todd Burpo’s Book

Mocking Todd Burpo’s Book

Sometimes I agree with the posters at SCCL Facebook group, sometimes not. This evening, the lady who runs the group published a graphic someone made, changing Burpo’s book cover to ridicule the kid and/or the concept of faith or Heaven. So far, all the responders below the doctored image are yukking it up, declaring it’s the hee haw damn funniest thing they’ve seen all week.

Me? 1. Who knows, maybe the kid did die, go to Heaven, and is telling the truth about it all
2. I think making that graphic and laughing at it is a shitty thing to do.

You can view the image I’m talking about here, (Link): (Stuff Christian Culture Likes Facebook Group) Doctored Todd Burpo Book “Heaven Is For Real”

Even me, in my half Christian, half agnostic stage of faith right now thinks that is a mean-spirited thing to do. Not funny, not even remotely. At least one or two juveniles in the thread were also making fun of the kid’s last name, “Burpo.” Real mature.

SCCL is usually a group where I can agree on some of their views or enjoy some of their pot shots at evangelicalism, but they occasionally pull nonsense like this that is disappointing.
———————-
Related posts:

(Link): Contemporary American Christianity’s Fascination with NDE Stories

(Link): General Observations Or Concerns About Stuff Christian Culture Likes Group and Blog

(Link): Apparent Inconsistency at SCCL Group – They’re Repulsed by Sexualization of Some Relationships But Not All

Skeevy, Sexist, Pastor John Piper Response to “Is Oral Sex Okay” And His Commentary on Teens Who Make Out At Night

Skeevy, Sexist, Pastor John Piper Response to “Is Oral Sex Okay”

Oh gross. This comes from sexist wacko John Piper (he was a preacher at one point, I think, but retired a few years ago, unless I am mistaken, but he still writes books and blogs, etc.) who gives permission to women to use the bathroom without getting a man’s permission, and who says women being abused should endure the abuse “for a season.” Go google for it, my friend. I’m not in the mood to back it all up with citations in this post. Google is your friend.

(Link): Is Oral Sex Okay? From John Piper’s Desiring God site

As the Bible does not specifically mention oral sex, and does not even allude to it (unless one wants to get into Rev. Driscoll’s pervy Song of Songs treatment), go ahead and have oral sex.

It’s like the masturbation debate; the Bible is totally silent on the matter, it doesn’t usually involve another person, so go for it, and without guilt.

I mean geeze, people. Some of you who write these preachers are ADULTS.

You are ADULTS and can read the Bible for yourself and make your own decisions about life. Why in the hell are you writing an over the hill (retired?) preacher and weirdo like Piper for sex advice?

Here is part of how Piper responded to the question “Is Oral Sex Okay?”

    I think it is wrong outside marriage. And we can talk about that another time more extensively. But here is the short answer. Why? Oral sex is even more intimate and delicate, it seems, then copulation. And we know this because even married couples are wondering if they should go there. It is as if it is a stage of intimacy that may not even be proper for married people. And so to think it can be an innocent substitute for copulation so people can obey the letter of the law outside marriage is a mirage. That is the first observation.

Read the rest here (if you have the stomach for it).

Where in the holy hell does he get this from,

    Oral sex is even more intimate and delicate, it seems, then copulation.

The Bible does not teach that, by the way. That is entirely Piper’s view or speculation.

In my opinion (and yes, this is only my opinion), I can see the argument that oral sex is EQUALLY intimate to penetration, or that penetration is MORE intimate to. I can see either of those arguments. What I cannot see is how oral sex is “more” intimate than penetration, which is what he’s arguing.

Piper does admit that “I don’t think oral sex is explicitly prohibited in any biblical command. If the Bible pro-scribes it, it would have to be by principle and not by an explicit command.”

I didn’t see too much objectionable in the remainder of his advice, but it’s beyond me why anyone would ask him for advice anymore than (Link): some Americans keep asking Pat Robertson for advice.

Then there was this Piper tweet (link to Tweet):

    Down by the river the teenagers would go to make out. I watched them drive back. They never looked happy. Especially she.

What?

Julie Anne at Spiritual Sounding Board blog (link to blog) reproduced a Tweeted reply to that, which I found to be a good come back:

    by Emily T.
    Maybe they weren’t happy because a creepy old man was watching them.

Indeed.

This was also good:

    Cindy Kunsman
    @JohnPiper Is a perv.
    I knew he was a perv, but this just adds to the confirmations. Does he wear ADIDAS? #AllDayPiperDreamsAboutSex

Parody (hat tip, Julie Anne of Spiritual Sounding Board blog):
(Link): Down By The River music parody

Christians are not obsessed with sexual purity. They are obsessed with sex. Maybe if they actually stood behind sexual purity, we’d not see so many odd ball pronouncements in public from them about… sex.
—————————————
Related posts:

(Link): No Christians and Churches Do Not Idolize Virginity and Sexual Purity – Christians Attack and Criticize Virginity Sexual Purity Celibacy / Virginity Sexual Purity Not An Idol

Ann Coulter’s Very Accurate Ebola Post Being Criticized As Being Insensitive – But It’s Not; It’s Accurate

Ann Coulter’s Very Accurate Ebola Post Being Criticized As Being Insensitive Part 2, a follow-up to this post (there are further updates much farther below, too):

(Link): Strawman Argument: “You’re Creating a False Dichotomy” – No, I’m Not (Re: Coulter editorial and U.S. Christians aiding foreigners)

———————————————————–

Updates much farther below – volunteers, including Red Cross workers, are being murdered by doofuses in Africa – volunteers who are there to help bury ebola dead or help ebola patients.

And, as of Sept 30, 2014, the C.D.C. reports that some American guy who went to Africa and is back in Texas is confirmed as having ebola. There are also now (as of Oct 2), reports of possible ebola infected people in Hawaii and Kentucky. And, as of Oct 3, in Washington.

Ann Coulter is proved right time and again with every new news story about this.

Oct 10, 2014: I am keeping updates at the bottom of the post. More and more people are testing positive for ebola around the world.

I am sorry people are getting sick and dying of ebola overseas, but I don’t see how Americans (or Europeans) flying down to Africa is going to help – looks to me as though non-African involvement is making things WORSE.

Oct 23, 2014: more “doctors without borders” physician volunteers have caught ebola in Africa, one is being treated in New York. Then there’s this headline: “Machete-wielding mob kills 2 over Ebola testing”

——————————————————-

I was skimming my Twitter feed yesterday when I saw this editorial by Ann Coulter mentioned, and a series of tweets and RTs, criticizing it:

(Link): EBOLA DOC’S CONDITION DOWNGRADED TO ‘IDIOTIC’ by Ann Coulter

I’ll include some excerpts from it below.

The criticisms I saw of it were depicting her observations as though they are totally heartless. I disagree.

I think she made a lot of sense and pointed out some common flaws in American Christians. I think her criticisms are true, and the truth hurts – I saw Christians on Twitter accusing her of being mean or cruel. I think the truth hurts.

I don’t think American Christians like being confronted with their total hypocrisy on this issue.

Here are a few excerpts from Ann Coulter’s editorial, with additional comments by me below it:

    August 8, 2014
    by A. Coulter
  • I wonder how the Ebola doctor feels now that his humanitarian trip has cost a Christian charity much more than any services he rendered.
  • What was the point?
  • Whatever good Dr. Kent Brantly did in Liberia has now been overwhelmed by the more than $2 million already paid by the Christian charities Samaritan’s Purse and SIM USA just to fly him and his nurse home in separate Gulfstream jets, specially equipped with medical tents, and to care for them at one of America’s premier hospitals….
  • … why do we have to deal with this at all?
  • Why did Dr. Brantly have to go to Africa? The very first “risk factor” listed by the Mayo Clinic for Ebola — an incurable disease with a 90 percent fatality rate — is: “Travel to Africa.”
  • Can’t anyone serve Christ in America anymore?
  • Continue reading

    Gary Habermas joins Janet Mefferd to discuss dealing with doubt in the Christian life (Re: Unanswered Prayer – other issues)

    Gary Habermas joins Janet to discuss dealing with doubt in the Christian life (Re: Unanswered Prayer)

    Audio / podcast.

    I have found that Janet Mefferd’s show does not work in Google Chrome (browser), sometimes does not work in FireFox, but DOES work in IE (Microsoft Internet Explorer browser). I loathe IE, but it’s the only browser that will play her show.

    Habermas has recently written a book about faith and doubt or something, and he is interviewed by Janet Mefferd about it, as well as related questions, such as unanswered prayer, Christians who walk away from church because they have been hurt by other Christias, or they lost a loved one (to death), or they don’t feel Christianity is meeting their needs, etc.

    You can listen to the interview here:
    (I think this is hour 3 – there appears to be an hour 1 and hour 2):
    (Fixed the link)

    (Link): Podcast: Gary Habermas joins Janet to discuss dealing with doubt in the Christian life. (mentions unanswered prayer, other topics)

    ———————————
    Related posts, this blog:

    (Link): Blaming the Christian for His or Her Own Problem or Unanswered Prayer / Christian Codependency

    (Link): On Prayer and Christ’s Comment to Grant You Anything You Ask in His Name

    (Link): Church Is Not Important, 51 Percent of US Adults Say

    (Link): Guilt Tripping or Shaming the Hurt Sheep to Return to Church

    (Link): Quitting Church – why single Christians aren’t going to church – church has failed Christian singles

    (Link): Christians Who Can’t Agree on Who The Old Testament Is For and When or If It Applies

    (Link): Why People Don’t Go To Church (various links and testimonies March 2014)

    Sexual Purity, Virginity, and Celibacy As Product – and: Christian Myths That Are Keeping Marriage Minded Single Women Single Courtesy Dannah Gresh

    Sexual Purity, Virginity, and Celibacy As Product

    I didn’t intend on blogging anything more tonight, but I just made a post about modesty (this one, (Link): “Sexualizing Modesty – Christians Defeating the Purpose”). I noticed in the Right Wing Watch article linked to in that post that it mentioned Dannah Gresh.

    Dannah Gresh does guest posts at The Christian Post about sexuality, where she promotes abstinence/ celibacy / chastity/ virginity, and talks about the dangers of pre-marital sex.

    If I am remembering rightly, I think the first post I saw that mentioned her discussed how she had sex as a teenager but now goes around as a guest speaker at churches and schools promoting sexual purity. I believe that was what prompted me to come up with the tag for this blog of “fornicators used as sexual role models.”

    I find it so absurd that Christians appear to have a preference for fornicators acting as role models for virgin youth (hiring them as speakers for youth groups about the importance of sexual purity), rather than getting an actual, literal, adult virgin who is over age 30, to give advice, write books on the topic, or act as speaker.

    It is not that I am against Christians speaking up in defense of celibacy or virginity, or in pointing out that pre marital or casual sex can have negative outcomes, but this Gresh woman seems to be making a living off the entire thing, and that bothers me (like the TV preachers who pimp the Gospel for a buck).

    There seems to be something a little unsavory about making a cottage industry, making profit, off promoting celibacy/ virginity/ sexual purity.

    I’ve blogged about this Gresh woman before, such as:

      (Link):

    Fifty Shades of Feminine Hypocrisy – editorial by Gresh, discusses slut shaming, rape culture, modesty – has points I agree and disagree with

    (Link): Sexual Purity Under Attack in Nation’s Schools, Says Christian Author Dannah Gresh

    (Link): Christians Blaming the Woman – again: Regarding: How Women Can Make Church a Safe Place for Men by D. Gresh

    (Link): How About Using Celibates as Role Models For Celibacy? (Oddity: Christians Holding Up Non-Virgins [Fornicators] As Being Experts or Positive Examples on Sexual Purity)

    I think I have one or two other posts about Gresh, or that mention her, but I cannot find them at the moment.

    According to my previous post, (Link): “Sexualizing Modesty – Christians Defeating the Purpose”), Gresh now has an entire web site devoted to the topic of sexual purity and/or modesty, here:

    (Link): Secret Keeper Girl

    That “Secret Keeper Girl” site has a link to a “store” page on it, where merchandise is being sold (as I skim the page today, there are several books by Gresh for sale).

    Here is a screen cap for one of her books from that page:

    Screen shot of Book Advertisement

    Screen shot of Book Advertisement

    According to (Link): the page of that site selling that book:

      Discover how to get so lost in God that a guy has to seek Him to find you.

    Dannah Gresh traces God’s language of love through Scripture to help you pursue your heart’s deepest desires and seek love the way God designed it to be. Because once you identify your true longings and let God answer them, you’ll know just how to respond when romantic love comes along.

    With a guided ten-day Love Feast Challenge, Get Lost will help you see for yourself how getting lost in God opens the door to lifelong fulfillment.

    Sigh. This is similar to the sort of thing I read and often heard as a teen-aged Christian girl and into my twenties (in no particular order, and some Christians imply it more than state it out right): be such a faithful, good, sexually pure Christian girl, put God first in your life, put other people first, and in due time, God will send a Christian Mr. Right your way.

    And, if you have followed this blog, you already know my story: I’m over 40, was engaged, still a virgin, and never married, though I had wanted to be.

    I certainly did all the things Christians advise young ladies to do who hope for marriage: I put God first, lived a clean life style, prayed to God for a spouse, waited, attended church, etc. etc. etc. And yet, I am still single.

    Upon reflection, I think I should have pursued marriage. Not sat back, crossing my fingers, hoping God would act and send me Mr. Right.

    Continue reading

    Sexualizing Modesty – Christians Defeating the Purpose

    Sexualizing Modesty – Christians Defeating the Purpose

    Before I get to the main heart of this post, here is a long introduction.

    First of all, I think the modesty debate re-enforces one Christian and secular stereotype: that only men are visually oriented, and women are not. That is, women are thought to hate sex, or not be very interested in sex, and that women prefer “emotional bonding,” knitting tea cozies, and reading poetry, to sex.

    The truth is, a lot of women (even Christian ones) are visually oriented and get “turned on” by looking at a good looking man (especially if he’s in great shape and shirtless).

    These modesty teachings almost never, ever take into account that women have sex drives, sexual desires, and sexual preferences – and I get so tired of that aspect of it. These modesty teachings only take into account that MEN are sexual and have sex drives and so forth.

    I am really not totally on either side of this modesty debate.

    Concerning this issue, like several others I regularly discuss on this blog, I’m neither fully on Team (secular or Christian) Feminist, nor am I fully on Team Conservative (or Team Christian).

    My views would probably hack off people on either side of the debate, both the anti-modesty types and the pro-modesty ones.

    I think both sides make some really good points on some things, but both sides also get a few things wrong.

    Where I might agree with the anti-modesty guys on “point X”, I might find that the pro-modesty guys are right about “point Z.”

    Where I Agree with the Pro Modesty Side

    As far as the pro-modesty side is concerned, I do agree that some teen-aged girls and women dress slutty, and this is not good, right, or cool.

    I’m tired of secular feminists shaming pro-modesty types and trying to intimidate them into silence by screaming “slut shamer” at them, or about them, in every other tweet or blog post.

    There are some women who do in fact want to use their looks, body, or sexuality to get attention. I saw these sorts of girls and women when I was a teen, in my 20s, and older. We’ve all known them.

    They’re not satisfied wearing plain old blue jeans with a normal shirt, no.

    They have to wear mini-skirts with fish net stockings and stiletto heels, or daisy duke shorts with their ass cheeks barely hanging out.

    There may be a minority of women who dress that way because they genuinely find such fashions cute or flattering on their figure, but you damn well know the majority are wearing such ensembles to look “hot,” and at that, because they want male attention.

    Personally, I find that look -the barely dressed, or stilettos with mini skirts types of sexy looks – rather trampy, and I think most women who dress like that are in fact seeking sexual attention from males – and no, I’m not fine with that.

    I don’t have to agree with other women’s choices all the time in clothing or how they choose to attract men.

      Side Note:

      (Seriously, this is one odd-ball aspect I’ve seen crop up on secular feminist blogs frequently: by sheer fact that I am a woman, I am expected to always agree with other women and all their choices and political and moral views all. the. time, and to deny my own personal, political, or religious values and opinions in the process.

      Yes, just because I am a woman, and they are a woman. Me supporting all other women all the time on every topic under the sun (and it seems especially true in regards to sexuality, modesty, sex, abortion, and birth control) is considered obligatory, all because I’m a woman too.

      I don’t support all males all the time on every topic, so why would I be expected to support all women all the time, about everything? It makes no sense.)

    Some women do in fact make a conscious choice to showcase their sexuality (e.g., by wearing tiny skirts and so forth) because their self esteem and self respect is so low, they don’t think they have anything else to offer a man, or they don’t think they have anything to offer the world but their looks, body, and sexuality.

    Or, some women who dress in revealing clothing may assume 99% of men are indeed visually-oriented cave men, sexist swine, who only want “one thing” from women, and if these women are in the market to pick up a boyfriend, yes, they will don the fishnet stockings and mini-skirts.

    There is a difference between Taylor Swift and Miley Cyrus. There is a difference between Madonna Ciccone and Whitney Houston.

    Some women do in fact choose character, talent, and/or brains to make their place in the world, to gain success, or to get attention, while other women opt to go the sexual and titillation route (which may include dressing in a provocative manner).

    And we (women) all know it. We know this is true. But a lot of the anti-modesty squad I see online seems to deny this.

    Or, maybe they realize it, and their argument is they feel a Miley Cyrus should be able to act or dress like a harlot in public and nobody should make any negative judgments what-so-ever about it.

    I’ve seen secular feminist blogs whose writers get upset with companies who objectify women by portraying women as sexy things in advertisements, or with companies who make too much out of a woman’s looks…

    But these same feminists turn around, and quite inconsistently, feel it’s okay for a woman to objectify herself – and nobody is supposed to say anything critical about it (because that would be “slut shaming”).

    But to me, that is a double standard.

    Where I Agree With the Anti Modesty Side

    Too often, as anti-modesty advocates point out, religious “modesty teachings” or modesty propaganda, tell girls and women they ought to dress in a conservative manner so as not to cause men to stumble.

    The fact is that men are responsible for their behavior. It does not matter if a woman is fully clothed or wearing a thong bikini in the presence of a man, it is up to a man to control his thoughts and actions.

    Continue reading

    Taking the Opposite Position from Neo Calvinists Just Because It’s the Opposite of Neo Calvinists

    Taking the Opposite Position from Neo Calvinists Just Because It’s the Opposite of Neo Calvinists

    I touched on this in an earlier post or two, such as this one: (Link): No Man’s Land – Part 2 – On Post Evangelicals or Ex Christians or Liberal Christians Ignorantly Hopping Aboard Belief Sets They Once Rejected.

    But this time, I wanted to discuss Neo Calvinism and spiritual abuse blogs and advocates in particular.

    I do not support Neo Calvinism, or even old school Calvinism. I think Calvinism is a crock of crap.

    Many of the NC’s (Neo Calvinists, aka YRRs), are arrogant, narrow minded jerks.

    My problem with seeing NC guys, their churches, or their positions discussed and picked apart by some bloggers is that the anti NCs go into reactionary mode.

    Their positions often time seem not so much well thought out in and of themselves, but that they will take a position opposite of that held by most NCs just because it’s the opposite of that held by NCs.

    I do know a little bit about NCs and their theological beliefs, but not as much as their frequent critics.

    According to their frequent critics, NCs believe in a literal six day creation, not an old age of the earth.

    (As for me, I am NOT an NC, and I believe in a literal six day creation.)

    My issue when I visit blogs or Twitter accounts by people who are vehemently anti NC is that they will, it appears to me, automatically take the opposite position on anything John Piper, The Gospel Coaltion, and other NC guys say just to be contrary.

    Continue reading

    A Sexual Revolution for Young Evangelicals? No. (from NR, by Russell Moore)

    A Sexual Revolution for Young Evangelicals? No.

    Moore is at it again. And he’s flip flopping in a way.

    Moore goes from bashing the concept of virginity until marriage ((Link): see this post) to now sort of arguing in favor of, or thinking it’s great that more Christians are supposedly remaining sexually pure. He also (like the rest of Christendom) seems to assume there are no virgins past the age of 30 (but there are).

    (Link): A Sexual Revolution for Young Evangelicals? No.

      Defying the secular culture, churchgoing Christians are sticking to Biblical teaching.

      By Russell D. Moore and Andrew Walker

      In any discussion about the future of religion in America, especially as it relates to stalled growth in churches and denominations, those outside our religious communities find one theory especially compelling.

      This is the idea: that young Evangelicals are frustrated with Christian orthodoxy’s strict standards of sexual morality.

      We’re told that these young Evangelicals will soon revolutionize our churches with liberalized views on same-sex marriage, premarital sex, gender identity, and so on. But a new study by a University of Texas sociologist finds that Evangelical Christians ages 18 to 39 are resisting liberalizing trends in the culture.

      Continue reading

    Update on Married Father Who Worked as Christian Radio Host And Who Rapes Children

    Update on Married Father Who Worked as Christian Radio Host And Who Rapes Children

    Previous post about this perverted loser:
    (Link): Christian radio show host John Balyo arrested on child rape charge

    UPDATES:

    Moser is the guy who was into naked kiddie photos and who was approached by the first pervert to help him get kids for sex:

    (Link): Federal Investigators Find “Bondage Kit” in Storage Unit Of Radio Host Accused of Child Molestation

      Investigators also found Moser had an account on OKCupid.com with his photo and the same email address connected to the child-porn website.

      … Moser is also being held in jail for sex crimes.

    Other info from that same page:

      PLAINFIELD TOWNSHIP, Mich. (June 25, 2014) – Federal investigators say Former Christian Radio Host, John Balyo, told them about a “bondage kit” he kept in a storage unit during an interview following his arrest for allegedly having oral sex with an 11-year-old boy in a Battle Creek Hotel Room.

      According to a spokesperson with Homeland Security, investigators say they found duct tape, handcuffs, rope, zip-ties, and children socks inside the so-called “bondage kit.”

      In addition, investigators say they also found a file containing reports of missing children along with sexually explicit photographs.

      Continue reading

    Another Too Long, Too Strict Suitor List That Will Keep A Single Single Forever: “The Man Who Will Marry My Daughter” by Tony Miano

    Another Too Long, Too Strict Suitor List That Will Keep A Single Single: “The Man Who Will Marry My Daughter”

    The dude who wrote this, Miano, is sexist. He is a gender complementarian and thinks it is sin for a woman to teach the Gospel to men in public.

    Based on other sites I have visited, he does not have a paying job, but his wife does, yet he teaches that a man is head of the house and actually lists this quality as being one he insists a man must have if a man wants to marry his daughter:

      “[a man must] …be able to provide, financially, for his wife and family (1 Timothy 5:8) “

    Miano himself is incapable or unwilling to financially support his own family (this is according to information I have read on other sites), so I have no idea why he makes that a requirement for a man who would want to date his daughter.

    He also, based upon what others have said on other blogs, goes on his Facebook ministry’s page and begs for people to send him Wal-Mart gift cards and to buy him vans and stuff. If he was financially supporting himself, he would not have to beg funds and for cars from other people.

    This blog posting by Miano, by the way, came to my attention via (Link): Stuff Christian Culture Likes. (I would encourage you to click that link and read visitor comments.)

    (Link): “The Man Who Will Marry My Daughter” by Tony Miano

    You’ll notice in this essay that this guy does not view his daughters as fully functioning, independent adults capable of making their own choices in life.

    Miano has infantilized his daughters, who range in age at the time of this writing of about 17 years of age to age 26 or 27, which is a very huge mistake. It is not his duty to choose boyfriends or husbands for his daughters.

    A father is certainly welcome to offer his daughter his advice or views on aspects of her life, including whom she is romantically involved with, but not to act as final arbiter of whom she marries.

    I completely object to the “dating is sin” or “dating is wrong” mindset this guy has.

    Notice also that Miano assumes each daughter will be married and that God “chooses” spouses for them – this is totally unbiblical.

    The Bible nowhere states that God will send a spouse to someone; God makes no statement in the Scriptures that he promises that he will send you, or anyone else, a spouse.

    Let me also use myself as an example of why this belief that everyone is destined for marriage and God “sends” them a spouse, or chooses a spouse for them, is a falsehood.

    I am over 40 years of age, a woman, had expected to marry, was a Christian from girlhood, and prayed daily from childhood onwards for God to send me a husband, and I never got a husband.

    It is simply not true that God “sends” or “chooses” spouses for people. If that were true, I would have been married years ago, but I am still single to this day.

    It may be that even if you are a Christian and want to marry that God will never send you a spouse, no matter how long you pray for it, and no matter how much faith you have.

    You may be single your entire life. Miano’s daughters may never marry.

    Here, a bit below, are some excerpts from the page by Miano – please understand that his list is pretty long.

    I am not going to reproduce the entire list here; this is only a portion of it (I have additional comments below this excerpt):

    (Link): “The Man Who Will Marry My Daughter” by Tony Miano

      by Tony Miano

      Godly, manly young Christian men are harder to find these days.

      But I will not lower my standards for my future son-in-laws.

      I will answer to God, not the culture, for to whom I give my daughters.

      Since our daughters were very young, Mahria and I have instilled in them a family commitment to courtship.

      Our girls will not “date” before they are married.

      We see no biblical precedence for “trying people on for size” or being in relationship with a member of the opposite sex because it is pleasurable or “something to do.” Courtship is a family affair.

      … Mahria and I understand that the day will come, probably soon, when three godly men (one for each daughter) will seek our daughters’ hands in marriage.

      … (Note to any potential candidate who may read this: if this first essential quality is not true in your life, you need not bother reading the rest of the list. You may be a wonderful young man, but you are not the one my Lord and Savior has chosen for my daughter.)

      … not be an adulterer in any form, including pornography (Matthew 5:27-28).

      … open car and building doors for women whenever given the opportunity. Chivalry is not dead (1 Peter 3:7).

      … understand and accept his biblical role as head of the home and his wife (Ephesians 5:25-32).

      Continue reading

    Christian radio show host John Balyo arrested on child rape charge

    Christian radio show host arrested on child rape charge

    And once again: I think the Christian teaching that Christians should only marry other Christians (the “be equally yoked” teaching) is a CROCK.

    As so many self-professing Christian men are pedophiles, serial killers, porn addicts, wife abusers, etc. and so forth, you stand just as good a chance dating and marrying Non-Christians as you would a Christian male.

    I am of course not suggesting that each and every self professing Christian man is a pervert, adulterer, porn addict and what have you, but I have seen enough examples of them that I no longer take the “be yoked” teaching seriously (see some examples here).

    I’m not sure if this Baylo guy was married or had children of his own – which would be relevant for the purposes of this blog, because many conservative Christians like to shame and insult childfree, childless, and adult singles and make them out to be losers, freaks, or weirdos for not marrying and/or for not pro-creating.

    (Many Christians often assume, and quite wrongly, that marriage and parenthood automatically makes a person more responsible, grown up, godly, ethical, and loving, as I have explained on this blog time and again.)

    (Link): Christian radio show host arrested on child rape charge

      John Balyo, 35, of Caledonia was arrested in Gaylord as part of a joint investigation by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the Battle Creek Police Department and Michigan State Police.

      Balyo, an on-air personality at WCSG-FM, a Christian radio station associated with Cornerstone University in Grand Rapids, was arrested on a state charge of first-degree criminal sexual conduct, according to Khaalid Walls, a spokesman for ICE.

      Walls said Friday investigators are alleging that Balyo had sexual encounters with minors in Battle Creek.

      ICE said in a statement that Balyo paid a Battle Creek man, Ronald Moser, 42, to arrange sexual encounters with underage children.

      Continue reading

    Apparent Inconsistency at SCCL Group – They’re Repulsed by Sexualization of Some Relationships But Not All

    Apparent Inconsistency at SCCL Group – They’re Repulsed by Sexualization of Some Relationships But Not All

    Sometimes, I enjoy and agree with some of the views as expressed by S. Drury’s SCCL (“Stuff Christian Culture Likes”) Facebook group, but not always.

    Folks who frequent the SCCL group generally despise Christian sexual purity teachings.

    Me? Nope.

    My position is that the church needs to start upholding sexual purity teachings more, rather than the SCCL group’s preferred option of backing off or halting.

    Very few churches and Christians today condemn sexual sin, nor do many Christians support virginity or sexual purity, something I have blogged about on a recurring basis (see links at the bottom of this post for more).

    One of the things that caught my attention were a couple of posts at the SCCL group this week.

    Continue reading

    Old Testament Studies Blog on Various Topics From Early Marriage to Sexual Sin to Evangelical and Baptist Propensity to Make an Idol Out of Family Marriage and Parenthood Etc Etc

    Old Testament Studies Blog on Various Topics From Early Marriage to Sexual Sin to Evangelical and Baptist Propensity to Make an Idol Out of Family Marriage and Parenthood Etc Etc

    I’m not necessarily in agreement with all views of the guy behind this blog, the OTSB (Old Testament Studies Blog).

    For one, he seems to be a Calvinist, and I disagree with Calvinism.

    OTSB guy discusses some of the same issues at his blog that I discuss here on mine. It looks as though he has not made a new blog entry since October 2013.

    Blog’s Main Page:
    (Link): Old Testament Studies

    (Link): The Dark Side of Evangelicalism-A Response to Accusations on the Boundless Blog
    (Re: Christians denigrating singlehood and idolizing marriage)

    Excerpts:

      The case in point is a recent radio podcast put out by the folks over at Boundless. Steve and Candice Watters were in Louisville, Kentucky for the Give me an Answer conference at Southern Seminary.

      While they were there, they interviewed Albert Mohler for their podcast.

      During the podcast, the following dicussion took place. I want you to read this carefully, and ask yourself if what Dr. Mohler says in the bold portion is consistent with scripture! It begins at 24:15:

      Candice- Are you encouraged by Mark Regnerus and others who are encouraging early marriage, and do you think that this movement will gain traction?

      Dr. Mohler- Well, I’ve been at that a long time, and I can tell you its extremely controversial whereas throughout most of human history that would be the mormal expectation.

      I am encouraged…It’s going to be a counter-revolution. We are literally going to have to stand against the kind of demographic tide that is coming at us, and say…you know, here is the question.

      I just want to ask you this honestly. I talk to young guys about this more than probably any other subject when they bring it up and say, you know, here is the issue: How are you going to be holy without marriage?

      And that’s a tough question to answer, unless, you know, if God has called you to missions, if God’s called you to special service and deployment in this area, then the word is going to compensate for that, but, for most guys, the big issue is just this now long wait.

    (Link): Kristin and Ted Kluck Write of the Familiolatry in the Modern Church

    (Link): Famliolatry on Display Again

    (Link): Why Getting Married Early Will Not Stop Sexual Sin

    (Link): Marital Gnosticism in Evangelicalism

    Excerpts:

      I think we as a church have boughten into a form of gnosticism which I will call “marital gnosticism.” We seem to think that the way to the higher Christian life is through marriage, and, although single people are a part of the church, they simply are not as “enlightened” as those who are married.

      Hence, we need to encourage, and even shame single people into getting married, so that they will become “enlightened” like the rest of the married people. It is gross, ridiculous, gnostic thinking.

      Not only does it not work [marriage cannot change the heart; only Christ can], even worse, it alienates singles. Singles who see this kind of behavior know that they are not part of the “enlightened” gnostic group, and thus, they are pushed further and further away.

    (Link): Another “Marriage is a Cure All” Message

    (Link): Horrendus Eisegesis from Evangelicals in the Culture War

    (Link): Challenging the Challenge to the “Unnecessary” Delay of Marriage

    Continue reading

    Married Youth Pastor Jailed for Sexually Assaulting Teen Girl Writes Editorial About Said Abuse for Christianity Today, Uproar Ensues On Christian Blogs

    Married Youth Pastor Jailed for Sexually Assaulting Teen Girl Writes Editorial About Said Abuse for Christianity Today, Uproar Ensues On Christian Blogs
    —————————————–
    Don’t forget, I may not be blogging as much or as often in the future, if at all.
    See this link (Link): [Blog Break] for more info.

    —————————————–
    There has been an uproar the last day or so, ever since Christianity Today published a long page by a jailed sex offender who preyed on a teen girl.

    I don’t know the man’s name because the piece was published anonymously. I shall here after refer to the author, the convicted sex offender, as “Mr. Perverted Youth Pastor,” or “Mr. PYP” for short.

    The author of the piece, Mr. PYP, is in his 30s, and he worked as a youth pastor. He was jailed for statutory rape of one of his female church students under his charge, a young lady he began to groom for exploitation when she was around 11 or 12 years old.

    Mr. PYP said in his piece published by Christianity Today that he found the attention from the young lady flattering and intoxicating, and felt his wife was not paying him enough attention, and IIRC, I think he mentioned that the wife was not putting out enough (sexually), or whatever. (I only skimmed the guy’s story, I did not read all of it closely.)

    The thing is, a grown man of age 30 should not be seeking validation from an 11 or 16 year old girl – that is not only morally wrong, perverted, and gross, but absolutely pathetic.

    I think the editors at Christianity Today intended for this pervert’s essay to be a helpful warning to Christian men not to get too close to women (or something along those lines), and which unfortunately also plays into false stereotypes about the genders, but the guy who wrote the page, Mr. PYP, never fully and unambiguously owns his sin, moral failing, and crime, so it comes across as though he’s excusing and justifying his behavior.

    There’s a bit of “victim blaming” in the piece on Mr. PYP’s part, where he uses terminology such as,
    “When WE [he and the young lady he was victimizing] decided to end the affair, I felt that…”

    I don’t feel like summarizing the guy’s entire story and situation on my blog, so click here to read his page (“My Easy Trip from Youth Minister to Felon”) and read it for yourself.

    The aspect of this story I am interested in for the purpose of this blog is that here he is, he is a married adult (with, IIRC, a kid of his own), he worked as a pastor, and yet he also sexually exploited a young lady, and I will explain further below why this interests me.

    Another aspect I am interested in regarding this story is that Mr. PYP does not take full responsibility for his actions in the piece, and he classifies his sexual exploitation of the young lady as an “extra martial affair.”

    Now, I, to a point, do regard his actions towards her as an “extra marital affair” because he was a MARRIED man who was sleeping with this girl – he was in fact sleeping around on his wife, but of course, his actions are more than just a standard extra-martial affair, because he was taking advantage of a young lady.

    In my opinion, his actions contain traits of both situations, sexual abuse as well as an extra-marital affair.

    There are a few other writers online who disagree with my view on this; they think his actions were 100% sexual abuse and that the phrase “extra marital affair” should not even be used when discussing this case, but I never- the- less see a tinge of extra-marital affair in the situation as well (but on the man’s part only; I am not blaming the girl at all).

    I am simply saying that yes, while Mr. PYP did sexually abuse a teen girl, that in doing so, he also violated his marital vows to his wife to remain faithful to the wife – which to me can categorize his actions as being an affair as well as being sexual abuse.

    Why I am interested in this story:

    As I have pointed out time and time again on the blog, Christians have several falsehoods and fairy tales and stereotypes about marriage, sex, dating, gender relations, and whom they feel a Christian should marry.

    Many conservative Christians believe that married people are immune from sexual sin. Christians falsely believe if a man is married, he must be getting steady, regular, hot sexy sex from his wife, and he therefore will not use porn, fondle kids, or have mistresses. This is of course naive and incorrect, because even men married to sexy wives, who get regular, great sex from the wife, still use porn and have affairs.

    Continue reading