Lori Alexander: Valentine's Day Causes Divorce

[Pam]

There's a recurring theme that have always left me shaking my head, which I doubt has anything to do with Christianity:

Men seeing caring for their own children (sometimes just referred to as "the kid") as some chore that their wives nag them about, and a favor that they may do for their wives if the wives behave nicely.

I see this attitude over and over again from not just Ken, but also cabinetman and jsr. I just don't get it.

Ah yes, the sad tale of the "pussy whipped" guy who can't indulge in some after work imbibing with his cohorts because he has to go home and "babysit the kid(s)" while his wife goes to work/runs errands/whatever it is she needs to do.

[AllisonWndrland]

Well done, FJers. I am still catching up on the thread because life has prevented me from spending much time on here since Monday, but from what I have seen, well done. I am always amazed at the intelligence, knowledge, and experience of the forum members and this thread is no exception. Y'all make me proud and hopeful for the future of women and children. :clap:

[Arete]

I do not hate God. I am an Eastern Orthodox Christian raised by an Agnostic father who practiced love your neighbor and hate your religious hierarchy. I have read Christian philosophy including Basil the Great, Augustine, Oregin, and Palegius. Contrary to what you think Ken, your particular perspective on how to be a practicing Christian is not shared by the majority of the practicing Christian world. Most Christians are not American fundementalist Protestants. Christianity did not start with Paul and go directly to Martin Luther (with no disrespect meant to Luther) and John Calvin ( may he be rotting in the hell he wanted to consign most of humanity to as I type this).

Christianity had over 300 years of oral and written tradition before the canonical New Testament was put together by a church fundamentalist Protestants consider idolatrous and invalid. A church that still teaches you cannot know if you are going to heaven for sure because we are judged AFTER death. The Bible was written in 2 languages most American fundamentalist can't read within 2 cultures they know nothing about. Keep telling yourself that language, translation, and cultural context don't matter, and that everything is to be interpreted literally at all times.

As for allowing husbands to lead and pay the bills, my grandmother was a devout Christian with 50 years of a GOOD marriage under her dress who had complete control of the paychecks and the finances. Because pleasing my grandfather ended where the food, shelter, and education needs of the children began. He excelled in making money and sucked at budgeting. In another time she could have probably run the Federal Reserve. Since they were partners and gramps obviously missed the lecture that his manhood depended on the submission of his wife, they played to each other's strengths, raised their family successfully, and enjoyed each other's companionship. When he died, she took his wedding ring and wore it on top of hers for the rest of her life. All done as a Christian woman who did not submit to please him or make him a better man. She expected him to treat her with respect from day one. Told all her female descendants that marriage was about compromise between equals. A woman was to get an education and support herself so that if her husband decided to chase skirts, get lazy, or treat her as a servant, he could be kicked to the curb. She was a Christian, not an atheist or a passive punching bag. Love your enemy, except your husband is not supposed to be your enemy or your general.

And lastly, as a Christian I cannot believe you actually tried to lecture an Orthodox Jew on how they should interpret Isaiah 53. That was lame and embarrassing. Context, culture, God is beyond any believer's ability to define. I expect to see Jews and Muslims in the life to come, but I expect to see atheists there as well. A Creator and a a Father does not hate his creation or his children, no matter how they understand him in whatever cultural context they live in.

[Mama Mia]

I'm going to try to break your last post into separate sections to respond to, I am really bad at this, so please be patient if it's garbled.

I have to wrap up for today, but her is a brief update on my thinking to this point.

Some of yo have given me some things to think about and to discuss with Lori over time:

She may or may not make any changes, but and here are the areas will will need to stand in disagreement with each other:

1) Submission is a Biblical concept that Lori will continue to teach. It is the aspirin she give wives who are looking for a great marriage, which is to look first at themselves and their own behavior and make sure that it is not negatively impacting their own goals and dreams in life. This is the most sound advice any life coach can give, and I have been giving this advice to my client offices for years with great success. You want to work at a happy place or have a happy home, start being happy and see if others around you do not respond in like manner. Why you find this message so offensive is because it is placed within the Biblical ideal of submission.

I think this is a great message in general, I really do. There are many times in my life where things would have been greatly improved if I had been better at remembering to look at the positive in the other person first. There are situations were greatly improved when I did remember to practice this

2) Spanking is Biblical, but i is not necessarily the only way to discipline, nor does it carry any godly connotations. It has proven to be a very valuable parenting tool and no studies have show differently in spite of what you believe. Certainly it must be used modestly, but this group's idea of zero spanking and our view is worlds apart and will never be aligned. We believe in a tough world whee obedience and discipline will get you a long way to an outstanding life. That is why spots and ballet and other disciplines are important for kids where they get injured and hurt far worse than any spanking they will get.

We do not teach abusive spanking practices abut because the words spank harder may be misinterpreted by some Eskimo or idiot parent, it may not be appropriate to give that form of advice to strangers who may not balance it with understanding that there should never be an intent to bruise or leave any marks that last more than a few minutes. Spanking can inadvertently lead to a bruised hand when the child places their hand in the way of a wooden spoon, so please take every precaution to avoid spanking anything other than a child's bottom. But I leave open the idea that some children need harder spankings and I am libertarian in the sense that the state should not come into my home and tell me what to do with my children, unless I am harming them... which I have proven I have not. We cannot legislate away Coca-Cola, all sugar, alcohol, etc. We have to assume a parent is reasonable until shown otherwise.

agree to disagree with the effectiveness of spanking in most situations. But I am very glad that you are seeing that on the Internet it really is important to keep in mind that people can easily misinterpret what is read. Not to mention That if reading comments on the Internet has shown me anything it is that there is a whole lot more stupid and crazy out there than I would have thought :)

3) We need to consider how the message impacts non-Christians and potential those who call themselves Christians, but are overzealous in their application of what they see to be submission. Submission as clearly taught by Lori is not demeaning or dominating and it is to be given willingly. If a wife does not choose to submit, a husband is to love her into changing. The except to the case may be a very difficult wife who needs to understand as gently as possible that her husband will no longer put up with her shenanigans of yelling, being demeaning, controlling and saying hurtful things. This is a small issue with difficult wives, but just as there are difficult and abusive husbands, so too their are difficult and abusive wives. We believe you first apply the aspirin solution of loving the difficult person, and if that fails, begin to set boundaries and get additional help. This applies to both the husband or wife of a difficult spouse.

While I might disagree with some of your methods I do agree with this overall. If both partners agree that this is the model they wish to follow.

4) The vast majority of the participants on this Forum have an agenda based on pain and difficulties they experienced in life from their parents, or from their spouse or the church. There are a lot of hurting people in this world and that is why Lori started her blog. Every day Lori receives thank yous from many success stories in marriages, and is not going to stop blogging because non-Christians or liberal Christians disagree with her. She is encouraged daily to keep going strong because she gives hope to many marriages that where hope seemed lost and it is restored, often along with a completely restored marriage.

I don't think I, personally, have any sort of agenda about anything. I have seen serious problems that can come from servant leadership if the husband isn't really cut out for it, even if both partners wholeheartedly believe in the concept, so that is why I would like to see Lori be less 'one size fits all' in her postings on that topic. I think she could easily do that without jeopardizing her core beliefs or philosophy..

5) Your Forum is often unfair and I see far too many purposeful lies, mischaracterizations of the truth, and unwillingness to look at context with significant lack of balance. What should I expect from a "hate Fundies Forum" but such willful discarding of the truth and replacing it often with lies. I have tried to glean through the manure to find a pony, but the pony is not forthcoming. All that becomes more and more apparent is that our worldviews don't intersect, they collide. You hate God, you hate Christians, you hate Christian philosophy. This is nothing new to Christianity, just something relatively new to America and it will get worse as time goes on and society continues to go into the sewer of promiscuity, and filth. Darkness wants no fellowship with the light, it hates the light.

I agree this can be a very tough crowd to be in disagreement with, I am of a differing opinion of most on one of the hot-button issues, and it can get rather heated. I have a couple threads I participated in that are even longer than this one to prove it :lol: . But I think you are going over the top here. Several posters have been engaging with you in honest discussion, many of them ( although not all) very religious people who happen to disagree with your interpretation of the bible and religious teachings. Frankly this last paragraph of yours comes across more the way your wife's blog generally comes across, and why people have a problem with it. It reads very much like " I know everything, you know nothing and if you disagree with me it's because you're evil and/or an idiot".

You want to deal with everything from a worldly perspective and I from a Biblical perspective. I rarely get answers from you when I prove to you that what we teach is indeed Biblical and sound. You can't see it... or get it. The beautiful perfume of the gospel of Jesus has always smelled to those who can't see it. I only hope that some of you will appreciate the dialogue and be wiling to be more open minded and fair in your characterizations of us as decent people would. There is so much about abortion, and other social evils that God detests but we put up with it for the sake of harmony with our fellow citizens. Hopefully you all can do the same in the name of religious freedom and social freedom. I am a bit more open minded to you.

I am by no means a biblical scholar, but it seems there are actually several posters who are engaging in a deep religious dialogue with you, so I am surprised with this statement. They aren't agreeing with you, and you aren't agreeing with them ( they aren't even necessarily agreeing with each other ) . But if everyone agreed on the exact same interpretation, even among Christians, there would be one denomination, instead of the multitude that exist.

Out for now... but will be back to talk to you Artemis and finish our conversation. I have to start curtailing my time on the Forum, and can't answer all questions anymore with too many coming at me. Once I am caught up with my work I hope to spend more time from time to time to see how we can better relate to the world without being a part of it. .

[Ken]

Oh, nonsense. I'm a Christian and most certainly do not hate God. But I'm sure it fits more easily into your little black-and-white worldview to cast everyone in this forum as "against God" rather than against bad theology/stupid doctrine/abuse. You're being intellectually dishonest.

OK Polecat ... can you please do a survey and tell me how many Christians you have in this Forum and who believe God's Word to interpreted according to normal hermaneutical rules. I am curious, do you really know something I have not seen yet? I will be happy to be corrected if you can show me any significant fraction of true Christians who are part of this Forum and I am OK with some who want to set aside Pauline passages as cultural. I am referring to Christians born again by believing in the life, work and death of Christ Jesus and who have accepted Him as Lord and Savior.

I am serious... I really would like to know if you have any idea whatsoever. You are one of the few who has claimed Christ as Savior, yet I find you to be one of the most offensive so far. I don;t get you, because at first you made no sense to me and I thought you were trying to defend me and blast others on this site. Now I see you are simply blasting me. So what is this about?

[Mama Mia]

OK Polecat ... can you please do a survey and tell me how many Christians you have in this Forum and who believe God's Word to interpreted according to normal hermaneutical rules. I am curious, do you really know something I have not seen yet? I will be happy to be corrected if you can show me any significant fraction of true Christians who are part of this Forum and I am OK with some who want to set aside Pauline passages as cultural. I am referring to Christians born again by believing in the life, work and death of Christ Jesus and who have accepted Him as Lord and Savior.

I am serious... I really would like to know if you have any idea whatsoever. You are one of the few who has claimed Christ as Savior, yet I find you to be one of the most offensive so far. I don;t get you, because at first you made no sense to me and I thought you were trying to defend me and blast others on this site. Now I see you are simply blasting me. So what is this about?

Hi Ken, just quickly, I think it would be very difficult to do any sort of accurate survey on this site, just because there are many thousands registered, but probably only a few hundred who regularly post, and of those probably only a fraction would answer a survey as most just check threads/topics that interest them. Just an off hand observation. I am a little concerned by the " true Christian" wording, as I think that can be used to exclude anyone who doesn't believe exactly as you do, but I am definitely a Christian.

[Ken]

I do not hate God. I am an Eastern Orthodox Christian raised by an Agnostic father who practiced love your neighbor and hate your religious hierarchy. I have read Christian philosophy including Basil the Great, Augustine, Oregin, and Palegius. Contrary to what you think Ken, your particular perspective on how to be a practicing Christian is not shared by the majority of the practicing Christian world. Most Christians are not American fundementalist Protestants. Christianity did not start with Paul and go directly to Martin Luther (with no disrespect meant to Luther) and John Calvin ( may he be rotting in the hell he wanted to consign most of humanity to as I type this).

Christianity had over 300 years of oral and written tradition before the canonical New Testament was put together by a church fundamentalist Protestants consider idolatrous and invalid. A church that still teaches you cannot know if you are going to heaven for sure because we are judged AFTER death. The Bible was written in 2 languages most American fundamentalist can't read within 2 cultures they know nothing about. Keep telling yourself that language, translation, and cultural context don't matter, and that everything is to be interpreted literally at all times.

As for allowing husbands to lead and pay the bills, my grandmother was a devout Christian with 50 years of a GOOD marriage under her dress who had complete control of the paychecks and the finances. Because pleasing my grandfather ended where the food, shelter, and education needs of the children began. He excelled in making money and sucked at budgeting. In another time she could have probably run the Federal Reserve. Since they were partners and gramps obviously missed the lecture that his manhood depended on the submission of his wife, they played to each other's strengths, raised their family successfully, and enjoyed each other's companionship. When he died, she took his wedding ring and wore it on top of hers for the rest of her life. All done as a Christian woman who did not submit to please him or make him a better man. She expected him to treat her with respect from day one. Told all her female descendants that marriage was about compromise between equals. A woman was to get an education and support herself so that if her husband decided to chase skirts, get lazy, or treat her as a servant, he could be kicked to the curb. She was a Christian, not an atheist or a passive punching bag. Love your enemy, except your husband is not supposed to be your enemy or your general.

And lastly, as a Christian I cannot believe you actually tried to lecture an Orthodox Jew on how they should interpret Isaiah 53. That was lame and embarrassing. Context, culture, God is beyond any believer's ability to define. I expect to see Jews and Muslims in the life to come, but I expect to see atheists there as well. A Creator and a a Father does not hate his creation or his children, no matter how they understand him in whatever cultural context they live in.

Concerning Isaiah 53 why would that be an issue as you must believe as an Orthodox Christian that it refers to the Messiah, correct? Our discussion was about how the OT scriptures are interpreted, and my point was that the Jewish scholars tend to interpret many passages figuratively, especially those related to the Messiah. Why is that so offensive to you?

Concerting submission of wives, if you have been following along you would know that we would find nothing wrong with your grandma keeping the checkbook and handling the finances in the open. That should be decided between husband and wife, and there are no set rules for who does what so long as she respected and pleased her husband. And certainly we would expect that he would in turn respect and please her. Submission as Biblically taught is not inferiority in any way, but is rather related to final management decisions of the family, home and marriage. Your grandma would defer to your grandpa on issues he felt strongly about, at least until she kindly and gently changed his mind. My employees are not inferior to me, and I acre about them very much, but they follow my lead and come and try to convince me of a better way at times. Most of the time I agree with them, but sometimes I say no because I have the final responsibility for the success for the firm, and same with my marriage.

By accepting all into heaven you do realize you are cutting out wide margins of the scriptures and especially the words of Jesus. But there will be many in heaven and I do hope to see all peoples there, but this is not what my Bible appears to say, but I know the God of the whole world will deal justly and He is a good and gracious God.

[Ken]

Ewwww geez, they're both perverts. Perverts obsess over their fetish and talk about it in a different context so no one finds out that they are really getting off on the conversation. Normal couples who like to do the above during play time don't talk about it over and over with strangers on the internet and pass it off as a discipline discussion. No wonder why Ken won't shut up about spanking. He's a pig.

You just gave me the perfect example of what I am talking about with lies and mischaracterizations that you so harshly chastised me for. You just did it.

I did not write or suggest the first quote above. That was taken from SSM, and not you put those words in my mouth and blast me for them? It's like a loose cannon going off. How can you jump into a conversation grab some words that are not my words and blast me for them? is it just your anger and hatred that makes you do this on a Forum when you would never do it in real life? It is unethical and unprincipled and to be honest I have never seen such blatant acts of slander like this before in my life... I can only assume that this was a mistake, not fully knowing those are not my words and a sincere apology is forthcoming.

[latraviata]

You just gave me the perfect example of what I am talking about with lies and mischaracterizations that you so harshly chastised me for. You just did it.

I did not write or suggest the first quote above. That was taken from SSM, and not you put those words in my mouth and blast me for them? It's like a loose cannon going off. How can you jump into a conversation grab some words that are not my words and blast me for them? is it just your anger and hatred that makes you do this on a Forum when you would never do it in real life? It is unethical and unprincipled and to be honest I have never seen such blatant acts of slander like this before in my life... I can only assume that this was a mistake, not fully knowing those are not my words and a sincere apology is forthcoming.

THEOLOGYGEEK!

Repent woman, repent now!!! You obviously insulted the godly great headship!!! REPENT!!!!!!

[Destiny]

You just gave me the perfect example of what I am talking about with lies and mischaracterizations that you so harshly chastised me for. You just did it.

I did not write or suggest the first quote above. That was taken from SSM, and not you put those words in my mouth and blast me for them? It's like a loose cannon going off. How can you jump into a conversation grab some words that are not my words and blast me for them? is it just your anger and hatred that makes you do this on a Forum when you would never do it in real life? It is unethical and unprincipled and to be honest I have never seen such blatant acts of slander like this before in my life... I can only assume that this was a mistake, not fully knowing those are not my words and a sincere apology is forthcoming.

FTR, this couldn't possibly be slander:

slan·der

ˈslandər/

noun

Law

noun: slander

1. the action or crime of making a false spoken statement damaging to a person's reputation.

Words mean things, and this is one that is a pet peeve of mine. Slander is spoken word.

[Ken]

Oh, and the above post?

File Under: The Internet Is Forever. Spread The Word.

OK Koala, your chasing me out of your playground soon. I cannot compete with your cut and paste to make everything look like you want it to look. Mischarcaterizations at best, and an unwillingness to recognize that one can hold two thoughts in the brain at once and both be accurate.

I personally think spankings should be over by 7 years old. I never had to spank any of my teens, BUT if I thought they needed one, I would not hesitate to give them one. is that so contradictory? You want a rule from me NO spankings after 7 years old... PERIOD! It doesn't work that way in real life. We hold out ideals, lie I will never lie, but better believe if a Nazi troop showed up at my door I am lying through my teeth. There is such a thing as a higher principle or ideal trumping another lower idea. Te lower ideal is don't spank after age 7. The higher ideal: "If I think I am going to save my kids life or direction i life by giving them a spanking as a teen... I am spanking them. I still do not think it may be very effective because if you have lost them by 7, additional spankings are less and less effective.

Yes, Koala, you can put works on apiece of a paper well to serve your purposes,but have you ever thought of trying to serve fairness in your life, or at least fairness with me? I can again only assume that you are some sort of terrific person in real life who jumps into a Forum and all she cares about is winning, not the truth per se, just being right for her position like this is some mock trial in law school.

[latraviata]

FTR, this couldn't possibly be slander:

slan·der

ˈslandər/

noun

Law

noun: slander

1. the action or crime of making a false spoken statement damaging to a person's reputation.

Words mean things, and this is one that is a pet peeve of mine. Slander is spoken word.

Destiny31 a question:

I know fundies love the term 'helpmeet'. English is not my first language, but I know it is wrong. Could you explain to me why it is wrong?? I once knew, but I forgot.

[formergothardite]

Ken, am I ever going to get an answer about why we should think Lori is a wise mentor if she gives advice without knowing the whole story, approaches the woman with a negative bias, and gives advice based on assumptions? And she apparently missed that she was promoting an obvious rape advocate on her blog? Are you just going to continue ignoring these questions?

Also, what do you have against Eskimos?

[Destiny]

Destiny31 a question:

I know fundies love the term 'helpmeet'. English is not my first language, but I know it is wrong. Could you explain to me why it is wrong?? I once knew, but I forgot.

I was raised fundie enough that it was a word that actually existed in my world, but if I remember right, it's not actually a word. The correct word is helpMATE, not helpMEET. I *think* it's a case of people making up their own words that don't really exist. I'm sure someone will correct me if I am wrong. (And please do. Words mean things, and should be used correctly!)

[formergothardite]

OK Polecat ... can you please do a survey and tell me how many Christians you have in this Forum and who believe God's Word to interpreted according to normal hermaneutical rules. I am curious, do you really know something I have not seen yet? I will be happy to be corrected if you can show me any significant fraction of true Christians who are part of this Forum and I am OK with some who want to set aside Pauline passages as cultural. I am referring to Christians born again by believing in the life, work and death of Christ Jesus and who have accepted Him as Lord and Savior.

I am serious... I really would like to know if you have any idea whatsoever. You are one of the few who has claimed Christ as Savior, yet I find you to be one of the most offensive so far. I don;t get you, because at first you made no sense to me and I thought you were trying to defend me and blast others on this site. Now I see you are simply blasting me. So what is this about?

I was a real, washed in the blood, ask Jesus into my heart as my Lord and Savior, born again, biblical literalists for close to 30 years. Weird thing is, after living that life for so long, I pretty much already know all the arguments you are going to use and can understand why you can't understand why I no longer believe. I used to be like you. Except even in my fundie days I would have frowned at Lori for associating with a rape advocate and the way she gives advice without knowing the whole situation.

Now, I can't believe in the God of the Bible if I tried. It would be like trying to force myself to believe in Santa. And I know that you can't understand this.

[Ken]

"I am equal with the clients who hire me and their staff members are equal to me, but my role is to listen to and serve my client who has the ultimate responsibility for his/her office, and the team members listen and serve me as I implement change in the office"

You were hired for your job because the people in charge thought that you showed good leadership skills, not because you had a penis. If after hiring you, you demonstrated that you did not have the skills to be a good leader, they would not humble sit there and let you ruin the business and try to change you by submitting more. You would get fired.

"A submissive wife is not always submissive but the attitude of wanting to please her husband does characterize her life. If she feels strongly about something she may not submit. My wife is not submitting to me on some issues I would like to see changed or modified on her blog. Are you shocked??? We are working it through, and no, I do not force her to do anything. I ask, suggest but I do not force or push and pull. That too is unbecoming a loving husband."

If this is true then Lori needs to post this on her blog immediately. Let the people who view her as always submitting know that not only is it okay for a wife to not submit when they feel strongly about something, but she is not submitting to your requests. If she does not do this, then she is lying by omission by making her readers think that she submits to you and that women should always submit.

What would Lori's advice be to a woman who said that she felt strongly about changes her husband wants her to make? I am 100% it wouldn't be, "well sometimes a woman doesn't have to submit if she feels strongly about it." it would be "Submit". She needs to start practicing what she preaches.

I may have overstated that Lori is not submitting, because I have made no specific requests of her that she has not followed through on. Other things I would like changed I have talked to her about, but I am unwilling to order her around or control her. That would not be loving on my part, so I leave her with the option to take or leave my suggestions, because in reality I simply want her to think some things through for herself long term, not make quick fixes against her will.

So I was wrong in characterizing her as not being submissive. I have made zero specific requests that she has not been willing to do, but in all honesty, I make few requests of her at all, because I treat her as more important than I am, and I value her thoughts, feelings and person hood. Lori is a great person and a great wife. She knows we disagree on a few things and she must process this on her own. Would you not agree, instead of my bossing her around ke an unloving husband might do?

[latraviata]

I was raised fundie enough that it was a word that actually existed in my world, but if I remember right, it's not actually a word. The correct word is helpMATE, not helpMEET. I *think* it's a case of people making up their own words that don't really exist. I'm sure someone will correct me if I am wrong. (And please do. Words mean things, and should be used correctly!)

What I remember (vagualy) is that mate actually means suitable and appropriate to help. He found a wife that mates to help or something in that fashion, correct me if I am wrong.

Fundies seem to think it is literally a suitable helping friend/partner.

[latraviata]

I was a real, washed in the blood, ask Jesus into my heart as my Lord and Savior, born again, biblical literalists for close to 30 years. Weird thing is, after living that life for so long, I pretty much already know all the arguments you are going to use and can understand why you can't understand why I no longer believe. I used to be like you. Except even in my fundie days I would have frowned at Lori for associating with a rape advocate and the way she gives advice without knowing the whole situation.

Now, I can't believe in the God of the Bible if I tried. It would be like trying to force myself to believe in Santa. And I know that you can't understand this.

Not only because she doesn't know the whole situation, but she is obviously not skilled/trained/intelligent enough to give any advice whatsoever.

[Hisey]

Ken, could you please comment on the four-hour spanking Lori wrote about?

You seem like a reasonable person, but there are things that are really puzzling. Like, why would you tell Lori what blogs she can frequent? And is it really possible to control that, anyway? Do you use Covenant Eyes to get reports on where she goes online? What about when she goes to the library and uses the public computer? What about when you die, who wil monitor her usage then, and why? What happens when you travel? She is not a 13-year old girl who needs protection from things she cannot understand. And please don't tell me she "gave you permission" to do this. Even that is weird. I could "give permission" to my husband to monitor my internet usage, but he wouldn't. He'd be like, "What the heck?"

On another note, men have written to Lori's blog saying they wouldn't want a submissive wife. Lori thinks such men are doing marriage wrong, and it is feminism's fault. Is it really appropriate for her to make such a decision about a marriage she has no experience with? She seems very My Way Or the Highway; perhaps that was the source of your early marital problems--her personality, stubborn and inflexible. Not all women are like that. And the solution is not submission. Instead, she needs to get out in the world a bit more ("Wow, you can work and still be very poor.") and you both need better communication skills.

[samurai_sarah]

OK Polecat ... can you please do a survey and tell me how many Christians you have in this Forum and who believe God's Word to interpreted according to normal hermaneutical rules. I am curious, do you really know something I have not seen yet? I will be happy to be corrected if you can show me any significant fraction of true Christians who are part of this Forum and I am OK with some who want to set aside Pauline passages as cultural. I am referring to Christians born again by believing in the life, work and death of Christ Jesus and who have accepted Him as Lord and Savior.

I am serious... I really would like to know if you have any idea whatsoever. You are one of the few who has claimed Christ as Savior, yet I find you to be one of the most offensive so far. I don;t get you, because at first you made no sense to me and I thought you were trying to defend me and blast others on this site. Now I see you are simply blasting me. So what is this about?

Out of the lot of us, in this thread, there were three (?) of us who positively and doubtlessly identified as non-believers. The vast majority has faith, one way or another.

[Ken]

Nothing gets by you, huh? Seriously though, how can you interpret a bible when you can't even figure out what dry sarcasm is?

Sorry, I started the cat fighting by not understanding that your comments were were mean to be humorous. I actually thought that some conservative Christian had jumped on and was trying to defend me or something with those words and I was aghast. I think it was your theologygeek that threw me off and I did not want some other Fundie on her defending me and turning this into a war of words. I have not handled my ego and frustrations as well as I would have liked at times, for which I regret as I truly have wanted to dialogue and see where the people in this group are at, and try to see some of what you see. We may never agree on certain things but we can always work on tryng to understand each other, and treating each other with respect.

Done for the night...

[GeoBQn]

If you want to treat people with respect, start by not using sexist terms like "prissy" and "cat fighting."

[polecat]

OK Polecat ... can you please do a survey and tell me how many Christians you have in this Forum and who believe God's Word to interpreted according to normal hermaneutical rules. I am curious, do you really know something I have not seen yet? I will be happy to be corrected if you can show me any significant fraction of true Christians who are part of this Forum and I am OK with some who want to set aside Pauline passages as cultural. I am referring to Christians born again by believing in the life, work and death of Christ Jesus and who have accepted Him as Lord and Savior.

I am serious... I really would like to know if you have any idea whatsoever. You are one of the few who has claimed Christ as Savior, yet I find you to be one of the most offensive so far. I don;t get you, because at first you made no sense to me and I thought you were trying to defend me and blast others on this site. Now I see you are simply blasting me. So what is this about?

Nowhere and at no time did I defend you. I have no idea how many people here you would consider "true Christians." I do know that a few of them have shown more love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness and temperance than you have.

If you find me offensive, so be it. I personally find you and your ilk to be fairly offensive.

[OkToBeTakei]

OK Polecat ... can you please do a survey and tell me how many Christians you have in this Forum and who believe God's Word to interpreted according to normal hermaneutical rules. I am curious, do you really know something I have not seen yet? I will be happy to be corrected if you can show me any significant fraction of true Christians who are part of this Forum and I am OK with some who want to set aside Pauline passages as cultural. I am referring to Christians born again by believing in the life, work and death of Christ Jesus and who have accepted Him as Lord and Savior.

I am serious... I really would like to know if you have any idea whatsoever. You are one of the few who has claimed Christ as Savior, yet I find you to be one of the most offensive so far. I don;t get you, because at first you made no sense to me and I thought you were trying to defend me and blast others on this site. Now I see you are simply blasting me. So what is this about?

Translated to the 'right' type of Christian according to Ken.

I am referring to Christians born again by believing in the life, work and death of Christ Jesus and who have accepted Him as Lord and Savior.

What does this even mean?

I went to the website of Calvary Chapel. It at least answered my question regarding denomination, basically that it is non-denomnational but is a fellowship of churches based on evangelism, pretribulation and charismatic format. I'm going out on a limb here to say that due to it's adherence to Sola Scriptura Protestant will be close enough as a denomination.

There are 1500 approx. Churches world wide although 1000 plus of these are in the US. There is actually one not 10 miles from my door, from their website

The new church began today and we were so blessed that some folks from another church came to support and encourage us. We had a local man come visit called James and a couple of other ladies were listening from the kitchen. They described the singing as lively which was nice to hear.

With the sectarian and bigoted history of Christianity in this country coupled with the centuries of history and religion, it's a tough crowd. The couple who run the 'church' consider themselves missionaries and whilst the chap teaches adult literacy to the disadvantaged on a voluntary basis. His wife is...a marriage guidance counsellor. I kid you not.

I digress.

During the late 1970s and early 1980s, Chuck Smith wrote and published a prophetic timeline that declared:

I believe that the generation of 1948 is the last generation. Since a generation of judgment is forty years and the Tribulation period lasts seven years, I believe the Lord could come back for His Church any time before the Tribulation starts, which would mean any time before 1981.[36][37]

The reasoning had to do with the idea that the 7-year Tribulation would end in 1988, forty years after the establishment of the state of Israel. In his 1978 book, Chuck reasoned that Halley's Comet in 1986 would result in problems for those left behind: "The Lord said that towards the end of the Tribulation period the sun would scorch men who dwell upon the face of the earth (Rev. 16). The year 1986 would fit just about right! We’re getting close to the Tribulation and the return of Christ in glory. All the pieces of the puzzle are coming together." [36]

Disappointment resulting from the prophecy not materializing in 1981 caused some to leave the church.

I actually am not snarking. I do actually believe that Ken and others like him have a strong faith it is just the absolute conviction that their faith is the right one. The only one. Therefore that really would have been quite devastating for some. Just as it would be for any person to have their faith shaken.

Ken attributes the fact that disagreeing with him or even by merely contributing to this site must mean one of a few things. Abused. Abused by religion. Atheist. Liberal. Feminist and I'm sure there was a few other labels thrown in there.

Actually a lot of people watched the Duggar TV show and it led them here as was my case. The horror of fundamental religion unravelled AFTER that for me. So unfortunately not everybody falls into a neat little box for convenience.

I am absolutely the wrong type of Christian according to the 'Ken Commandments.' I have a sneaking suspicion the worst type of wrong Christian. That's Ok. I'm not trying to sell anybody on my religion. I would though appreciate at least a little bit of religious tolerance, nobody here is telling Ken his religion is wrong. Religious intolerance has caused many wars and in as much as Ken has said America has not seen persecution it is only because that level of intolerance has not been reached yet. I wonder if he realises it will head that way at break neck speed if everybody was as intolerant as he.

By accepting all into heaven you do realize you are cutting out wide margins of the scriptures and especially the words of Jesus. But there will be many in heaven and I do hope to see all peoples there, but this is not what my Bible appears to say, but I know the God of the whole world will deal justly and He is a good and gracious God.

Le big sigh.

WHY can people not practise their faith quietly and privately? I am so everlastingly thankful for the fact that not all religions practice evangelism. Can you imagine the noise?

On that note Peter said the proper way to deal with non-believers is..

“Do this with gentleness and respect, keeping a clear conscienceâ€

Unfortunately Ken you show absolutely no respect for any other religion or belief, other than your own.

[Mama Mia]

I may have overstated that Lori is not submitting, because I have made no specific requests of her that she has not followed through on. Other things I would like changed I have talked to her about, but I am unwilling to order her around or control her. That would not be loving on my part, so I leave her with the option to take or leave my suggestions, because in reality I simply want her to think some things through for herself long term, not make quick fixes against her will.

So I was wrong in characterizing her as not being submissive. I have made zero specific requests that she has not been willing to do, but in all honesty, I make few requests of her at all, because I treat her as more important than I am, and I value her thoughts, feelings and person hood. Lori is a great person and a great wife. She knows we disagree on a few things and she must process this on her own. Would you not agree, instead of my bossing her around ke an unloving husband might do?

See, this is the problem with the tone of much of Loris advice. She became happily submissive and her marriage improved because she has a husband who places her first, doesn't try to be overly controlling and order her about etc....but unfortunately, there are many, many men who either can't, or won't, take on the sort of servant leader role. The way she words her advice gives the impression that ALL men will become good husbands if the wife just does her part and is patient enough, but unfortunately that just isn't reality. I'm not trying to get either of you to change your worldview or philosophy, just urging you to look at how there really is a good deal of variance in what these individual marriages will look like if wifely submission is carried out with a man who just really isn't right for the role of leader.