The Long Term Effects of the January 6 Insurrection

As evangelicals, we are used to “revivals.” Big social and media events where hundreds to tens of thousands become Christian at one time.
I believe that what happened yesterday will cause a sort of reverse revival. It will be impossible to calculate. But I strongly suspect that in one day Christianity lost more than would have been gained in several years of Billy Graham crusades.
This event will become not just historic, but culture defining. Like the Crusades, this will become like a cultural anchor point, which will turn generation after generation away from Christianity.
This day was the bitter harvest of years of sowing idolatry to a political leader. It absolutely frustrates and angers me. It is so sad!

How Reasonable Christianity becomes Fundamentalism

1. Encounter new ideas, which threaten old beliefs and structures (and money)

2. Rather than engage with/integrate ideas, resolve situation through power by:

a) identifying new ideas as heresies

b) identifying previous beliefs as orthodoxy 

c) assigning punishments to those who believe wrong views (excommunication, loss of job, hell)

d) put money into organizations designed to protect old ideas

3. Create situations where information is controlled (homeschool, churches-that-don’t-communicate-with-broader-theological-community-because-only-they-have-the-answers, unaccredited Bible schools, parachuting organizations & publishing houses controlled by said churches)

4. When children raised in this system find out that the message “if you pursue free thought/science you will agree with us,” was a lie,

…

a) hopefully they are trapped by a pay check and a social circle. So they have to keep preaching it or be jobless and friendless in midlife. 

b) …if they do dare to get outside that bubble, remember to remove, exclude, excommunicate, fire, and purge them from the system

c) quote, “if they left us they were never a part of us” invalidate their entire Christian experience 

d) create fictional tales of the woes of those who leave (many of these “woes” were caused by the unhealthy messages of the religious group, the pressure of trying to live a double life, and the pain of being abandoned or actively attacked on the way out)

5. Double down. The problem was always too much free thought. 

a) create longer and longer lists of approved and unapproved doctrines 

b) purge all leadership positions of those who don’t agree

c) paint all those who left as dangerous heretics and apostates 

6. When “apostates” call out problems, identify these as heresy. Go back to step one and repeat, thus drawing the circle tighter and tighter. 

…sing to Jesus and say “amen”…

How reasonable Christianity becomes fundamentalism:

1. Encounter new ideas, which threaten old beliefs and structures (and money)

2. Rather than engage with/integrate ideas, resolve situation through power by:

a) identifying ideas as heresies

b) identifying previous beliefs as orthodoxy 

c) assigning punishments to those who believe wrong views (excommunication, loss if job, hell)

d) put money into organizations designed to protect old ideas

3. Create situations where information is controlled (homeschool, churches-that-don’t-communicate-with-broader-theological-community-because-only-they-have-the-answers, unaccredited Bible schools set up by said churches, parachuting organizations & publishing houses controlled by said churches)

4. When children raised in this system find out that the message “if you pursue free thought/science you will agree with us,” was a lie,

a) hopefully they are trapped by a pay check. So they have to keep preaching it or be jobless with kids in midlife. 

b) if they dare to get outside that bubble, remember to remove, exclude, excommunicate, fire, and purge them from the system

c) quote, “if they left us they were never a part of us”

d) create fictional tales of the woes of those who leave (many of these “woes” were caused by the unhealthy messages of the religious group, the pressure of trying to live a double life, and the pain of being abandoned or actively attacked on the way out)

5. Double down. The problem was always too much free thought. 

a) create longer and longer lists of approved and unapproved doctrines 

b) purge all leadership positions of those who don’t agree

c) paint all those who left as dangerous heretics and apostates 

6. When “apostates” call out problems, identify these as heretical thoughts. Go back to step one and repeat…

…sing to Jesus and say “amen”…

What would a reasonable Christianity look like?

Well, here’s a start…

1) A humble attitude towards knowledge. Leaders should be known for their generous and kind spirit, sense of wonder, and emotional health. Not their ability to memorize the previous generation’s list of heresies/orthodoxies)

2) Science should be welcomed. NOT as a new kind if religion, but AS SCIENCE. Real scientists ask questions, admit when their theories are incomplete but “the best I have right now,” and change their minds when presented with new information

3) Emotional health should be prioritized. Vital relationships maintained with secular mental health experts in the community. 

4) VERY. MINIMAL. CONTROL. STRUCTURES. Membership is completely voluntary. Leaders are not there to control the lives of members and certainly not to police thoughts. 

5) Know for active engagement in the community. Caring for the metaphorical “widows and orphans,” those who are marginalized and ignored in local community.

6) Very minimal infrastructure. NOT a huge heated building that has to be maintained 7 days a week for a few hours on Sunday. Not putting all of the energy if the religious community into making this service amazing. But rather, putting that energy into truly helping people. 

Phil Vischer on Ken Ham’s Creationism

So this was a really interesting podcast. In it, Phil Vischer (maker of veggie tales) lays out his research about how Young Earth Creationism became a “do-or-die” issue for many Evangelicals:

1. Through the course of the 1700’s and 1800’s, as science progressed, nearly all educated Christians came to believe in an old earth

2. The one exception was Seventh Day Adventists, who believed in a young earth
3. In the 1920’s, to 1940’s, many American Christians reacted against European Christianity by developing “Fundamentalism”
4. None of the founders of Fundamentalism believed in a young earth, although several rejected evolution
5. In the 60’s, Dr. Henry Morrison started writing books about creationism. He explicitly tied a certain view of Genesis 1-3 with Fundamentalist/Evangelical orthodoxy. Using the “slippery slope” argument (btw, a very weak argument in logic), he argued that if one did not agree with him on this point, they would soon not be a Christian anymore
6. Ken Ham read Morrison, and dedicated his life to propagating Young Earth Creationism, eventually coming to the US, joining Morrison, then founding Answers in Genesis
7. Answers in Genesis grew to twice the size of Morrison’s organization. As Evangelicals pulled back from society into homeschooling and private school in the 70’s and 80’s, Ham produced very well packaged homeschool curriculum, making his views incredibly popular in the “bubble” of American Evangelicalism. It is impossible to avoid noticing that Answers in Genesis has an incredible amount of money behind them, and are able to use media extremely well, including the internet.
8. Today, it is very common for Evangelicals to not only deny Evolution, but also believe that the earth is only 6,000 years old. Further, to believe that this is the only Christian way to read the Bible, and that if anyone denies this, it will be a “slippery slope” to rejecting all of the Bible.

…

In my own experience and research:

1. There are many views on the very complex passages of Genesis 1-3 (also Job and Psalms, etc.)
2. Young Earth Creationism (as Ham explains it) is a modern and American belief. It is not common in Europe. It was not common before this time. (People did not believe in Evolution before Darwin, of course, but many Christians were open to an old earth, and there were many, many theories about the agency of creation. That was never identified as a key issue in any synod, council or creed)
3. There are many great theologians today doing work on this topic, such as John Walton, Hugh Ross, and Willian Lane Craig.
4. In my work as a campus pastor, Ken Ham’s strict choice of, “Either you believe in YEC or you’re not a Christian” was one of the chief reasons students left the faith, as Young Earth Creationism doesn’t square with many many fields of study
5. A dogmatic statement of YEC is a big part of why I am on this journey now. Nipawin Bible College used to be a place where many types of conservative Christians could find a place and dialogue openly. But I was told that (despite fitting in nearly every other way) I could not be hired as a teacher because I would not teach a hard-line stance on this issue. I preferred to teach YEC as one option among many, but was willing to only teach YEC: but because I admitted that I did not believe this theory personally (for academic reasons), I could not teach there.

This is a very complex issue, and it is just sad that one man has made a living of reducing complexity down to two options: “my way or the highway.” I’m glad that Visher did this podcast, shining a light on the very recent nature of Ken Ham’s Young Earth Creationism.

Then and Now: Some thoughts on Gender and the Bible

I have been a complimentarian most of my life, which means that I believe in a traditional reading of the Bible, that although men and women are equal in worth, they have different roles in the home, in society, and in the church.

As with many of my beliefs, I am just putting that up for review right now. I am asking, “Is that healthy?”

I got to thinking about some of the things that were different 2,000 years ago, to now. Since things were different, wouldn’t it be healthy and normal to also shift our views on gender roles…?

Some things that were different then:

1. Men normally married around ten years younger. Times were hard. It was a way of matching optimal fertility with optimal ability to provide. 
2. Everyone worked, including women. This meant that everyone was an asset: if a woman left the family/clan, her loss would be compensated for by a dowry, to help the clan that had lost an able-bodied worker. Times were hard. 
3. Society had to hold together to survive. There were no contraceptives. A teenage pregnancy was a disaster, as it broke down the family/clan structure. Adolescent sex was tightly controlled, and women sometimes sequestered until they were given in marriage. Clans were organized around a male patriarchal head. Dissension was like treason, and treated as such. The only way to survive was to stick together. Times were hard. 
4. There were no feminine hygiene products, and very minimal medical supplies. This very greatly limited the mobility and health of women: especially in cultures with strict rules on ceremonial cleanliness. 
5. There was no birth control, and many children died in infancy. By necessity, the role of a married woman was to watch children, and tend to the very busy domestic chores of life. Times were very hard. 
6. When there was education to be had, the men usually got it first, as they had more ability, they were probably older than their wives, society was organized patriarchally, and the education would seem to be more useful in the hands of the family/clan leader. Remember, times were hard. 
7. Although Jesus broke down stereotypes by making a missionary out of a woman, having female followers, and teaching women, Paul knew these practices would not go over well in the general population. Paul’s great passion was to get the message of the Gospel out, and “not cause offense” to the Jewish and Greek audience. The Jews of Jesus’ day often saw women as spiritually inferior and incapable of receiving the law. The Greeks often saw women as “less spiritual,” more “fleshly,” and emotional vs. Intelligent 

…and so just keeping this in mind as we read Paul…

1. When Paul said, “let wife’s learn from their husbands,” (1 Cor. 13:35) he was speaking into a situation where the women would have been less educated, had less experience outside the home, less religious training (if any), and usually were a decade younger than their husbands. 
2. When Paul said, “it is shameful for a woman to speak in the assembly,” (1 Cor. 14:35) …he may have simply been pointing out a fact. It was shameful for women to speak publicly in that context. (He was not saying it was always a sin for women to speak in church because…)
3. …when he said that a woman should have her head covered when prophesying (speaking) in church, clearly that meant something to them in their culture and context (1 Cor. 11). There is much discussion about short and long hair, and coverings in this passage. Some interpret this as timeless commands: but Paul may also be guiding a church in how to be culturally appropriate in their own time: a great principle to apply in our own.
4. When he says, “I do not permit a woman to teach or have authority over a man,” (1 Tim. 2:12) he may have been laying down a universal command, of he may have been sharing his personal rule in a private letter to his closest friend and protégée. If so, there were definite cultural reasons why this made sense at the time, but…
5. …there were also Biblical examples of women with teaching capacity, such as Phoebe (Rom. 16:1), Acquilla (Acts 18:26), and others. 
6. When Paul said that women should be “workers at home,” he was almost certainly not thinking of cooking and cleaning and looking pretty, with all of the modern conveniences, like a 1950’s “model woman.” The proverbs 31 woman bought fields, hired employees, and handled the finances for her (very fortunate) husband.
7. In Titus 2:5, Paul tells wives to submit to their husbands, “…so that the word of God will not be maligned.” Well folks, we have the opposite situation today. People are more likely to “malign” the word of God if wives are not allowed to pursue careers because of outdated mandates: does this mean that it is also time to update how we see this verse?
8. …when Peter told husbands to live with their wives in and understanding way, “as the weaker vessel,” (1 Pet. 3:7) he was not speaking about a lower worth (as he goes on to immediately say that they have equal worth as “co-heirs” of the gospel) but teaching husbands to be compassionate for the difficult plight of women in that day. Times were hard. 

…this is not a definitive list. However, I think this is the first time that I have pulled together these bits of information to review as a whole the question of gender roles within Christianity. 

In our very different times, when age, education, health, hygiene, kids, and the difficulty of life are not such a crushing burden on us all….is it not time to upgrade our view of gender?

…or must we continue in exactly the same patriarchal holding pattern that our ancestors developed to solve very specific problems back then?

Paul’s words are…interesting. “So that the word of God will not be maligned.”

What is the #1 reason people turn away from our faith today? As a campus pastor, one objection came up over and over.

“I can’t be a Christian because of their outdated and sexist views on women.”

🤔 Interesting…

So what would it look like if we prioritized our witness, and cultural sensitivity on this issue, in 2020?

A “Satanist” Cabal? 🤔

There is a rising conspiracy theory, known as Qanon, which teaches that a cabal of pedophilic and child-eating satanist elites are controlling the world. This seems like a good time to talk about Satanism.

Satanism is:

1. A Christian phenomenon in that the word “Satan” is a Christian term. “Satan” is a character derived from the judeo -Christian tradition. While present in the Abrahamuc religions, it is not usually found inside of it. Non-Christians do not usually call themselves “Satanists”
2. The exception to this is the relatively small and recent religion of Satanism. Founded in 1966, this religion draws in Christianity and other sources, with their “Satanist Bible,” which seeks to teach the opposite of Christianity. Their core motto is “do as you please” (the opposite of “love God/your neighbour”). Satanism is not a world religion and is not large.
3. Wicca is modern-day witchcraft (the closest to what Christians would call “Satanism”). It is a revival of the Druid religion which existed in Europe before Christianity. Modern day Wiccans live by the motto, “do as you will, but harm none.” They seek to restore order and harmony with themselves and nature. It is sometimes called paganism. Wiccans often call themselves witches and warlocks and meet in covens. They do not, however, call themselves “Satanists.”
4. In the 80’s and 90’s, many Christians best-selling authors made claims that Satanist elites were brainwashing the young through cartoons such as Care Bears and the Smurfs. Mike Warnke was exposed as a fraud for his claims of the “true nature” of Satanism. Others made the false (and confusing) claim that the New Age movement was actually Satanism.
5. The true issue here is that after enjoying a privileged position as the only religion in the West for centuries, Christians kind of forgot that there are other religions in the world. Ever since the Salem Witch Trials (1698), (when people were executed for practicing traditional African religion, imported by African slaves) American Christians have tended to call all non-Christian religion “Satanism” or (which is the same thing to them) “witchcraft.”
6. While it is true that the Bible can legitimately be interpreted as saying that all other beliefs are wrong, and come ultimately from Satan (1 Tim. 4:1), this is not the same thing as believing that every religion other than Christianity is “Satanism.” Many authors purposely cause confusion on this point, misleading the readers, and leading to a fear-based-knee-jerk reaction.

This very narrow-sighted view of other religions has a dark past, and I do not see it providing much light in the future.

The next time someone shares with you a link exposing “a secret Satanist agenda,” remember: the word “Satanist” really only makes sense to Christians. There are many religions in the world, with many beliefs: but they do not call themselves Satanists.

Someone who is “exposing Satanism” is trying to get a reaction out of Christians and post-Christians. It is our equivalent of the “boogey-man.” But Satan is a figure which exists only within Christianity.

While it is entirely probable that there are many dark forces, world religions, ideologies and mysterious societies running our world — I find it very highly unlikely that “Satanism” is a word which could describe any of these, and I find it more than unlikely that a “cabal of pedophilic Satanists” is secretly running the world.

Search us Oh God…

Search us, O God, and know our church culture; Try us and know our anxious thoughts;

And see if there be any hurtful way in us,

And lead us in the everlasting way.

Psalm 139:23-24

…we want health more than we need to be right

…we want justice more than we need power

…we want to truly help people: forgive our harm!

…we believe this is worth saving

…search us, oh a God!

…lead us in the way everlasting!

…Amen ❤️ 🙏 ✌️

Who are the Heretics?

What if…

…it’s really the conservative Christians who will only tolerate teachers who “tickle their ears”? 

What if only teachers willing to ignore the latest in research, shut down free though, and tell them exactly what they want to hear will have a job?

What if anyone who will not tell the story exactly how they remember it will be fired, blacklisted, and called a heretic?

What if “conservative congregations” are really scared boys and girls, afraid of change, and unwilling to hear and facts or evidence that might make the uncomfortable or force them to rethink cherished beliefs?

Paul, on “Judging Outsiders”

“What have I to do with judging outsiders?
…Remove the wicked man from among yourselves!”

1 Corinthians 5:9-13

I think that the above passage (full passage below) gets to the heart of what is wrong with evangelicalism today. We are focused:
1) On judging the behaviour of outsiders (especially LGBTQ and abortion) according to our standards, which they do not share
2) We have become so preoccupied with #1, we are willing to turn a blind eye to wickedness in our own camp (Trump, Jerry Falwell Jr., innumerable sexual and domestic abuse scandals), which everyone sees and is perplexed about.
…we claim to possess the moral high ground. But I don’t think that we do any more. There is only so much we can hide behind “media spin.” Are we secure enough in our faith and in our own selves to let people live their own lives? We are not. Are we committed enough to holiness to pay a costly price by holding our leaders to a high standard? We are not. We have lost the moral high ground, and the smoke from this culture war has so blinded our eyes that we are unable to see the true battles for justice and mercy happening right in front of us.

It is the Gospel of Jesus Christ that is suffering from our lack of focus, and we are losing our world, our witness, and the coming generation in our mad desire to have our way through coercion, rather than through influence.

I wrote you in my letter not to associate with immoral people; I did not at all mean with the immoral people of this world, or with the covetous and swindlers, or with idolaters, for then you would have to go out of the world. But actually, I wrote to you not to associate with any so-called brother if he is an immoral person, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or a swindler—not even to eat with such a one. For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Do you not judge those who are within the church? But those who are outside, God judges. Remove the wicked man from among yourselves.

1 Corinthians 5:9-13

Jerry Falwell Jr (Initial Thoughts)

More is coming out about Jerry Falwell Jr. as we speak. It is so recent I am waiting until it settles down to get the facts. Here is a synopsis (and my commentary) on the “old news” of Mr Falwell. 

1) Jerry Falwell Sr. is a very prominent name in evangelicalism, and in politics 

2) His son Jerry Falwell Jr. now runs the school which his father founded 

3) Jerry Falwell Jr. was one of the key leaders that swayed the Evangelical “voting block” (yes, they vote as a block) to vote for Trump

4) The school is the largest Christian school in America, perhaps the world. I seriously considered attending there, as their online classes are apparently cheap and very well taught. 

5) The school has extremely tough moral codes, including monetary fines for drinking, and “being caught in a state of undress” with a member of the opposite sex. 

6) Mr. Falwell has a very long history of both scandals, which the school has consistently ignored

6) He was finally fired after posting a photo (below) on social media of himself with his arm around a woman who was not his wife with a glass of black liquid in his hand, on his private Yacht (yes, he has a private yacht)

7) More scandals are coming out as we speak. Buckle your seatbelts. It sounds like another 1 Corinthians 5 situation. 

…commentary…

Up until a few weeks ago, I didn’t know this guy. But I think that what this highlights is:

1) Evangelical institutions (seminaries, churches, radio stations, publishing houses, music & media, denominational headquarters) have a HUGE sway over the direction of evangelicalism

2) The control of these institutions is held by relatively few people

3) These people are not perfect, and sometimes they are in their position for no other reason than that they are rich, or that they inherited it

4) These people are often courted by politicians, who convince them to convert their spiritual authority into political power 

5) It is hard to hold these people accountable, because any critique of them would seem to weaken “the cause” (be that the pro-life cause, or promoting Christianity). 

6) The average church-going Evangelical is not aware of the “machine” of evangelicalism, nor of the people running it. Yet they are influenced by it. If Mr. Falwell has been convinced otherwise, perhaps all evangelicals would have voted for another candidate. 

What this story highlights is:

1. Evangelicalism is a grassroots movement of several million Christians who express their faith a certain way
2. Evangelicalism is also a financial, political, and religious “machine”

There is a complex relationship between the two. Both need each other. Neither is wrong in and of itself. But, both can be sinful and need to be called to account. 

It will be interesting to see how this situation unfolds. We are learning a lot about the institutions that have formed us, and some of those who lead them. 

I Don’t “Get” Pro-Life Politics…

Me: so I don’t really get the pro life argument. Could you explain it to me?

Every Evangelical Ever: unborn babies are humans, and their lives matter. 

Me: OK, yeah. I definitely get that. So what is your plan, exactly?

EEE: make abortions illegal. 

Me: OK, illegal for whom? The doctors or the women?

EEE: both. Or either. We are divided. 

Me: So if a woman wants to end her pregnancy, she should go to prison. And if a doctor wants to help her, he should go to. That’s it?

EEE: Something like that. But ideally, abortions would not be available at all. 

Me: Of course, the argument is that there will be unsafe and illegal abortions. 

EEE: yes, but far fewer. 

Me: yes, but very much more dangerous. 

Me: Does it bother you that most Americans and Canadians aren’t on board with this plan?

EEE: That is OK. We will just elect a very powerful politician to push our agenda. 

Me: So you want to make abortions illegal for people who want them, by electing a politician who won’t listen to the majority of his citizens?

EEE: Exactly. 

Me: But isn’t this anti-democratic?

EEE: No, because America was founded as a Christian nation. 

Me: I’m a Canadian. And also, weren’t the Natives here first?

EEE: Tish tosh. Western Culture is what really is responsible for America.

Me: But, the roots of Western Philosophy are actually more in Ancient Greece…but anyways…how will you impose your will on the rest of the population?

EEE: We are a strong voting block. As long as we all vote the same way, we can change policy on this issue. 

Me: OK, so I’m just wondering about some of the policies maybe we Christians should be attentive to…

EEE: like what?

Me: Like global warming. 

EEE: Oh, well that’s a myth. And if it’s true, there’s no way that humans are causing it. And if they are, there’d be no way to stop it. 

Me: We could try to work together to solve our problems. It has worked on other issues. 

EEE: You mean work with the UN?! Don’t you know they are the Antichrist? And don’t you know they are…

Me: pro-choice. Right. 

Me: So what about commercialism?

EEE: What do you mean?

Me: I mean what about the fact that our products were provided in unfair working conditions on the other side of the planet, by people not making a working wage? Shouldn’t we hold our politicians accountable? 

EEE: We can’t. It would dilute our voting power. 

Me: What about the crisis at the border? Do we care that kids are being permanently separated from their parents? That seems like something Jesus would care about…

EEE: We can’t talk about that, really. It would dilute our voting power. 

Me: Does it bother you that we now know that George bush secretly broke the Geneva Contract, by creating Guantanamo bay, and torturing prisoners of war, without a trial?

EEE: We can’t talk about that, really. It would dilute our voting power. 

Me: What about the fact that Bush brought in the patriot act, reneging basic human rights for anyone considered a “terrorist”?

EEE: Yes, but he was Gods man in the White House. 

Me: Is it a problem to you that they have now amended the Patriot Act to give the government the ability to track your online activities without a warrant?

EEE: Yes, but that was Trump. He’s pro-choice, so we can’t criticize him on anything. 

Me: Really? You can’t criticize him on anything?

EEE: No. that would dilute our voting base. 

Me: So you can’t critique him on his sexual immorality?

EEE: No. 

Me: His arrogance? 

EEE: Nope. 

Me: His blatant and chronicled racism?

EEE: That’s all media spin. 

Me: OK. I could go on. But it seems like this is redundant. Let me see if I can summarize. I definitely understand that an unborn child is a human, precious, made in the image of God. I think that knowing this is an excellent argument for yourself to decide not to have an abortion. However, I’m a little bit lost on why we are putting so much energy into controlling others. As Paul said, “those outside the church, God judges.” (1 Cor. 5:13)

It seems as though you are putting everything into a desperate attempt to elect somebody — anybody — into office who will go against the will of the majority, to outlaw abortions, that you are willing to give up anything to do it. Even your own freedoms, causes dear to Christ, and your own Christian values. 

In short, the pro-choice agenda seems to have become, for you, an idol before which you will sacrifice anything, even your own soul, to have and worship this god. 

For politicians, it seems a convenient chain. Politicians can yank that chain and you will all vote, without any thought at all to his or her flaws or other policies. And what has it accomplished? Even Trump could not abolish abortions. So what is the point of all of this…?

***

This is why — while I would never choose an abortion for myself — I am having a hard time right now being grouped in with the “pro-life evangelicals.”

I get their desire to protect life. But their desire for power scares me. 

Hath God Really Said?

For the record, the Bereans also asked, “hath God really said.” If someone shames you for thinking critical about what they are saying…think critically about what they are saying!

Christianity and Rights (Phil. 2)

Just a gentle reminder about what our religion teaches about personal rights. ✌️

In whatever you do, don’t let selfishness or pride be your guide. Be humble, and honor others more than yourselves. Don’t be interested only in your own life, but care about the lives of others too. In your life together, think the way Christ Jesus thought. He was like God in every way, but he did not think that his being equal with God was something to use for his own benefit. Instead, he gave up everything, even his place with God. He accepted the role of a servant, appearing in human form. During his life as a man, he humbled himself by being fully obedient to God, even when that caused his death—death on a cross.
Philippians 2:3-8

Proof-Texting Ethics 😬

…just to be clear, there is a Bible verse for…

1. Burning witches

2. Castrating theological opponents

3. Cutting off women’s hands

4. Killing the babies of your enemies

5. Killing your own children if they disrespect you

6. Eating kosher

7. Kissing everyone in church 🤨

8. Being baptized for the dead (🤯🤷‍♂️)

9. Women being saved by having babies

…just pointing to one verse and saying, “see! See?! The bible says!” Is not enough. In fact, that is scary!

The bible is a coming together of the human and the divine. Do you understand the people of the time? Do you know what problems they were trying to address with these laws? Do you know the bigger story? Can you glean out some principles? Can you tie everything back to Jesus’ principle, that all commands should be hinged on love of God and neighbour? Do you know your OWN story? Do you know the history that brought you to the beliefs that you have? Do you know the culture in which you live? Do you know the real-life heartache and problems around you? Can you remember that true godliness is about purity of life, and care of the vulnerable and the outcasts? Can you balance biblical commands with mercy, as Jesus taught?

Interpreting the Bible is hard. Work. Which is why it is usually best done in community. It’s a long book with a lot of seeming contradictions. I think this is on purpose. We see ourselves in the story, but the Bible resists a rigid “black-and-white” interpretation. There’s always that one verse that doesn’t quite fit.

It’s complicated. It’s hard work. It’s heart work. We won’t always get it right. We may feel like we are living in the grey. It can be quite unsatisfying.

…and yet, God can guide us, and we can find ourselves in the story. The Bible can become a living book, to give us timeless help in our changing lives.

…but someone just studying alone, unreflective, cut off from culture, not reading any commentaries, and basing all their ethics on proof-texts? “The Bible says!” “I’ve got a verse for that!” “Look right here, it says…” 😬 Yeah…there’s a LOT of verses in there…😬😬

Proof-text ethics is just scary…

Be Awesome! 😎

Birds don’t sing because they are showing off. They are not proud, vain, self-centred, competitive, egocentric, or immature. They just want to sing. Because God made them that way, and it makes them feel alive!

What is it that God made you to do? What makes you feel alive? Have been afraid to do it, because someone might think that you are not being humble enough? Haters gonna hate. Ignore them. You be you. Because you are awesome, just like God made you.

Religious Shame

I think one if the very emotionally healthy aspects of Christianity is the emphasis that in Christ, ALL our sins will be not only forgiven, but really washed away. No shame!

…the problem is, this emphasis on grace has, in my opinion, encouraged some to condone, even encourage feelings of guilt and shame in all their forms: no matter how unfounded, no matter how damaging. It is as though we want more shame, so that grace may abound!

…but shame is bad, folks. Really, really bad. It causes you to hate the body that God gave you. It causes you to abstain from really beautiful things that God meant for you to enjoy. It causes you to hide parts of yourself from friends who care. It causes you to cut off parts of your life that God intended to sparkle, but that somebody shamed you for.

If you’ve done something legitimately wrong, walk to the cross and get that shame off of you. But don’t let people convince you that to be a good Christian is to walk under a cloud of self-deprecation.

Be proud of what you are, and live it out loud, because God made you to be awesome! 😎

Fences Around the Law

Because the Pharisees believed that a person could go to Hell for breaking any of the 613 commandments in the Old Testament, they (along with the lawyers, teachers, and scribes) made more rules, which some called a “fence” around the law. The logic being: if you can fall into Hell for gathering sticks on a Sabbath, then let’s make a rule about not even walking more than x number of steps on a sabbath. Just in case.

Jesus comes along and just doesn’t give a hoot about their traditions. He walks through them like a bulldozer through barbed wire.

Furthermore, he says:

1) You have totally missed the spirit of the commands (which were supposed to be about love)

2) You teach as precepts of God the commandments of men (Mark 7:6)

3) You tie up heavy burdens on people

4) You very often use tradition to even disregard commandments entirely

5) You measure your spirituality by your ability to follow a lot of external, showy rules.

They seemed to think that the more rules the better: but Jesus seemed to think the opposite.

….so question…

What are some of the “fences around the law” that you were raised with? Let’s make a list! I’ll start:

…the Bible says “Don’t get drunk,” so tradition says, “don’t ever touch alcohol.”

…the bible says “don’t cross-dress,” so tradition says, “women must wear dresses” (even when they are outdated and fairly impractical at times, especially for sports!)

…tradition says rock music is bad. But nobody can seem to find the verse for it.

…there is one fairly confusing verse about men having short hair (despite many long-haired dudes in the Old Testament) and so good Christian men don’t have hair past their ears.

…now your turn…

…what “fences” did you see around the law, growing up? What did it feel like to have so many rules?

Why I no Longer Believe in the “Permanence View” Of Marriage

The “Permanence View” of marriage is the view that a marriage is always for life for Christians. Some believe that even divorce is a sin: all believe that remarriage is a sin. This belief is based largely on Jesus’ words:

“It was said, ‘Whoever sends his wife away, let him give her a certificate of divorce’; but I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except for the reason of unchastity, makes her commit adultery; and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.

Matthew 5:31-32

The Permanence View is common among Fundamentalist and Evangelical Christians. Some of the most outspoken proponents of it are John Piper, Gordon J. Wenham, and Nancy Leigh DeMoss. I once firmly held this view. Here is a summary of my previous position: below, is my current position.

1. The most important thing about marriage is that it reflects Gods glory (John Piper)

2. God does not break His covenant with us: we should never break our covenant to our spouse

3. Jesus said, “what God has joined together, let no man put asunder.” (Mat. 9:6, Mark 10:9)

4. Jesus said if anyone marries a divorced person, they are committing adultery (Mat. 5:32, Luke 16:18)

5. Paul said that if a divorced woman marries another man while her husband is still living, she is an adulteress (Rom. 7:1-3)

6. Paul said that a woman should not divorce her husband: if she does, she should remain unmarried or go back to him (1 Cor. 7:11)

7. In a fairly complicated (but convincing) argument, Heth and Wenham make a lengthy argument based on Deuteronomy 24:1-4:

When a man takes a wife and marries her, and it happens that she finds no favor in his eyes because he has found some indecency in her, and he writes her a certificate of divorce and puts it in her hand and sends her out from his house, and she leaves his house and goes and becomes another man’s wife, and if the latter husband turns against her and writes her a certificate of divorce and puts it in her hand and sends her out of his house, or if the latter husband dies who took her to be his wife, then her former husband who sent her away is not allowed to take her again to be his wife, since she has been defiled; for that is an abomination before the Lord, and you shall not bring sin on the land which the Lord your God gives you as an inheritance.

Deuteronomy 24:1-4

a) the reason why a divorced couple could not remarry in the Old Testament is that marriage bound them together like family.

b) Therefore, remarriage would be like incest.

c) This also means that divorce does not break the marriage bond (they are still “like family,” this is why they cannot be remarried…do you understand the logic?)

d) …thus a divorced person is still married. This is why their second marriage counts as adultery

8. Jesus & Paul said that anyone who has sex, even with a prostitute “becomes one flesh” with that person. (Mark 10:8, 1 Cor. 6:16) Therefore, having sex with a second partner is being “one flesh” with three or more people, or committing adultery

9. It is OK that the “permanence view” of marriage consigns many spouses (especially women) to terrible, even abusive marriages, because life is supposed to be suffering. It is good character development. (Nancy Leigh Demoss)

10. It is also OK that this will result in a lot of singles. As John Piper once mentioned, “Such singles are honestly a great blessing to our church.”

…here is why I no longer hold to this view:

A Biblical Basis for Divorce and Remarriage:

1. According to Jesus, “man was not made for the sabbath, but the sabbath for man.” (Mark 2:27) This means that rules were meant to guide and aid human behaviour, not provide inflexible and painful boxes to limit expression and the fluidity of real life

But if you had known what this means, ‘I desire compassion, and not a sacrifice,’ you would not have condemned the innocent.

Matthew 12:7

2. He further said that God desires “mercy, and not sacrifice” (Mat. 12:7). The permanence view seems unmerciful, demands a very high sacrifice, and seems to condemn the innocent

3. Jesus, James, and Paul say that the Christian life should be about protecting the most vulnerable (Mark 12:40, 1 Tim. 5:16, Jam. 1:27): but the permanence doctrine seems to protect abusers, and force victims to go back to bad marriages. It provides no protection for abused spouses. Most churches have no singles ministries, and I don’t think I’ve ever even heard of a “single mothers pastor” in a church. Divorced and separated people often have little support in the church.

4. Jeff Crippen argues that there are not many types of covenants in the bible, but only two: bilateral and unilateral covenants. Unilateral covenants are covenants where only one party fulfills all of the obligations of the covenant (eg. God to Christians) whereas in bilateral covenants, both parties have obligations.

5. Marriage is a bilateral covenant.

a) If a spouse commits adultery, they are breaking the covenant. If they abandon the other, they are breaking the covenant. If they abuse (the opposite of “love, cherish, have hold, in sickness and in health… “) then they are breaking the covenant.

b) Once the covenant is broken it is…broken. The party that broke it is responsible for the dissolution

c) It is not reasonable to expect one party to continue being bound to the covenant that the other has broken, because marriage is a bilateral covenant. This would be abusive and unreasonable.

d) Once one or both parties have broken it, the covenant is no longer in effect.

e) If one party choses to get a divorce, when the marriage is already “over,” that person is not necessarily guilty of breaking the covenant. Physically leaving one’s house is not the act of “breaking the covenant,” when said covenant has already been broken.

f) The words, “she should not leave” (1 Cor. 7:10) are not meant to prevent a spouse whose marriage covenant has already been broken from physically and legally leaving their marriage.

¹³ 

Here is another thing you do. You cover the Lord’s altar with tears, weeping and groaning because he pays no attention to your offerings and doesn’t accept them with pleasure. You cry out, “Why doesn’t the Lord accept my worship?” I’ll tell you why! Because the Lord witnessed the vows you and your wife made when you were young. But you have been unfaithful to her, though she remained your faithful partner, the wife of your marriage vows. Didn’t the Lord make you one with your wife? In body and spirit you are his. And what does he want? Godly children from your union. So guard your heart; remain loyal to the wife of your youth. “For I hate divorce!” says the Lord, the God of Israel. “To divorce your wife is to overwhelm her with cruelty,” says the Lord of Heaven’s Armies. “So guard your heart; do not be unfaithful to your wife.”

Malachi 2:13-16, NLT

6. It is clear that marriage is meant to be a lifelong union. The most common form of abuse is for a spouse to seek a divorce out of boredom or due to a desire for another person. This is the practice that was confronted in Malachi and in Matthew: religious men seeking a divorce to legally commit adultery by switching to another woman. When Jesus said, “What man has joined together, let man not put asunder,” he was saying that the marriage covenant should not be broken. It is cruel and ungodly to end the marriage for any reason, except if the covenant has already been broken, as in the case of adultery.

Some Pharisees came and tried to trap him with this question: “Should a man be allowed to divorce his wife for just any reason?”

Matthew 19:3, NASB

7. Paul also adresses this in 1 Corinthians 7, stating that a mixed marriage is not grounds for divorce: unless the unbelieving spouse breaks the covenant, the believer should stay. If she has left, she should return, lest the covenant be broken.

But I say that a man who divorces his wife, unless she has been unfaithful, causes her to commitadultery.

Matthew 5:32, NASB

8. The person who broke the covenant bears the guilt of “adultery,” according to Jesus. (Mat. 5:32)

Now, dear brothers and sisters—you who are familiar with the law—don’t you know that the law applies only while a person is living?For example, when a woman marries, the law binds her to her husband as long as he is alive. But if he dies, the laws of marriage no longer apply to her. So while her husband is alive, she would be committing adultery if she married another man. But if her husband dies, she is free from that law and does not commit adultery when she remarries.

Romans 7:1-3, NASB

9. Paul is using marriage as an illustration in Romans 7:1-3. He is using shorthand, and speaking in generalities: we understand what he means. Usually, marriage is until death. He is using marriage here to illustrate a theological point about covenants being broken in death.

a) This verse is not actually about the remarriage question, which is handled elsewhere. It is unreasonable to expect that every time Paul mentions an issue he will mention all of the exceptions and caveats. This verse needs to be interpreted according to the verses dealing more specifically with the topic. This verse should not be read as a once-for-all statement, which overrules the other passages

b) Taking this verse out of context would seem to say that any remarriage is a sin. This unreasonable, because actually Jesus has stated elsewhere that remarriage is clearly permitted in the case if adultery

10. The “incest argument” of Heth and Wenham (above) is…

a) A very recent argument with virtually no historical support. It has never enjoyed widespread support. Even John Piper says that not all of his elders at his own church agree with his position on this point. Furthermore…

b) The logic of the argument would seem to forbid a divorced couple from getting remarried (that is literally what the verse in question forbids). But this is exactly what such teachers are trying to mandate! They are actually saying the exact opposite of their own proof-text!

c) The “one flesh” argument would seem to say that anyone who is not a virgin when they marry is committing adultery. This would include rape victims. This seems unreasonable.

d) (Or) if previous sexual experiences are not a hindrance to marriage, but a previous marriage is a hindrance, then they are being inconsistent. The argument is supposed to be that sex creates a bond that divorce cannot sever. But in this case, previous sexual encounters are not the problem, but a previous marriage covenant is the problem. Which is it? Is it the marriage covenant, or physical sex which is permanently binding? They seem inconsistent on this point.

11. Requiring a second marriage to dissolve (as some do) would cause both parties to break their new vows. Calling these vows illegitimate is unfounded, because even unreasonable vows in the Bible are binding

12. Requiring a person to return to their divorced spouse or remain single may cause an abused person to return to, or never to leave, a situation of abuse. This is a terrible reality, which I don’t think is given nearly enough weight in these discussions

Pure and genuine religion in the sight of God the Father means caring for orphans and widows in their distress and refusing to let the world corrupt you.

James 1:27, NASB

13. God maintains over and over that He has a heart for the oppressed and outcasts. The permanence view of marriage literally creates widows and orphans.

14. The Bible states over and over that humans are sexual beings, and that we are not meant to be alone

a) It was not good for the first human to be alone (Gen. 2:18)

b) Jesus said celibacy was not recommended, and should be only for those who had a biological necessity, or those who chose it (Mat. 19:12)

c) Paul recommended celibacy, in view of the terrible persecution the church was the experiencing: however, he recommended that those with strong sexual desires should disregard this advice and pursue marriage

The younger widows should not be on the list [to receive church support], because their physical desires will overpower their devotion to Christ and they will want to remarry. Then they would be guilty of breaking their previous pledge. [Apparently, receiving church support included a pledge to celibacy] And if they are on the list, they will learn to be lazy and will spend their time gossiping from house to house, meddling in other people’s business and talking about things they shouldn’t. So I advise these younger widows to marry again, have children, and take care of their own homes. Then the enemy will not be able to say anything against them. For I am afraid that some of them have already gone astray and now follow Satan.

1 Timothy 5:11-15, NLT

d) He encourages young widows to seek marriage, to prevent their becoming “busybodies” about the church, and also being lead into temptations (1 Tim. 5:11-15).

e) Requiring that a normal, sexually-active person live the whole rest of their lives without love or sexual fulfillment seems contrary to the design of God. It seems to be “tying up heavy burdens,” on people, without “lifting a finger to help.” (Mat. 23:4)

15. The Permanence View seems to place an incredible amount of power in the hands of abusers. Imagine. An abusive person can deceptively marry an innocent victim. They may abuse them physically, sexually, emotionally, financially, spiritually, and in other ways. But this doctrine makes the victim feel trapped. Do they really want to live their whole lives alone? If the abuser decides to leave, they can break the covenant, and have married or unmarried sex with whomever they want, and move on with their lives. Yet this doctrine ties a victim forever to their abuser. The victim is told that their only hope ever of sexual and romantic intimacy is with their abuser. Does this sound like God’s heart for the “widows and orphans” to you?

16. The Christian religion is centred on love (Mat. 22:37-38), and love involves consent.

a) Non-consensual intimate relationships are subjugation, not love

I thought, ‘After she has done all these things she will return to Me’; but she did not return, and her treacherous sister Judah saw it. And I saw that for all the adulteries of faithless Israel, I had sent her away and given her a writ of divorce.

Jeremiah 3:7-8, NASB

b) God allows Israel to enter into a bilateral covenant with Him. When they are unfaithful, He is patient but He finally divorced the northern state of Israel, as well as the Southern state of Judah. God takes Judah back, and makes a new spiritual covenant only with the faithful Israelites. God invites gentiles into this new covenant.

c) The fact that God divorced Israel proves that divorce itself cannot be a sin: because God is incapable of sin. (Jam. 1:13)

d) God allows people to leave this relationship. As CS Lewis famously explains: “Hell is locked from the inside,” and, “There are only two types of poeple, those who say to God, ‘thy will be done,’ and those to whom God says, ‘thy will be done.'” That is to say, God is willing to allow people to leave Him, and exit their relationship with Him.

e) But the permanence view seems to lock people into a relationship that they no longer chose, even if the covenant has already been broken by the other party

End Times Conspiracy Theories… 🙄

I recently took a Christian seminary class on new religious movements. Jehovahs Witnesses were among the groups that we studied. One of the things that was pointed out was that a recurring recruitment strategy was predicting the end of the world. This was a successful strategy for getting people into motion: but it was a bit awkward when the end did not come. …and so the dates were adjusted. And adjusted. And then adjusted again.
The old books conveniently vanished, and the new ones made no mention of failed predictions.
“See!” My professor stated triumphantly, “that proves that the religion is false!”
That’s them.
We’re not like that at all, are we? 🤔
Can I be really honest here? When I was a kid, I was told in no uncertain terms that the world was ending within a few years. No joke. It was going to be bad. Really, really bad. I was sincerely terrified. Antichrist, pandemics, floods, governments tracking us through credit cards and cell phones, communism taking over, occultism (paradoxically) rampant in the secular governments. The Temple would be built in Jerusalem, Russia would come marching down (for some reason) to attack. There would be blood everywhere. Rocks would fall from the sky. Demons with scorpion tails stinging everybody. It was going to be bad, people. Really, really bad. Our only hope? “Tell people about Jesus! Then they can escape in the rapture! Otherwise they’ll be…🎶…left behind…🎶…” There were songs, movies, books, sermon after sermon after sermon. It was all there! Right there in the Bible! If you couldn’t see it, plain as day, were you even a Christian?
…🤷‍♂️…
It’s 2020. Communism is dead, credit cards aren’t the mark of the beast, the Temple hasn’t been built, and satanist/secular world leaders haven’t cut off a single Christian’s head, that I know of.
None of it happened!
🤔 Maybe we could take a moment to reflect that end times conspiracy theories are not the best use of our limited time and resources. 🤷‍♂️ Maybe we could admit that we were wrong. Maybe we could dare to hope that the world won’t explode in a ball of flames in oh, say, ten years or so? Maybe we could switch gears and start thinking about LONG TERM solutions for our planet. Like recycling, maybe? Hug a tree, for your great-great-great-great grandkid’s sake, for example? Maybe we could find other themes in the bible — I don’t know, love, inclusion, and kindness maybe..? — and focus on those for a change?
…or…we could just change the dates, change the predictions, and start all over. 🙄
I just saw this again today online. The guy seems to be deadly serious. I love Jesus and all, but some of this stuff from professing Christians is just 👎🏻.

Fences Around the Law

Because the Pharisees believed that a person could go to Hell for breaking any of the 613 commandments in the Old Testament, they (along with the lawyers, teachers, and scribes) made more rules, which some called a “fence” around the law. The logic being: if you can fall into Hell for gathering sticks on a Sabbath, then let’s make a rule about not even walking more than x number of steps on a sabbath. Just in case.
Jesus comes along and just doesn’t give a hoot about their traditions. He walks through them like a bulldozer through barbed wire.
Furthermore, he says:
1) You have totally missed the spirit of the commands (which were supposed to be about love)
2) You teach as precepts of God the commandments of men (Mark 7:6)
3) You tie up heavy burdens on people
4) You very often use tradition to even disregard commandments entirely
5) You measure your spirituality by your ability to follow a lot of external, showy rules.
They seemed to think that the more rules the better: but Jesus seemed to think the opposite.
….so question…
What are some of the “fences around the law” that you were raised with? Let’s make a list! I’ll start:
…the Bible says “Don’t get drunk,” so tradition says, “don’t ever touch alcohol.”
…the bible says “don’t cross-dress,” so tradition says, “women must wear dresses” (even when they are outdated and fairly impractical at times, especially for sports!)
…tradition says rock music is bad. But nobody can seem to find the verse for it.
…there is one fairly confusing verse about men having short hair (despite many long-haired dudes in the Old Testament) and so good Christian men don’t have hair past their ears.
…now your turn…
…what “fences” did you see around the law, growing up? What did it feel like to have so many rules?

The Bible, and Other Books…

The Bible is an amazing book. It is THE book: ancient, influential, powerful. But…not the ONLY book. And not the best book for some things.
Like mechanics. The Bible really doesn’t have a lot to say about fixing a rear differential.
…or cooking. The Bible isn’t the best recipe book (except for “Ezekiel bread,” I guess! lol)
You won’t learn much about chemistry in the Bible.
The botany and anatomy and cosmological statements are true to the time, but outdated by today’s standards.
The Bible is a tremendous book for what it is. But it is not the only book. We need to use other books as well.
…and so…someone who is an expert in reading the Bible…is not necessarily going to be an expert on every topic every, anywhere in the world.
This is just an important point to make.
A Bible teacher MAY have studied political theory, infectious disease theory, medicine, sociology, psychology, cosmology, archeology, palaeontology, chemistry, and a host of other disciplines. They MAY know what they are talking about. Or…they may just have their own private opinions on matters that really have nothing to do with the Bible. Because being a Bible teacher gives them a platform, sometimes these speakers feel the need to also share their private opinions on a host of other non-Bible-related topics.
…and that is fine. Sure. Go ahead!
But let’s just keep in mind: the Bible is one book among many. It is amazing, it is inspired, it is the Word of God (if you believe that, as I do). But…it’s a terrible manual for fixing your car, or making cinnamon rolls.
Listen to the Word, and listen to your pastor when he is explaining the Bible. But when he veers off into topics that really have nothing to do wth theology, it is just helpful to remember that these may just be private opinions, and disagreeing with him on these points is not a Bible issue: it is a personal disagreement like you would have with anyone at the coffee shop. Especially in these times, we need to let the experts be the experts, and remember the being an expert in one domain does not necessarily make you an expert in other domains. That is my opinion: apply it as you see fit! ✌️

20 Reasons Masturbation Is Not A Sin

1. The story of Onan in the bible is not actually about masturbation. It is about coitus interruptus. Onan was having sex with his brothers widow, as the law required. However, he was pulling out and “spilling his seed on the ground” at the last minute, so that she would not be one pregnant and bear a son to inherit her estate and protect her in old age: he wanted her property for himself. It was a cruel and dastardly action, which is why God killed him for it. He was not struck down for masturbating. 🙄 (Gen. 38:6-10)

2. The Catholic arguments that “spilling seed” is wasteful or even murderous is completely unscientific and wrong.

3. “Seminal emissions” are mentioned in the ceremonial laws of the Old Testament. If one has such an emission, they are to wash, and they are unclean until evening. This is exactly the same as regular sex, menstruation, and a host of other bodily functions. Ceremonial cleanliness is not about sin: it’s about “being clean.” These passages do not condemn masturbation.

4. True enough, the pagan nations around Israel worshipped fertility gods, and the Ashera poles were giant phalluses. But their worship involved temple prostitution, and masturbation is not mentioned. This should not be brought up in the current discussion.

5. Both men and women have natural build ups in their bodies, which crave release. Without sex or masturbation, these buildups can make it hard to concentrate, hard to keep ones mind off of sex, hard to resist illicit lustful thoughts, hard to sleep, and can sometimes (for men) become physically painful

6. Making it a sin to masturbate seems to place many people in a “no way to win” situation. If they resist throughout the day, they may have very vivid and potentially troubling “wet dreams,” often with very vivid sexual images, leading to deep shame and confusion.

7. If they find it impossible to resist the urge to masturbate, they may feel that, “well, I am sinning anyways. I might as well enjoy it!” …causing them to engage in lustful thoughts, pornography, or other sinful or unhelpful practices

8. If such a person finds that they are thus caught in cycles of irresistible temptation, they may become far too comfortable with the temptation—sin—shame—repent—feel forgiveness—repeat cycle. This cycle may start to excuse greater and greater sexually deviant behaviours

9. Feelings of shame surrounding ones sexuality may lead to feelings that “sex is dirty,” and that it should be divorced from ones life. Like in Jeckyl and Hyde, ones sexuality could become something hidden, ugly, and shameful. In the darkness, it may grow very dark and twist towards the perverted, the selfish, and even the criminal. Or, perhaps equally devastating, the person may become successful in really killing their sexuality, thus destroying an integral part of what makes them human

10. …it seems like a far better option would be to simply masturbate — with no shame, and without lust or pornographic images — to release the “pressure,” and go on with ones life. Far from encouraging lust, it seems that such an action could be essential in fighting lustful thoughts and porn addiction

11. It is true enough that the more that one masturbates, the more the body will adjust to increase the bodily desires. Excessive masturbation is a problem recognized by psychotherapists and others. This seems to be a reason to have adult conversations with trusted friends or therapists about “how much is too much?” A person may perhaps find the need to work out some guidelines, even rules for themselves. By way of illustration, it may not be a sin to eat the whole box of Oreo cookies…but it may be unwise and unhealthy. Similar guidelines could be made for ones personal practices, without any shame. “All things are lawful for me, but not all things are profitable. All things are lawful for me, but I will not be mastered by anything.” 1 Corinthians 6:12

12. One important factor for Christians to weigh is that masturbation can create powerful links to seemingly unrelated images, thoughts, and even objects. These may also be things to discuss and weigh out carefully in ones own conscience. “All things are lawful, but not all things are profitable. All things are lawful, but not all things edify.” 1 Corinthians 10:23

13. It is true enough that in marriage, ones body belongs in part to the other, and that masturbation may dissipate important sexual energy that should be directed at ones spouse. 1 Cor. 7:4-5 If a spouse is not comfortable with masturbation, the other probably should not engage. However, this is not a reason to forbid it for all singles. When travelling, masturbation may be a much needed escape from temptation. These are matters to be worked out as a couple.

14. Some have argued that masturbation before marriage will “defile the marriage bed.” Heb. 13:4. There is no indication in the context of this passage that masturbation is being referenced: the danger here is almost certainly adultery.

15. In her book, Pure, author Rebecca Davis did research and extensive research on people raised within the evangelical subculture of the 1980’s-1990’s, which tended to teach a hard line view on masturbation, sex, and even romantic thoughts. She found a very high prevalence of sexual dysfunction in marriage, including erectile dysfunction and vaginismus. One couple who shared their story were only able to achieve sex a handful of times in a decade, and were considering a divorce, since their “love life” had never really worked out. Although not talked about, she found that similar stories were very common. Anecdotally, she reports that health nurses who deal with vaginismus say that there is a very high correlation to religious upbringings. It turns out that attempting to “shut down” ones sexuality during ones formative years, cloaking it in layers of shame, and divorcing sexual thoughts from other positive feelings in life is not necessarily the best formula for the “fireworks” that our pastor promised would happen after marriage.

16. Calling a natural function a “sin” with no biblical basis seems in keeping with the warnings against legalism in the Bible. “But the Spirit explicitly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines….men who forbid marriage and advocate abstaining from foods which God has created to be gratefully shared in by those who believe and know the truth. For everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with gratitude; for it is sanctified by means of the word of God and prayer.” 1 Timothy 4:1-5

17. It seems to “tie up heavy burdens” on people, especially singles. (Mat. 23:4) One notices that it is mostly married people making these harsh rules.

18. The argument, “We’re not sure if it’s sin. It’s kind of grey. So let’s err on the side of caution and call it a sin.” Is a stupid argument. Grey issues are mentioned in 1 Corinthians 8-10, Romans 13-14. We are to consider them carefully and make up our own minds, using our consciences. Those with more rules are called “weak in conscience,” those who can live their life “in of the Spirit” with a minimum of rules are called “strong” Christians

19. Making black-and-white pronouncements on matters of conscience is warned against in Scripture. Jesus rebuked the Pharisees for “teaching as precepts the doctrines of men.” (Mat. 15:9) Paul warned his readers “not to let anyone take you captive through…the basic principles of men…acting as your judge [in regards to disputed matters]” (Col. 2:8-23).

20. Rather, he encourages people to weigh matters, and come up with their own convictions. “Each person should be fully convinced in their own minds.” (Rom. 14:5)

…now that you’ve seen my examination of the topic, what do you think? Is masturbation a sin for you, or not? What guidelines might you need to bring into play to make it healthy for yourself? What does your spouse think?

I pray that God’s spirit gives you wisdom, as you seek to honour God with the beautiful and powerful and sexual body that He has gifted you with.

Protecting the Church’s Reputation…?

It occurs to me that Jesus really didn’t seem to care much about protecting the reputation of the synagogues (proto-churches) or the religious leaders of his day. He pointed out their crooked financial practices, their hypocritical way of dressing, their ridiculous prayers, their pretentious religious paraphernalia, and their hard-hearted domestic lives. He called the temple a “den of thieves,” and the religious leaders “snakes,” “brood of vipers,” “sons of satan,” “white-washed tombs,” and “destined for hell.” Phew.

The Pharisees, on the other hand, were far more careful. They had a lot of private meetings about Jesus, but never called him out publicly. They were very tactful. They just asked him a lot of questions. They did not want to cause trouble or be seen as taking sides. They were very proper and correct. They would not have wanted to cause disrepute or lose esteem in the eyes of the public. They tried to deal with their problems internally, and probably would have killed Jesus secretly, if they could.

…and yet the Bible says, “The name of God is blasphemed among the unbelievers on account of you!” Whereas Jesus said, “I honour my father.”

In this day and age, I don’t think we are fooling anybody. With media shining an unfavourable light behind the doors of the church, sex scandals rocking the evening news, and situations close to home sending ripples through our communities…everyone knows that there are real people with real problems in the church.

…so tell me, what is more honourable? What brings more disrepute on the church, and glorifies God best? Being silent about abuse, sin, hypocrisy, legalism, and failures in the church, “to protect our testimony”? Or calling them out? And daring to point the way towards something better?

What do you think? What would Jesus do?

Abusive or Servant Leadership?

So Jesus called them together and said, “You know that the rulers in this world lord it over their people, and officials flaunt their authority over those under them. But among you it will be different. Whoever wants to be a leader among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first among you must be the slave of everyone else. For even the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve others and to give his life as a ransom for many.”

(Mat. 10:42-45)

…abusers love positions of authority. Whether it’s pastor, father, husband, or boss: they love being in control of others. Religion seems to provide just that excuse to have unquestioned authority over others. Except…for Jesus. Jesus said that a true leader is a servant of all. Jesus washed His disciples feet. A true leader, according to Jesus, changes diapers, takes out the trash, and sets his own goals and dreams aside to prioritize the needs of those under him. …but people who demand absolute allegiance, demand that people serve them, and demand that those under them sacrifice *their* lives, wishes, wants, and needs in service of the leader are not leading as Jesus did. It doesn’t matter if they claim to be Christians: maybe they even are. But in their leadership, they are leading “like the rulers of this world,” and not at all like Christ.

If Immodesty Caused Rape…

As I continue to read Rebecca Davis’ book, “Pure,” on purity culture she continues to lay out the devastating psychological consequences of being told, as a young teenager, that her body would cause other men to sin, and could even cause them to rape her.

“This is such utter nonsense!” I kept thinking, “Does anybody actually believe this?” As she gave example after example, I began to recognize some messegase that sounded all to familiar. Yes, we do communicate this message. Maybe not always in so many words: but women are often told in the church, “Be modest, or you might get raped!”

…but this is ridiculous!

If immodesty really caused rape, what we would see is:

1. Rape happening all the time at public beaches, right out there in public. After all, men can’t control themselves, can they? But actually, strangely, we find that men can control themselves rather well when other people are watching.
2. Rape would dramatically diminish during the winter time, and dramatically increase during the summer, due to the wearing of more clothing. Rather, it seems that it stays pretty stable.
3. Rape would be virtually non-existent in in Muslim and Amish and other communities. Tragically, rape seems to be just as present in very religious communities.

…if we really cared about girls getting raped, here are some suggestions:

1. Teach them basic safety, such as “don’t walk down dark alleys at night.” Seriously — do we even tell girls this in our religious subculture? Or are we afraid that it will be too naughty to say?
2. Teach them basic self defence. Are we teaching girls that the best thing they can do is to hit an attacker hard in the groin? Or will they be confused in a situation of violence, frozen by hours of teaching about “turning the other cheek”?
3. Teach them that their “body” is their best friend: often, that feeling “in your gut” that a person or a situation is not safe is your first and best defence. Teach them to listen to that and to never, ever, ever put yourself in a vulnerable situation with someone who makes you feel unsafe. …or are we teaching them that their bodies are evil, and their “hearts” are “deceptively wicked,” that “women are emotional, and emotions deceive people,” and that it is an act of witchcraft to “listen to your heart”?
4. Are we creating an atmosphere of trust with our children, and giving them the vocabulary for the human body, and for healthy sexuality, so that they can determine what is appropriate and what is not? Or is “sex” a dirty word in our homes — and “penis,” “vagina,” and “breast” equally forbidden? Will she even know how to explain to her parents or a police officer what has happened? Can she explain her great discomfort with inappropriate conduct which may have preceded a rape? Or has she been gagged into silence by a culture afraid of their own bodies?
5. Teach that most rape does not happen by a stranger, but by a trusted friend, authority figure, or family member. This should not lead to mistrusting everybody, but there should be discussions of what is normal and what is not normal for a man to ask a young girl. A man of any age, and no matter their status or relationship, should not seek to be alone with a girl. Period. Do they know that? Or have they been taught that “women are weak,” “women need men to help them make decisions,” and that a girl should (I have actually heard this taught) always listen to the oldest male in the room, as though he were giving her instructions from God.

…and if we really cared about young girls, we would teach them safety. Basic, common sense, idiotically simple safety.

Rape is not about temptation: any woman with a vagina is a temptation to a wicked man. Rape is about availability, and the belief that they can get away with it.

Let’s face it: this doctrine tends to make girls vulnerable, and makes it far less likely that they will successfully flee or report the crime.

And if we really cared about victims — knowing that despite our very best attempts, a very large percentage of girls will be violated before they reach adulthood — we would be sure to tell them that rape is never, ever, ever a girl’s fault.

Pathological shame and guilt follows all traumatic events. This is because traumatic events overwhelm a brain: it cannot cope. It stores the event in fragmented, terrorizing portions all over the brain. (I will write more about this in future posts). The brain become obsessed with thoughts like, “I could have done more,” and “how can I prevent this from happening again?” These thoughts are not a weakness, and they are not the fault of the victim. They are as a result of a basic survival instinct: it happens because when the brain feels as though it has come in contact with a , the most important thing is to figure out why that happened, and to stop it from happening again.

…but this shame is a profoundly destructive force. Many victims of Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome report that when they realized that it was not their fault, most of the debilitating symptoms of PTSD diminished. They were able to find their peace with their trauma, without blaming and punishing themselves.

…and yet this horrendous teaching of purity culture not only locks victims of rape into a never-ending hell of PTSD, but it also seems to have the effect of traumatizing them before the fact, by presenting them with impossible situations.

…they are made to feel as though there is literally no way that they can avoid stirring up lust in others, and causing themselves to be raped.

This feeling of powerlessness, and hopelessness, and intense danger takes its toll. It is profoundly dangerous psychologically.

It is this phenomenon that Rebecca Davis continues to talk about, in her book “Pure.”

Churches: Ill Equipped to Help Survivors

Churches and Christians often seem ill equipped to help abuse survivors. This is because our religion has trained them to ask, “Is it right? Is it Biblical? Is it sinful? Will it harm our community?”

Whereas an abuse survivor needs to be asked, “Are you safe? Are you healthy? Are you speaking your own truth (and not just hiding behind a false self)? Are you taking steps that are right for you, (as opposed to living life to please everyone else)? What does your “gut”/heart say? Are you sure you are SAFE?

It’s not that most Christians are bad people. These are not even bad questions to ask: in certain contexts, these are exactly the questions to ask. For example, if a person is tempted to run off with his secretary, he aught to think long and hard about whether that would be right, or biblical, and what harm it would have in the larger community.

This is where our religion shines: in the black and white moments of average people tempted to sin. “The Bible says don’t do it.” That clarity has been helpful for many.

But these are not the right questions to ask survivors of abuse. In fact, they are exactly the wrong questions to ask. These questions will tend to re-trigger the deep shame that accompanies trauma. That shame will activate crippling self-doubt and brain fog, causing them to question themselves, doubt the survival instincts that are leading them out of a dangerous situation, and can cause them to robotically shut down and mechanically go back to their abuser.

And when the Christian community has these questions primarily in their minds, they will prevent them from caring adequately for an abuse survivor.

The more combative Christians will seek to silence or argue with the victim. The more thoughtful will withdraw to re-evaluate whether or not leaving is a sin. (This will take some time). Others will just not know what to say, since they lack the time or ability to render judgment on the matter, and they would not want to be caught aiding and abetting a sinner.

All this with the result that the simplest and most profound human gesture — simply being there, in a non-judgmental way, in a time of need — is precisely what many churches and Christians have such difficulty in giving.

Wilful Sin

For if we go on sinning willfully after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a terrifying expectation of judgment and the fury of a fire which will consume the adversaries. It is a terrifying thing to fall into the hands of the living God.
Hebrews 10:26-27,31

This is not written for “unbelievers.” This is written for believers who think grace means they can get away with bad behaviours, “because God will forgive me anyways.”
No. It doesn’t work that way.

“Be Modest or Men Will Stumble!” — False!

Unbiblical sermons #1
“Women need to dress modestly so that their weaker brothers will not be caused to stumble.”
Well, actually…
1) “Stumbling stones” normally refers to adults corrupting or harming little children. It is not about grown men shaming others for their sins. Matt. 18:5-10, Mark 9:42, Luke 17:2
2) The discussion of “weaker brothers” is not gender specific, and is in regards to the ancient question of eating meat sacrificed to idols. This has nothing to do with lust or modesty. (1 Corinthians 8 )
3) Modesty is only explicitly adresses once in the Bible. The purpose of modesty here stated is contrasting inner vs. outer beauty, staying that a beautiful spirit and a kind life are better adornments than braided hair and jewels. Male lust is mentioned nowhere in this book. 1 Tim 2:9-10
4) Men are specifically addressed by Jesus, told that if they are “lusting,” they are sinning. Period. The modesty of the woman after whom they may be lusting is not mentioned. (Mat. 5:28)
5) We are told that “pornea” (sexual sin) comes “out of the heart,” and not from externals (Mark 7:21)
6) Using figurative language, Paul tells men to “possess their own vessel in sanctification and honour.” (1 Thess. 4:3) He does not add an addendum, “…unless she’s really hot” or, “…unless she’s immodestly dressed,” or, “…unless you’re really tired, or feeling entitled.”
7) Paul tells the young Timothy to “flee from youthful lusts,” (2 Tim. 2:22) and “treat younger women as sisters in all purity.” (1 Tim. 5:2) And to be an example of purity (1 Tim 4:12)
8“) “Yes, but what about very provocative women who are really trying to seduce men? What if alcohol is involved?” In Proverbs 7, the question of seduction is looked at in depth. There are three men, and one seductive woman in the scenario. The seductive woman is out seducing. A man goes to her, becomes intoxicated, and commits adultery with her. He is held completely liable for his actions, called a fool, and the commentary is that he did not know that her steps lead down to death. There is also a father and son in the scenario. The father resists “going down” to the seductrice. He instructs his son to avoid situations like this, and warns him of the mortal danger that they represent. Elsewhere, he tells him of the joys of married love, prays he finds a good wife, and blesses him: “may her breasts always satisfy you! May you always be intoxicated with her love!” (Prov. 5:19) Lesson: even if a prostitute is flaunting her wares, men are still responsible for their eyes, for their “vessels,” and for how they model integrity to the next generation. Sex is beautiful, and desireable. We should tell our daughters and sons how wonderful it is, so that they can be motivated to save it for the person of their dreams! What a beautiful gift! ❤️
…but telling women that unless they dress modestly, they will become a victim of male lust, (or even responsible for their own rape! 😵) is a form of victim shaming. It is wrong, it is unhealthy, it is abusive, and nobody can show me where it is in the Bible. This verse does not exist.

From Good To Great

In his book, “Good to Great,” Jim Collins says that the secret to a great business is “getting the right people on the bus, the right people off the bus, and moving people to the right seats on the bus.”
That metaphor also works for your life. Every life is lived in community, which also affects your mind and thoughts. not every person will help make your life “great.” You need to invite some new people onto your “bus,” move some people around (“excuse me, actually, I am the driver, not you”) and…some people need to be moved out of you life. Or, at least, out of your inner circle and out of your daily life and mind.
…once you get people on, off, and in the right seats (you in the drivers seat!)…then you’re really ready to get your life rumbling down the road in the right direction!

Jesus Was Not a Doormat

Jesus was not a doormat.
Jesus stood up to bullies.
Jesus walked away from mobs and false teachers.
Jesus left situations of harm.
Jesus never apologized for something he didn’t do.
Jesus did not back down and was not intimidated.
Jesus hurt people’s feelings. Really often.
Jesus damages people’s property and pride.
Jesus caused controversy and divisions.
Jesus didn’t loose sleep over lost followers or people being “disappointed in” Him.
Jesus never really fit in anywhere. He was ok with that.
Jesus spoke his mind, even when it meant losing followers, and rebuking his own friends.
Jesus spoke up to authority when he was wrongfully slapped.
Jesus was willing to suffer for a cause, even if it cost him everything.

Be like Jesus. Don’t be a doormat.

[Note: I posted this to my Facebook, and a friend replied that, in effect, we aught not to walk around smashing things and being mean. I agree. To clarify, I wrote the following…]

🤔 I’m thinking you all may have pointed out a needed corrective. Jesus was…Jesus. His motivation was love. He was on a mission of love, truth, and divine appointment. He was not a bully, he did not go around doing random acts of violence.

What I am speaking against is the extreme of people pleasing (“codependent” in psychological terminology). People pleasing is a coping skill often learned in childhood to survive a situation of ongoing rage and/or harsh discipline. People pleasing is not a good thing, and it blunts our ability to speak effectively in the world.

…but we also wouldn’t want to swing over to the other extreme of being a self-centred, unreasonable, heard-hearted bully. (In psychological terms, a “narcissist”). This is another response to trauma. “OK then. If I will be treated like that, I will just stop feeling. I will look out for #1 Nobody will tell me what to do.

Jesus was in between these two. He was a fully integrated human being. He could be moved to tears and actions from compassion. And he could be sparked to rage at injustice. He cared deeply for people and made close friends, but He also knew His is mind and moved clearly in a direction.

As Pastor Merle said one time, “the problem with backing away from something is that one cannot see where they are going.”

Perhaps I should have written this post in the positive, and concluded, “Be like Jesus.”

Thank you all very much for your feedback

“Turn the other cheek” — Not a Reason to Allow Abuse!

Jesus said to “turn the other cheek.” Here are twenty reasons why that does not mean that a spouse or child should overlook physical abuse.
1) In the original context, Jesus was speaking to men, in a world of men. The implied audience was people who had the ability to strike back, not women or children.
2) Jesus told His followers to flee from persecution and physical danger.
3) Jacob, David, Abigail, and many other saints fled from authority figures, when they became physically dangerous.
4) Your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit. A temple was the most sacred possible place in anceint times: your body is THAT precious! God promises to destroy anyone who destroys your body (1 Cor. 3:17).
5) Jesus said, “let the little children come to me,” and “if anyone causes one of these little ones to stumble, it would be better if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he be thrown into the sea.” Children need to be protected from harm. So do you.
6) “I’m sorry…you just made me so angry” is not an apology. It is a lie that their evil actions were the fault of their victim. If a person is not able to restrain their violence unless people around them “walk on eggshells,” that person should not be around vulnerable people until they find help.
7) “I’m sorry, I just couldn’t control myself,” is a lie. After all, they controlled themselves just fine in public.
8) “This is normal/all men do it/everyone slips up” is not true. Most spouses do not hit or abuse one another. The Bible tells us to love and care for our spouses as we would our own bodies (Eph. 5). Jesus washed the feet of His disciples, and laid down His life for the church. Care is normal, harm is abnormal.
9) “You have to forgive me,” is a lie. You do not need to forgive them if they do not repent. (Luke 17:3…notice “IF he repent…”) Repentance means bringing their actions to the light to people who can provide tough accountability (James 5:16). It means getting help, and making sure that it does not happen again.
10) “The Bible says ‘forgive and forget'” No it does not. This verse does not exist. You can release bitterness in your heart while still remembering. Memories are there to remind us of danger, and to keep us safe.
11) The Bible says, “Do not be deceived, whatever a man sows, this he will also reap.” The natural consequence of violence is the loss of intimacy. “Do not make friends with an angry man, and do not associate with a hot-tempered man” (Prov. 22:24)
12) “This punishment is unreasonable! I miss you! I need you! People will be mad at me if they find out!” …is exactly what Cain complained to God after he murdered his brother. Truly repentant people (like David, Peter) are sad about their sins. Evil people (like Cain) are sad about the CONSEQUENCES of their sins. Know the difference.
13) “I love you….” saying the words, “I love you” does not mean the person loves you. Love is patient, kind, and unselfish. It is not provoked, does not hold a grudge, and does not act unbecomingly (1 Corinthians 13:4-5). If their words say “love,” but their actions say “hate,” that is hypocritical love (Rom. 12:9). “Let us love not in word and speech, but in action and truth.” (1 John 3:18) “You will know them by their fruits.” (Mat. 7:16)
14) “The Bible says don’t gossip.” That is true. Gossip is untrue or uneccesary tidbits, spread around to harm someone. But telling appropriate authority figures about abuse is exactly what Jesus told us to do (Mat. 18:15-17)
15) “You have to keep our secret.” Is impossible. The Bible says that all sins will be brought to light (1 Tim. 5:24). One of the hallmarks of a dysfunctional family is secrecy. “For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light for fear that his deeds will be exposed.” (John 3:20) But “the truth shall set you free,” (John 8:32). Good people have nothing to hide.
16) “I don’t trust the police/social workers/authorities.” …is a telling statement. “rulers are not a cause of fear for good behavior, but for evil. Do what is good and you will have praise from the same; But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing.” (Rom. 13:3-4)
17) “You are wrecking the family!” is a lie. The one who is unrepentantly harming others, and not seeking help for their issues is wrecking the family. Those who protect themselves and others are salvaging what remains of the family.
18) “You hurt my feelings when you told me that I abused you. You always complain so much! Why are you so negative? You are always so mean to me. YOU should apologize to ME.” …is a gaslighting. Gaslighting is a technique of changing the facts, in order to confuse the victim. A typical attack is blaming the victim for the actions of the abuser. This is a form of psychological abuse: it is an attempt to break down your mind, confuse you, and weaken your most powerful defence: your trust in your own sanity. If reading this post causes you to feel dizzy, confused, anxious, an upset stomach, extreme fatigue, a headache, or an unexplained ache in a part of your body, you may have been a victim of psychological abuse.
19) “You can’t report this because I am your spiritual head,” is a lie. People in positions of leadership are held to a *higher* standard in the Bible: “judgment begins with the house of God” 1 Peter 4:17, and “If a church elder continues in sin despite being warned, rebuke him in the presence of all so that others will be warned not to sin” (1 Tim. 5:19)
20) “God forgives me, so should you” is not true. Nowhere does God forgive unrepentant sinners. God also does not forgive people who use grace as an excuse to continue sinning. Neither should you. (Hebrews 10:26-27)
If you believe that you are the victim of physical, psychological, emotional, spiritual, or financial abuse, please find a safe person and/or the appropriate authorities with which to share your story. If you believe that you are in physical danger, please leave now or call the police. Yes, Christians are allowed to call secular authorities: in fact, I would recommend that you start there.
You were meant to thrive, not just survive. And the Bible was never meant to keep you in a cage!

Is EVERYTHING Either a Sin or a Virtue?

If you take something simple, like say an apple: there are a lot of different ways of looking at it. It can be round, or red, or expensive, or sweet, or heavy, or healthy, or ethically sourced, or GMO-free, or stolen, or cursed, or poisoned, or tasty. None of these descriptions are contradictory: they may all be true at the same time. (Hopefully not, for the one tasting them! lol)
When it comes to humans, as well, there are many different ways of looking at people, and at problems. It seems as though one common problem is that we tend to see people only through one lens: in the church, we tend to think of people as only spiritual, and their problems as only moral. But there are other ways of looking at the same problems. Say a person is struggling with anxiety. Is this a sin problem? Well, that is one way of looking at it. Maybe we should wag our fingers at them and say, “stop being scared.” We could try that. But there are also other options: maybe the problem is past trauma, which needs to be delicately unravelled. Maybe the subconscious is trying to warn them of something in the present: a person or situation that their conscious mind cannot face rationally. Maybe they are out of sync with their bodies. Maybe they have an illness, or a chemical deficiency. …or there could be many other explanations.

The problem with seeing all issues through one lens is mislabeling things, and labeling things poorly. Imagine if the only thing that you cared about were apples that looked good. You could end up with some tasteless ones, some not ethically sourced, and some that were poisoned!

Imagine labelling everything a sin, or a faith issue. Now, anyone who is sick feels a sense of shame. Anyone who has emotions and thoughts that they cannot control now tries to buckle down and repress them even harder, and adds shame to the mix.

The solution is not to remove the ethical component. Some things really are wrong, and sin is a word we need in our vocabulary. But it is not the only word.

I propose another word: health.

What is healthy for you?

God made your body, and He loves you, and He wants you to thrive. Why not try living for a while by asking, “What will be the most healthy thing I can do for myself today?”

…just see where that takes you. Maybe that could be a better starting place than, “How can I avoid sinning today?”

The Dangers of “Biblicism”

Reading the Bible, all by yourself, with no commentaries and no input from others is the ultimate in confirmation bias. A person can conveniently ignore or explain away anything that challenges them, while finding “biblical support” for all of their personal prejudices and ideas. If no support is given directly from scriptures, the person can simply say, “the Holy Spirit told me…” and put some very outlandish spin on a verse. It happens all the time!
“Bible teachers” like this can be very attractive. “Wow, he only quotes the Bible!” “Wow, he is self-taught! He wasn’t corrupted by some dirty seminary!” “Wow, God seems to speak to him so much!” …but the person isn’t really speaking to them about Gods way, but their own private ideas, wrapped in Biblical language. The effects of such teachers can be devastating: among other things, it can make it seem like anybody can make the Bible say anything that they want. Which of course, they can. So how can we avoid this confirmation bias? We cannot. We are only human. That is why we need one another. “Let one or two speak, and the rest pass judgment.” “But the Bereans were more noble, because after Paul spoke, they searched the Scriptures, to see if these things were so.” “*Study* to show yourself as a workman approved, able to *accurately* handle the word if God.” “You Pharisees…teach as doctrines the ideas of men…” “see to it that no one takes you captive through the…basic principles of men…”
The believing community is:
1) A local church of people who can respond in some way to the “teacher.” If the teacher is never told that they were wrong, and never revises their views, they have no such community
2) Commentaries and other pastors. You don’t know it all! The Bible wasn’t written in your language — or your millennia! You need help understanding some things! Be humble enough to ask for and receive help!
3) The wider faith community. Not every good Christian agrees with you. Some have very good Biblical reasons for what they believe. Learn from them! Learn to sit with the fact that there are more than one way to see many issues. Gradually, you will begin to see that while *some* issues in the Bible are black and white, many are grey. And some things you were taught to believe aren’t even in the Bible at all!
…as you emerge from under the dictatorial cloud of one narrow minded teacher, into the light and colour of the family of God, you may begin to find that the Bible is more like a grand story, where we can all find meaning and purpose and direction for our own lives. It is less like an instruction manual, telling us how to conform to the ideas and biases of one narrow minded “Bible teacher.”

Manly Myth

Myth: 
“Men don’t ask for directions”
“Men don’t read instructions”
“When he gets like this, there’s no reasoning with him!”
Reality: humble people know what they don’t know. They ask questions, seek advice, and receive correction when it is offered. 
Gender has nothing to do with it.

Raised in the IBLP Cult?

I recently shared an interview from my therapist Chantelle Neufeld, entitled, “Raised in a Cult.” I commented that this would give my friends a window into what it was like to be raised in IBLP/ATI under the teachings of Bill Gothart, as my wife was.

I have had significant responses to posting this and other videos. I have decided not to share these responses, as most of them were made in private messages.

In summary, I have had quite a few women — mostly in their mid thirties — either simply “like” the interview, or reach out to me to say that my comments on this and related subjects really encouraged them.

I had two lengthy discussions with men in their fifties. They both were incredulous that I would call ATI a “cult.” When I encouraged them to watch the interview, they responded that the specific issues cited were clearly wrong, but that an entire system should not be thrown out due to “a few slip ups” of the leader. (For those who don’t know, there is compelling evidence that Bill Gothart was using his organization to groom and systematically rape young girls). When asked for evidence as to why ATI was such a wonderful system, they both responded that, “I had a great experience,” and “it is Biblical.”

The difference between these two responses is very striking to myself. Yes, the experience was great to the men who were told that “head of your home” meant that they basically had absolute control over the lives of their children, for life. However, that was not a good experience for the children — particularly the girls, but also the boys — who were trying to figure out how to grow up and learn to thrive under such harsh parenting.

I hope to look more at IBLP, ATI, and Bill Gothart in future posts.

Shaming Apostates?

I take serious issue with this meme. What it seems to imply is that if anyone leaves the faith, even due to legitimate harms caused by others, the guilt still lies conveniently on the victim. But there are victims of physical abuse that will never walk again. There are victims of sexual abuse that may never learn to love. There are victims of psychological abuse that have truly lost their minds. And those who have participated in spiritual abuse are not innocent in God’s eyes. In fact, Jesus said, “It would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck and he were thrown into the sea, than that he would cause one of these little ones to stumble.” (Luke 17:2)
Spiritual abuse is a very serious cause of pain, and the damage can be life-long. I do not think that we should shame victims in this way.

Obey thy Parents…?

An important key in Biblical interpretation is distinguishing between principles and “magic formulas.” It is a good principle that if we raise our kids right, they will turn out well. That usually works: and it is certainly better than the alternative. However, Proverbs 22:6 is not a magic formula. It’s not telling parents: 1) if you find just the right technique, your kids will be perfect, or, 2) if your kids “destroy” their lives, that was because you didn’t get the formula right. It’s a principle: love and guide your kids. It is important for their future well-being. As a principle, it is good wisdom.
Another principle is that if one honours parents and authority figures, and obeys them when appropriate, life will go well for them. This is good wisdom: you won’t get far in life by disrespecting every authority figure you find. However, it does not mean: 1) honouring is equivalent to obeying, 2) adult children need to keep obeying their parents, 3) children who do not obey will be cursed, and the universe will conspire to destroy them, 4) children who make adult decisions and have an adult life apart from their parents are rebelling or dishonouring them.
As a principle, Ephesians 6:3 is good. But as a “magic formula,” this same passage can be used to try to cross boundaries (which are already tough to navigate) between adult children and their parents: as though parents should still be making decisions for their adult children — sometimes even when they are married! This teaching very unhelpfully goes against the teaching (established in Genesis 3) that adult children should “leave” their parents and “cleave” to their spouse (or, just leave if they will remain single). It even makes some people feel like they will be “cursed with bad luck” if they go against their parents: a very unbiblical idea. It places undue pressure on the parents, and can be weaponized to place an incredible amount of control on the children.
Taken this way, this passage of ancient wisdom can be turned into a powerful tool of spiritual abuse.

A Psalm for Victims of Abuse

👇 my commentary below 👇

O Lord, You have searched me and known me . You know when I sit down and when I rise up; You understand my thought from afar. You scrutinize my path and my lying down, And are intimately acquainted with all my ways. Even before there is a word on my tongue, Behold, O Lord, You know it all. You have enclosed me behind and before, And laid Your hand upon me. Such  knowledge is too wonderful for me; It is too high, I cannot attain to it. Where can I go from Your Spirit? Or where can I flee from Your presence? If I ascend to heaven, You are there; If I make my bed in Sheol, behold, You are there. If I take the wings of the dawn, If I dwell in the remotest part of the sea, Even there Your hand will lead me, And Your right hand will lay hold of me. If I say, “Surely the darkness will overwhelm me, And the light around me will be night,” Even the darkness is not dark to You, And the night is as bright as the day. Darkness and light are alike to You. For You formed my inward parts; You wove me in my mother’s womb. I will give thanks to You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made; Wonderful are Your works, And my soul knows it very well. My frame was not hidden from You, When I was made in secret, And skillfully wrought in the depths of the earth; Your eyes have seen my unformed substance; And in Your book were all written The days that were ordained for me, When as yet there was not one of them. How precious also are Your thoughts to me, O God! How vast is the sum of them! If I should count them, they would outnumber the sand. When I awake, I am still with You.

O that You would slay the wicked, O God; Depart from me, therefore, men of bloodshed. For they speak against You wickedly, And Your enemies take Your name in vain. Do I not hate those who hate You, O Lord? And do I not loathe those who rise up against You? I hate them with the utmost hatred; They have become my enemies.

Search me, O God, and know my heart; Try me and know my anxious thoughts; And see if there be any hurtful way in me, And lead me in the everlasting way.

Psalm 139:1-24

1. A constant theme in narcissistic abuse is NEGLECT. Because narcissists are so self-centred, they train others to serve them, fear them, to “love” them, to hate them, to need them, to listen to them, to become obsessed with them, and to live for them. The victim learns that their life does not matter. When the abuser needs them, the victim MUST be there. But nobody is there for the victim. Nobody sees them. But…God reminds her…God sees. He is there. In every way that the abuser has ignored them, this psalm remind the victim of how thoroughly they are *seen* by their Heavenly Father. He thinks about them, knows them, cares for them, sees them, is THERE. Wherever they are. Up? Down? Extatic? Suicidal? At home? Lost? He is there. He sees. He is there.
2. Another theme is minimization and excusing. The victim feels they need the abuser, and so they put up with the mistreatment, and excuse it all away when the abuser throws in a pale apology, or shows some fleeting kindness. But at a certain point, the abuser sees things in a new light. This behaviour is not an accident, but a premeditated pattern. It is intended to harm and destroy for selfish ends. It is wicked: there is no other word for it. No excuse. None. Suddenly, the victim sees their abuser for the enemy that they are. In language that some would find shocking, the victim cuts ties with their abuser, and calls down curses on them, and prays against any attempt to cause them harm
3. The victim is now free from the abuser: but pain still lingers in their hearts. Anxious thoughts trouble them. They pray for their Heavenly Father to know them still more, and to seek out and heal all of the wounded and broken places inside of them.

…a wonderful prayer for survivors to memorize, tape to their mirrors, or pray through in conjunction with guided breathing (deep breath in, pray a line of the psalm out) as relaxation/centring when anxious or troubled.

These are true and healing words.

Review: A Christian’s Guide to No Contact

As I have mentioned before, this blog was birthed out of my private journals. For that reason, a lot of my earlier posts have important gaps in them, and some important steps of the journey go undocumented.

Perhaps the most important step is my reading A Christian’s Guide to No Contact. 

This was one of the first books that I read, and it had a profound impact on me. At the time, I thought that her words were very good, but perhaps her language was bit harsh. She kept referring to her parents as “narcissistic psychopaths.” At the time, I did not know what these words meant, and so I thought she was simply calling them names. I now understand that these are technical terms for real psychological conditions. I have recently discovered that both of my parents are narcissists, and my father is a psychopath, with “dark triad” characteristics. 

As I had a recent dream about my parents, I realized that parts of me are still struggling with feelings of attachment to them. I decided that I would reread this book, after the research and progress I have made in the last five months, I was able to understand her much more clearly.

The first statement that really stood out to me was: 

It is a basic human right of every person to be left alone if they want to be. (Page 5)

As I read it again, this sentence rocked me. In the days since reading it, this sentence has become like a bedrock in my thinking. Yes, I do have a right to be left alone if I want to be. And I do want to be. How could anyone argue with this? Well, how could they?

It reminds me of the early days of my journey, some eight months ago. In the tangle of confusion of my mind, I played through scenario after scenario of my angry father or manipulative mother confronting me in a variety of ways and saying, “Why haven’t you called? Why haven’t you contacted us?” I felt frozen, stunned, confused. All I could think of to say was, “I didn’t feel like it.” 

…and yet, strangely, this response seemed incredibly powerful. 

I didn’t want to. I’m a grown man. And I don’t want to talk to you. So why should I?

It is revolutionary thinking, for someone raised to believe that their life is owned by their parents, and that their own will does not matter.

“I don’t want to.” 

Who cares what you want. We have legal, Biblical, and societal rights: and our rights trump your desires. They always have, and they always will!

“No. I don’t want to, and that is that.”

This journey (which has now topped 200 posts) is really no more complex than that: I wish to be left alone. And I’m allowed to make that call if I feel like it.

Were these people not related to me, there would be no question: I am not in the habit of letting narcissists and psychopaths close to me. And simply sharing some genetic material and giving birth to me does not give a lifelong privilege of hurtful access to my life. I am allowed to cut out people that are not being nice to me. 

I am allowed to be left alone if I want to be. And I want to be.

The second principle that really stuck out to me was how to identify an unfixable relationship. People and relationships are moving in a direction. And based on the past, we can make a reasonable guess about what the future will be. Pitelli writes:

Usually we stay in a bad relationship because we think there’s a chance that things will get better. We need to ask ourselves what exactly are the chances that this person will change? It may be possible, but is it likely? It might happen, and it might not. For that matter, our relative might come to his senses after we leave, and change his ways. Nothing is stopping him from doing that, either. Probably the best way of judging whether there is actually a realistic possibility of our relative ever changing is to think back on our past experiences with this person. We need to ask ourselves the four most important questions: Does this person ever admit it when he is wrong? Does this person ever apologize (sincerely apologize)? Have I ever seen this person change his behavior after being told it was hurtful or upsetting to others? Has this person ever shown true remorse or tried to make amends for anything he’s done? If our abusive relative or friend has never done any of these things, then he is not likely to start now. And if he very rarely or grudgingly does one of these things, then he is also unlikely to make a sincere effort to modify his behavior. (pp. 32-33). 

The third thing that spoke to me was writing a divorce notice. Pitelli writes:  

Another possibility for going No Contact is to write your abusive friend or relative a note. Again, this can be short and sweet, as in “Our relationship is not enjoyable (and/or healthy) and I am ending it. Do not contact me or my children again.” Remember, the more you say, the more you are giving your narcissist ammunition to argue over. Send this certified mail, return receipt requested…in case you need it for evidence in the future. (pp. 35-36)

The final thing that really really spoke to me was the many Bible verses that Pitelli found about loneliness and families. However, the most powerful part of this book, I believe was her simple concept of abstaining from evil. Her logic is something like this: 1) there are evil people in this world, 2) the Bible has a lot to say about evil people, including having nothing to do with them, and completely being separate from them, 3) if you are reading this book, it is very possible that your parents are evil, and these verses apply. 

That is simple Bible exegesis, and when you see it laid out like that, it is hard to deny that going “No Contact” with an evil person is at times a Biblical mandate. 

Some of the verses that especially spoke to me were:

WHEN MY FATHER AND MY MOTHER FORSAKE ME, THEN THE LORD WILL TAKE ME UP… Psalm 27:10 KJV. 

Our Abba Father will never leave nor forsake us (Joshua 1:5; Psalm 37:25; Hebrews 13:5). The Lord sets the lonely in families (Psalm 68:6) and his grace is always sufficient for us (2 Corinthians 12:9). (p. 9).   

He will replace every relationship that has caused us sorrow and pain with a healthy, loving relationship- often in the most unexpected ways and from the most unexpected places: AT MY FIRST DEFENSE NO ONE STOOD WITH ME, BUT ALL FORSOOK ME. MAY IT NOT BE CHARGED AGAINST THEM, BUT THE LORD STOOD WITH ME AND STRENGTHENED ME, SO THAT THE MESSAGE MIGHT BE PREACHED FULLY THROUGH ME, AND THAT ALL THE GENTILES MIGHT HEAR. ALSO I WAS DELIVERED OUT OF THE MOUTH OF THE LION. AND THE LORD WILL DELIVER ME FROM EVERY EVIL WORK AND PRESERVE ME FOR HIS HEAVENLY KINGDOM. TO HIM BE GLORY FOREVER AND EVER. AMEN!… 2 Timothy 4:16-18 NKJV. Thank you, Father! (p. 10) 

FROM MY EARLIEST YOUTH MY ENEMIES HAVE PERSECUTED ME, BUT THEY HAVE NEVER BEEN ABLE TO FINISH ME OFF. MY BACK IS COVERED WITH CUTS, AS IF A FARMER HAD PLOWED LONG FURROWS. BUT THE LORD IS GOOD; HE HAS CUT THE CORDS USED BY THE UNGODLY TO BIND ME.…. Psalm 129:2-4 NLT. (p. 11) I feel as though this is my new life verse.

I WILL SET NO WICKED THING BEFORE MINE EYES: I HATE THE WORK OF THEM THAT TURN ASIDE; IT SHALL NOT CLEAVE TO ME. A FROWARD HEART SHALL DEPART FROM ME: I WILL NOT KNOW A WICKED PERSON. WHOSO PRIVILY SLANDERETH HIS NEIGHBOUR, HIM WILL I CUT OFF: HIM THAT HATH A HIGH LOOK AND A PROUD HEART WILL NOT I SUFFER…..HE THAT WORKETH DECEIT SHALL NOT DWELL WITHIN MY HOUSE: HE THAT TELLETH LIES SHALL NOT TARRY IN MY SIGHT. I WILL EARLY DESTROY ALL THE WICKED OF THE LAND; THAT I MAY CUT OFF ALL WICKED DOERS FROM THE CITY OF THE LORD…. Psalm 101:3-5, 7-8 KJV. 

BE YE NOT UNEQUALLY YOKED TOGETHER WITH UNBELIEVERS: FOR WHAT FELLOWSHIP HATH RIGHTEOUSNESS WITH UNRIGHTEOUSNESS? AND WHAT COMMUNION HATH LIGHT WITH DARKNESS? AND WHAT CONCORD HATH CHRIST WITH BELIAL? OR WHAT PART HATH HE THAT BELIEVETH WITH AN INFIDEL? AND WHAT AGREEMENT HATH THE TEMPLE OF GOD WITH IDOLS? FOR YE ARE THE TEMPLE OF THE LIVING GOD; AS GOD HATH SAID, I WILL DWELL IN THEM, AND WALK IN THEM; AND I WILL BE THEIR GOD, AND THEY SHALL BE MY PEOPLE. WHEREFORE COME OUT FROM AMONG THEM, AND BE YE SEPARATE, SAITH THE LORD, AND TOUCH NOT THE UNCLEAN THING; AND I WILL RECEIVE YOU, AND WILL BE A FATHER UNTO YOU, AND YE SHALL BE MY SONS AND DAUGHTERS, SAITH THE LORD ALMIGHTY…. 2 Corinthians 6:14-18 KJV. 

FOR MEN SHALL BE LOVERS OF THEIR OWN SELVES, COVETOUS, BOASTERS, PROUD, BLASPHEMERS, DISOBEDIENT TO PARENTS, UNTHANKFUL, UNHOLY, WITHOUT NATURAL AFFECTION, TRUCEBREAKERS, FALSE ACCUSERS, INCONTINENT, FIERCE, DESPISERS OF THOSE THAT ARE GOOD, TRAITORS, HEADY, HIGH-MINDED, LOVERS OF PLEASURES MORE THAN LOVERS OF GOD; HAVING A FORM OF GODLINESS, BUT DENYING THE POWER THEREOF: FROM SUCH TURN AWAY….. 2 Timothy 3:2-5 KJV. 

REJECT A DIVISIVE MAN AFTER THE FIRST AND SECOND ADMONITION, KNOWING THAT SUCH A PERSON IS WARPED AND SINNING, BEING SELF-COMDEMNED… Titus 3:10-11 NKJV. 

DO NOT BE MISLED: “BAD COMPANY CORRUPTS GOOD CHARACTER.”… 1 Corinthians 15:33 NIV. 

HE THAT WALKETH WITH WISE MEN SHALL BE WISE: BUT A COMPANION OF FOOLS SHALL BE DESTROYED… Proverbs 13:20 KJV. 

THROW OUT THE MOCKER, AND FIGHTING, QUARRELS AND INSULTS WILL DISAPPEAR… Proverbs 22:10 NLT. 

MAKE NO FRIENDSHIP WITH AN ANGRY MAN; AND WITH A FURIOUS MAN THOU SHALT NOT GO: LEST THOU LEARN HIS WAYS, AND GET A SNARE TO THY SOUL… Proverbs 22:24-25 KJV. (pp. 11-14)  

SHORT-TEMPERED PEOPLE MUST PAY THEIR OWN PENALTY. IF YOU RESCUE THEM ONCE, YOU WILL HAVE TO DO IT AGAIN…. Proverbs 19:19 NLT.
(p. 14)  

GOD WILL JUDGE THOSE ON THE OUTSIDE; BUT AS THE SCRIPTURES SAY, “YOU MUST REMOVE THE EVIL PERSON FROM AMONG YOU”… 1 Corinthians 5:13 NLT. (p. 14)  

BUT NOW I AM WRITING YOU THAT YOU MUST NOT ASSOCIATE WITH ANYONE WHO CALLS HIMSELF A BROTHER BUT IS SEXUALLY IMMORAL OR GREEDY, AN IDOLATER OR A SLANDERER, A DRUNKARD OR A SWINDLER. WITH SUCH A MAN DO NOT EVEN EAT…. 1 Corinthians 5:11 NIV.
(pp. 15-16)

Sister Pitelli has a Facebook page that I have been following, and several other books. I am very interested in her book on forgiveness, as this is something that my wife and I have discussed at length. Forgiveness has been a cornerstone of my ministry for over a decade. But I now feel like I may have been teaching it slightly wrong. I would like to read and analyze this book in the near future.

• Forgiveness: Not Necessarily What You Think: What the Bible Really Says, and What it Doesn’t Say
• Narcissistic Predicaments: A Biblical Guide to Navigating the Schemes, Snares, and No-Win Situations Unique to Abusive Families
• Breaking the Bonds of Adult Child Abuse: A Biblical Textbook on Abusive Narcissistic Families, How They Operate, and How to Deal with Them
• Narcissistic Confrontations: A Biblical Guide to Your Abusive Family and Church Family’s Battle Tactics, Covert Operations, and Nuclear Meltdowns
• The Family Freeloader: A Biblical Answer for Sob Stories, Con Games, and Never Having to Get Off the Couch

Review of the book, A Christian’s Guide to No Contact. 

The first statement that really stood out to me from this book was: 
It is a basic human right of every person to be left alone if they want to be. (Page 5)
As I read it again, this sentence rocked me. Yes, it does seem like a person should have a right to be left alone if they want to be. How could you argue with that? “You have to let this person into your life, even though you don’t want them there.” I’m sorry, that is not a loving relationship. That is domination and captivity.

A healthy adult can be left alone if they so chose.

The second principle that really stuck out to me was how to identify an unfixable relationship. People and relationships are moving in a direction. And based on the past, we can make a reasonable guess about what the future will be. Pitelli writes:

Usually we stay in a bad relationship because we think there’s a chance that things will get better. We need to ask ourselves what exactly are the chances that this person will change? It may be possible, but is it likely? It might happen, and it might not. For that matter, our relative might come to his senses after we leave, and change his ways. Nothing is stopping him from doing that, either. Probably the best way of judging whether there is actually a realistic possibility of our relative ever changing is to think back on our past experiences with this person. We need to ask ourselves the four most important questions: Does this person ever admit it when he is wrong? Does this person ever apologize (sincerely apologize)? Have I ever seen this person change his behavior after being told it was hurtful or upsetting to others? Has this person ever shown true remorse or tried to make amends for anything he’s done? If our abusive relative or friend has never done any of these things, then he is not likely to start now. And if he very rarely or grudgingly does one of these things, then he is also unlikely to make a sincere effort to modify his behavior. (pp. 32-33). 

The third thing that spoke to me was writing a divorce notice. Pitelli writes:  

Another possibility for going No Contact is to write your abusive friend or relative a note. Again, this can be short and sweet, as in “Our relationship is not enjoyable (and/or healthy) and I am ending it. Do not contact me or my children again.” Remember, the more you say, the more you are giving your narcissist ammunition to argue over. Send this certified mail, return receipt requested…in case you need it for evidence in the future. (pp. 35-36)

The final thing that really really spoke to me was the many Bible verses that Pitelli found about loneliness and families. However, the most powerful part of this book, I believe was her simple concept of abstaining from evil. Her logic is something like this:

1) there are evil people in this world,

2) the Bible has a lot to say about evil people, including having nothing to do with them, and completely being separate from them,

3) if a person came to mind when reading the above section about unfixable people and relationships, there is a good chance that this person qualifies as a “wicked” person, as in the Bible. Thus, the Biblical commands about “separating” from wicked people would apply to them.

That is simple Bible exegesis, and when you see it laid out like that, it is hard to deny that going “No Contact” with an evil person is at times a Biblical mandate. 
Some of the verses that especially spoke to me were:

He will replace every relationship that has caused us sorrow and pain with a healthy, loving relationship- often in the most unexpected ways and from the most unexpected places: AT MY FIRST DEFENSE NO ONE STOOD WITH ME, BUT ALL FORSOOK ME. MAY IT NOT BE CHARGED AGAINST THEM, BUT THE LORD STOOD WITH ME AND STRENGTHENED ME, SO THAT THE MESSAGE MIGHT BE PREACHED FULLY THROUGH ME, AND THAT ALL THE GENTILES MIGHT HEAR. ALSO I WAS DELIVERED OUT OF THE MOUTH OF THE LION. AND THE LORD WILL DELIVER ME FROM EVERY EVIL WORK AND PRESERVE ME FOR HIS HEAVENLY KINGDOM. TO HIM BE GLORY FOREVER AND EVER. AMEN!… 2 Timothy 4:16-18 NKJV. Thank you, Father! (p. 10) 

FROM MY EARLIEST YOUTH MY ENEMIES HAVE PERSECUTED ME, BUT THEY HAVE NEVER BEEN ABLE TO FINISH ME OFF. MY BACK IS COVERED WITH CUTS, AS IF A FARMER HAD PLOWED LONG FURROWS. BUT THE LORD IS GOOD; HE HAS CUT THE CORDS USED BY THE UNGODLY TO BIND ME.…. Psalm 129:2-4 NLT. (p. 11) I feel as though this is my new life verse.

I WILL SET NO WICKED THING BEFORE MINE EYES: I HATE THE WORK OF THEM THAT TURN ASIDE; IT SHALL NOT CLEAVE TO ME. A FROWARD HEART SHALL DEPART FROM ME: I WILL NOT KNOW A WICKED PERSON. WHOSO PRIVILY SLANDERETH HIS NEIGHBOUR, HIM WILL I CUT OFF: HIM THAT HATH A HIGH LOOK AND A PROUD HEART WILL NOT I SUFFER…..HE THAT WORKETH DECEIT SHALL NOT DWELL WITHIN MY HOUSE: HE THAT TELLETH LIES SHALL NOT TARRY IN MY SIGHT. I WILL EARLY DESTROY ALL THE WICKED OF THE LAND; THAT I MAY CUT OFF ALL WICKED DOERS FROM THE CITY OF THE LORD…. Psalm 101:3-5, 7-8 KJV. 

BE YE NOT UNEQUALLY YOKED TOGETHER WITH UNBELIEVERS: FOR WHAT FELLOWSHIP HATH RIGHTEOUSNESS WITH UNRIGHTEOUSNESS? AND WHAT COMMUNION HATH LIGHT WITH DARKNESS? AND WHAT CONCORD HATH CHRIST WITH BELIAL? OR WHAT PART HATH HE THAT BELIEVETH WITH AN INFIDEL? AND WHAT AGREEMENT HATH THE TEMPLE OF GOD WITH IDOLS? FOR YE ARE THE TEMPLE OF THE LIVING GOD; AS GOD HATH SAID, I WILL DWELL IN THEM, AND WALK IN THEM; AND I WILL BE THEIR GOD, AND THEY SHALL BE MY PEOPLE. WHEREFORE COME OUT FROM AMONG THEM, AND BE YE SEPARATE, SAITH THE LORD, AND TOUCH NOT THE UNCLEAN THING; AND I WILL RECEIVE YOU, AND WILL BE A FATHER UNTO YOU, AND YE SHALL BE MY SONS AND DAUGHTERS, SAITH THE LORD ALMIGHTY…. 2 Corinthians 6:14-18 KJV. 

FOR MEN SHALL BE LOVERS OF THEIR OWN SELVES, COVETOUS, BOASTERS, PROUD, BLASPHEMERS, DISOBEDIENT TO PARENTS, UNTHANKFUL, UNHOLY, WITHOUT NATURAL AFFECTION, TRUCEBREAKERS, FALSE ACCUSERS, INCONTINENT, FIERCE, DESPISERS OF THOSE THAT ARE GOOD, TRAITORS, HEADY, HIGH-MINDED, LOVERS OF PLEASURES MORE THAN LOVERS OF GOD; HAVING A FORM OF GODLINESS, BUT DENYING THE POWER THEREOF: FROM SUCH TURN AWAY….. 2 Timothy 3:2-5 KJV. 

REJECT A DIVISIVE MAN AFTER THE FIRST AND SECOND ADMONITION, KNOWING THAT SUCH A PERSON IS WARPED AND SINNING, BEING SELF-COMDEMNED… Titus 3:10-11 NKJV. 

DO NOT BE MISLED: “BAD COMPANY CORRUPTS GOOD CHARACTER.”… 1 Corinthians 15:33 NIV. 

HE THAT WALKETH WITH WISE MEN SHALL BE WISE: BUT A COMPANION OF FOOLS SHALL BE DESTROYED… Proverbs 13:20 KJV. 

THROW OUT THE MOCKER, AND FIGHTING, QUARRELS AND INSULTS WILL DISAPPEAR… Proverbs 22:10 NLT. 

MAKE NO FRIENDSHIP WITH AN ANGRY MAN; AND WITH A FURIOUS MAN THOU SHALT NOT GO: LEST THOU LEARN HIS WAYS, AND GET A SNARE TO THY SOUL… Proverbs 22:24-25 KJV. (pp. 11-14)  

SHORT-TEMPERED PEOPLE MUST PAY THEIR OWN PENALTY. IF YOU RESCUE THEM ONCE, YOU WILL HAVE TO DO IT AGAIN…. Proverbs 19:19 NLT.
(p. 14)  

GOD WILL JUDGE THOSE ON THE OUTSIDE; BUT AS THE SCRIPTURES SAY, “YOU MUST REMOVE THE EVIL PERSON FROM AMONG YOU”… 1 Corinthians 5:13 NLT. (p. 14)  

BUT NOW I AM WRITING YOU THAT YOU MUST NOT ASSOCIATE WITH ANYONE WHO CALLS HIMSELF A BROTHER BUT IS SEXUALLY IMMORAL OR GREEDY, AN IDOLATER OR A SLANDERER, A DRUNKARD OR A SWINDLER. WITH SUCH A MAN DO NOT EVEN EAT…. 1 Corinthians 5:11 NIV.
(pp. 15-16)

Sister Pitelli has a Facebook page that I have been following, and several other books. I am very interested in her book on forgiveness, as this is something that my wife and I have discussed at length. Forgiveness has been a cornerstone of my ministry for over a decade. But I now feel like I may have been teaching it slightly wrong. I would like to read and analyze this book in the near future.

Other books by Pitelli include:

• Forgiveness: Not Necessarily What You Think: What the Bible Really Says, and What it Doesn’t Say
• Narcissistic Predicaments: A Biblical Guide to Navigating the Schemes, Snares, and No-Win Situations Unique to Abusive Families
• Breaking the Bonds of Adult Child Abuse: A Biblical Textbook on Abusive Narcissistic Families, How They Operate, and How to Deal with Them
• Narcissistic Confrontations: A Biblical Guide to Your Abusive Family and Church Family’s Battle Tactics, Covert Operations, and Nuclear Meltdowns
• The Family Freeloader: A Biblical Answer for Sob Stories, Con Games, and Never Having to Get Off the Couch

When is the “Perfect Time” To Leave a Ministry?

When is a perfect time to leave?
When the ministry is failing, you are fading, and everything has dragged on too long?
Or when the ministry is healthy, competent people are in place, and you feel a call to move on?

Where is the perfect place to move to, from a long-time ministry?
Into another long-term, deep, hard-working ministry?
But then, where is the space to mourn the passing of one season into that of another?
Or is it better to move out of ministry for a time — into a season of rest, sabbatical and “normal life”?
To have space and time in which to heal, refresh, and recalibrate,
Before moving into the next ministry?

When is the perfect time to leave support?
When support drops, when there is no money left, and nobody left to call?
When desperate calls and arrangements must be made, and it takes years to dig out of the hole?
Many there are who have walked that road.
Or do we leave when support is still strong, when there are means to make a change,
and when God is calling us on?

When is the perfect time to leave a country that is clamping down on homeschoolers?
When a case is opened on your family? When they begin formally investigating your ability to parent?
Or when you still have your freedom, they have not yet flagged you, and you don’t have a case open on your family?

We are strong, and we are guided by a few principles, that we hold very dear:
1. We will not keep a ministry alive longer than it serves a purpose (or, in this case…)
2. We will not stay in a ministry longer than it needs us
3. We will not sacrifice our spiritual or physical health by continuing to do something that people think we should do, simply to save face
4. We will never cling to a ministry as a source of employment, simply because we are afraid of secular work

We are free and thinking clearly. We know that usually, people leave ministries because:
1. They found one which was “better” in some way, or
2. They are fleeing one which is failing in some way

….but we are leaving for neither reason. We are leaving because,

3. It is the perfect time to leave. It is perfect for us, and for our ministry. And it is perfect to go into a season of sabbatical, and then to look to the future

This may not make sense to some people. But that is not the most important thing. What is important is that we are 100% united as a couple — we really are! — and that we both feel very strongly that this is the right decision.

We are not compelled by anything outside of us to make this decision.
We have come to a decision together, after much thought and through deep prayer:
Many of our closest friends and mentors are also in agreement with us here:
And now we are confidently putting into motion what we believe that God is calling us to do.