Why So Many Rules? - Duggars

[luckylassie]

I've been thinking....I've studied the bible for a pretty long time and a lot of the regulations that the Duggars and others follow are not even in there. I have never found anything biblical that says that girls must stay home until marriage, kissing was wrong, or that birth control was a sin. I know of old testament verses saying that women should not wear what pertains to a man but I was under the impression that those old laws and rules were for a different time and place (old covenant). I could be wrong but just my thoughts.

[DamnPrecious]

I think it just boils down to control and holier than thou contests.

"He didn't even know my name until the preacher had us take our vows, I'm as pure as snow!"

[TheBuddha]

I think , If you take the OT rules, even if you beileve they are for today (like messy-antics "judiasm")

If you interpret those rules, on a scholastic level- even conservitivly scholastic- youll find something a bit different then what the duggars or mj or what not wants it to be.

to undestand "what pertains to a man" and "what to a woman"

3-4k years ago or whatever

what did men normally wear

what did women normally wear

I was always under the impression that clothing for men and women back then, resembled more of a skirt or dress by todays terms anyway... but thats just me.

[TheBuddha]

there is definately the holier than thou

its a contest of "im clearly not different enough, so what can i do to be more different"

or "victorian era is what God wants"

"no one points at me and persecutes me"

"well, because of some dumb law in the 1920s, well disregard logic, and ecclesiastical history for the sake of : (see above)"

[twin2]

I think the whole damn thing is a pissing match between headships as to who is the holiest of the holy.

An example:

Dimblulb: When my oldest male blessing was married, he and his wife did not kiss till their wedding day.

Gil: Well, Jimbob, my oldest male blessing is now courting and will not kiss OR hold hands till their wedding day.

Dimblulb: I'll call your no touching till the wedding and raise you this. When my eldest female blessing weds, she will not see her beloved until I pull her veil away at the alter.

Gil: I'll see your not seeing each other till the wedding, and raise you that my eldest female blessing will not see her beloved until he pulls away her veil at their marriage bed.

Dimbulb: Why Gil, I'll see your......

[Sweetpea1]

Dimblulb: When my oldest male blessing was married, he and his wife did not kiss till their wedding day.

Gil: Well, Jimbob, my oldest male blessing is now courting and will not kiss OR hold hands till their wedding day.

Dimblulb: I'll call your no touching till the wedding and raise you this. When my eldest female blessing weds, she will not she her beloved until I pull her veil away at the alter.

Gil: I'll see your not seeing each other till the wedding, and raise you that my eldest female blessing will not see her beloved until he pulls away her veil at their marriage bed.

Dimbulb: Why Gil, I'll see your......

Fundie Poker.

[Lillian]

Women should not wear what pertains to a man....great! I only shop in the women's section, wear women's jeans, etc..

I don't get why they can't read the bible in context :?

[luckylassie]

Yes, holier than thou is definitely running through their veins. In some cultures, I heard that the man was not allowed to look at the bride until the wedding. Maybe to top Josh and Anna, one of the other fundies could go that route. I thought that the bible actually encouraged the exact reverse of being "holier than thou". Maybe the Duggars hided that part from their lives.

[Letgo]

I think the rules are for control and to set them apart from mainstream Christians. Following restrictive rules allows for more separation and less contact with others who are not "like minded" and could entice people away from the group. I agree that there is also some one-upmanship in how outwardly rigid and "Christian" families can be. The Duggars at least do seem to get the love of Christ part, but they also focus on random OT verses-not showing the thigh, no pork, abstaining for 40 or 80 days after giving birth, etc. How they choose one verse and not another on which to focus is beyond me!

[ladypuglover]

Women should not wear what pertains to a man....great! I only shop in the women's section, wear women's jeans, etc..

I don't get why they can't read the bible in context :?

I'm waiting for them to carry it further. Women can't wear jeans because men wear jeans. So woman can't wear shoes, underwear, shirts, watches, rings, earings, socks, coats, mittens and so on and so on because men wear those things also or wore them first in the history of fashion. Someone better figure this out because you all don't want to see me naked. :shock:

[bananacat]

The Bible isn't just a list of rules though. There are many stories that were meant to explain natural phenomena and not meant to be moralizing or tell people what to do. But we live in a society where every children's story and tv show has the format of someone learning a Valuable Lesson. So fundies can only see stories in that way. They can't accept that some stories are were just interesting things that people told each other. They assume there must be some prescription for behavior in every story and every verse. So when David (I think) saw Bathseba and lusted after her, the Bible says he already committed adultery in his heart. Fundies stretch this interpretation to assume that even thinking a lustful thought is basically the same as having an orgy.

They also tend to not understand historical societies so even when a story is moralizing, they don't understand the behavior is shown as wrong. For example, because they don't understand Levirate marriage and the status and life options of women in Biblical times, they see the story of Onan as forbidding masturbation, even though the story doesn't actually include any masturbation.

On top of all that, following the Bible is not actually their top priority. They have an idea for the kind of society that they want, which is strictly hierarchical with men at the top and kids at the bottom. They will interpret Bible verses to support their pre-existing ideology. They use the Bible as a bludgeon to keep women in their place.

[xDreamerx]

For me, the funniest part is that they don't bother to understand context AT ALL. Even if you're not a Biblical historian or scholar, it doesn't take a genius to figure out that in the time of the Bible women and men both wore dress like items of clothing. "Pants" didn't even begin to come about until the Middle Ages (correct me if I'm wrong) when you started to get tights and then later the doublet and hoes combo. Breeches, which is probably the closest thing to modern pants, came about in the early 17th century.

I assume, in Biblical times adornment is what separated how men dressed from how women dressed. Women being somber and serious is often mentioned, that they should not braid their hair or adorn themselves with pearls and gold. Maybe they didn't want women to look nice? I don't know. Maybe they took issue with Roman finery and thought them debauched so they rejected cultural customs like dress etc?

[luckylassie]

By the way, Josh and Anna's site has "marriage tools" that will teach us heathen commoners how to repair our lives. Perhaps we should all stop using our brain power and just let the Duggars do the thinking for us? Nah, I couldn't do that, there's way to many books in my room. I've been having some pretty defrauding thoughts too. Oh, the fundies better avoid me at all costs! :twisted:

[luckylassie]

Also, my German Shepherd was walking around the neighborhood lately completely naked....I think she defrauded the neighbor's cat. What a bad girl she is! I better blanket train her before it's too late. She's even sniffed a guy's behind before marriage. Bad girl cloey!

[maybeizfundie]

I think in part because for some people, rules make life seem safer and easier to deal with. When the world is spinning, and sorting out what is right and wrong gets difficult, it can be reassuring to have your giant brick wall of rules surrounding you and stolidly reminding you that this is what you should do, and this is what you shouldn't do.

That was how it was in the cult we passed through. The rules were developed close to a century ago, and whenever a crisis arose (usually surrounding some branching out or change in practice), it was unifying and calming to the group to rally around "Let's go back to our roots! Let's remember our mission! Let's do things according to the old rules!"

[maybeizfundie]

Also, many of the things the Duggars (and many other religious folks) do are not rules, per se, but their understanding of what Biblical principles point to.

There is no rule not to use birth control, but they would see things like "Be fruitful and multiply", and "Children are a heritage from the Lord", as well as the theological concept of God as the Creator, soul-giver, and general Sovreign over everything, etc as principles on which their rejection of birth control would be Scripturally based.

[ThisOlGirl]

By the way, Josh and Anna's site has "marriage tools" that will teach us heathen commoners how to repair our lives. Perhaps we should all stop using our brain power and just let the Duggars do the thinking for us? Nah, I couldn't do that, there's way to many books in my room. I've been having some pretty defrauding thoughts too. Oh, the fundies better avoid me at all costs! :twisted:

Oh please! Those two have been married for what, 3 years? Thanks, but I'll get my marriage advice from someone else (or not).

I see that there aren't any "marriage tools" for divorcees and single parents who may be looking to get remarried. I guess I, a divorced single parent, must not be worthy of a husband. The fundies probably consider me a lost cause or the bride of Satan. Good thing I'm not looking to get married anytime soon.

[Guest Anonymous]

I see that there aren't any "marriage tools" for divorcees and single parents who may be looking to get remarried. I guess I, a divorced single parent, must not be worthy of a husband. The fundies probably consider me a lost cause or the bride of Satan. Good thing I'm not looking to get married anytime soon.

Don't despair, ThisOlGirl! There's room for you in fundiedom under the "reformed whore" category. (See Kelly at GC for a prime example.) You just have to find and marry a widowed patriarch with umpteen screaming children who worked and bred his first wife to death. Make sure to let everyone know how grateful you are to be under his headship, and be super judgemental, especially to people who aren't holy and special enough to have made the exact same decisions as you have. Don't forget to pop out at least ten more kids, and wallop the hell out of them if they show any signs of having personalities. As a bonus, you can force the oldest daughters of the patriarch to do most of the child rearing.

Or, you know, stick to your original plan. :P

[luckylassie]

I will not be taking any marriage advice from J and A any time soon either. According to someone on the old board, Josh is a complete jerk in real life and is so stuck up it's not even funny. I don't know why Anna chose home birthing (if it was really her choice at all). This second birth looked so much more painful then the first and a lot more people were around to watch.

[sacrilicious]

By the way, Josh and Anna's site has "marriage tools" that will teach us heathen commoners how to repair our lives. Perhaps we should all stop using our brain power and just let the Duggars do the thinking for us? Nah, I couldn't do that, there's way to many books in my room. I've been having some pretty defrauding thoughts too. Oh, the fundies better avoid me at all costs! :twisted:

Please. :roll: I've been married for almost 6 years and was engaged/dated my husband for about 4.5 years before that. What, pray tell, do they have to tell me? As an aside, I can't even imagine barely knowing my future spouse before getting married and starting a family. I totally credit our long engagement with giving us a good foundation for a healthier marriage, especially once we had a child. I suppose it's possible to make it work with such a short "courting" and engagement, but on the other hand if they aren't happy it's not like they have an out.

[HowRude]

I don't understand as a Christian I watch the show an go no that is not in the bible.Especially the new testament which applies to us. I think they just want control and to be Jesus' favorite. Also fundamentalists groups have formed because they thought the main sect were barbarians, so they had to be better than them and go back to a better time at least in their minds.They also have to have so many rules to prove their sect works.

[Childless]

Yeah, I don't think Josh and Anna have anything to tell me that is of any value. My husband and I get along just fine and have a great marriage despite the fact that we did everything the Duggars preach against. So, I'm not inclined to think their way is the better way.

[emeraldskull]

For me, the funniest part is that they don't bother to understand context AT ALL. Even if you're not a Biblical historian or scholar, it doesn't take a genius to figure out that in the time of the Bible women and men both wore dress like items of clothing. "Pants" didn't even begin to come about until the Middle Ages (correct me if I'm wrong) when you started to get tights and then later the doublet and hoes combo. Breeches, which is probably the closest thing to modern pants, came about in the early 17th century.

Yeah... it's like they want to apply verses to 18th century mindsets/ideals (men wear pants, women wear dresses), when honestly, in the time era it was written, they all wore "dresses"! :-P

I assume, in Biblical times adornment is what separated how men dressed from how women dressed. Women being somber and serious is often mentioned, that they should not braid their hair or adorn themselves with pearls and gold. Maybe they didn't want women to look nice? I don't know. Maybe they took issue with Roman finery and thought them debauched so they rejected cultural customs like dress etc?

That particular passage (about not braiding hair or adorning with pearls) is not saying Christian women should not dress up or wear jewelry. It was saying "don't make your outward appearance the focus of your life".

But the whole one-up-man-ship... It makes life easier to deal with I guess if you don't have to actually deal with it. You can build lives around these rules, shun everyone who doesn't live up to them, and not worry about anyone else.

[roddma]

The braided hair was a popular style at the time. The women were trying to one up one another causing jealousy. It's explained here

http://www.thercg.org/questions/p122.a.html

They also take the women remain silent in church out of context. In Paul's day, the women and men sat on separate sides of the building and women shouted questions. I can't recall the site but it is misinterpreted as women can not speak in church at all.

[emeraldskull]

They also take the women remain silent in church out of context. In Paul's day, the women and men sat on separate sides of the building and women shouted questions. I can't recall the site but it is misinterpreted as women can not speak in church at all.

That is true as well. In fact, if one actually reads what Paul wrote in context and in light of WHO he was writing to, you would find that in that day and time, he was in fact very radically pro-women.