Joanne from "Narrow Is The Way" totally flips her shit

[formergothardite]

Well raw bacon against skin would be icky feeling.

[joannesmith]

First off, it's thief, not theif. Are you homeschooling those kids of yours? Because you're doing them a terrible disservice if you are.

I'm doing my children a terrible disservice because I transposed two letters? Seriously?

[debrand]

Great. Then if I was a theif before becoming a christian I can keep being a theif. If I was a murderer before becoming a christian then I can keep on murdering. If I was gay before becoming a christian then I can keep on being gay. If I was an alcoholic before becoming a christian then I can keep on being an alcoholic.

No, this does not work does it? Christ calls us to REPENT and follow him. We cannot repent of something if we are continually living in it. We are not following Christ if we are not putting his teachings into practice.

If we don't want to follow Christ, then we have no business calling ourselves christians.Top Report this postReply with quote

I agree it would be silly to call yourself Christian if you don't follow Christ. However, I don't get the connection between how being a thief is the same as leaving your husband?

You weren't a Christian when you were married to the first man or when you married the second husband. The bible does not say that women should leave their unbelieving husbands. It does say that through the wives meekness and obedience the husband might be saved.

1 Corinthians 7:13-14 And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him. For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy.

1 Corinthians 7:16 For what knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband? or how knowest thou, O man, whether thou shalt save thy wife?

1 Peter 3:1-2 Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, if any obey not the word, they also may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives; While they behold your chaste conversation coupled with fear.

[Marian the Librarian]

I'm doing my children a terrible disservice because I transposed two letters? Seriously?

Joanne, you're doing your children a terrible disservice by inflicting your extremist, punitive, shame-based religious beliefs on them - and by not taking steps to address your obvious depression.

[formergothardite]

So atheist take more vacations? Am I getting that right? And is there any solid proof for that statement?

How do I become an atheist so I can get the vacation packages?

[TXDuck]

Flip side, I'm a Christian* that does take vacations. Not terribly elaborate vacations, mind you, but vacations still.

*I have a feeling a great many fundies would not consider me Christian.

[debrand]

I'm sorry that you suffer depression Joanne. That has to be very difficult on you. It sounds like you've made hard decisions based on what you thought was the right thing to do. However, I think that your interpretation of your faith is not very healthy for you.

At one time, I was a fundamentalist too. My desire was to follow Christ but I ended up adding rules that are not in the bible. Modesty is a good example. The bible does not say what modest means but I wanted clear, exact rules so I listened to the Ladies Against Feminism site and started wearing skirts and dressess. It was a downward spiral from there.

Do your children get to see their fathers?

And like freegothard, I would like to know why atheists take more vacations? Are vacations evil?

[Kaylee]

Hello Raine - I remember you. I'm not sure why you assume I have been deceived and taken advantage of? Based on what? And the other conclusions you have come to - what is your basis?

Mainly the idea that you were bound to leave your husband and that all remarried people are as well. That has always confused me because it seems like it creates more divorces and broken families. God hates divorce, so I don't see how adding another divorces is right, even if it is supposed to be the final one.

It's been a while since I'd read your blog because I have cut down on internet time in the past few months, so I apologize for insinuating that Joanna or the church was the cause of your divorce and for other false assumptions I may have made. I think I remember now that you had come across these ideas in your own study and then later found that the church believed the same things. At the same time, I think this is a false teaching but I doubt either one of us will change our belief on that point because of a discussion thread. Honestly, I think part of it is that I like you as a person - you seem really sincere, but I really disagree with some of the things you say, so it was easier for me to see you as being somewhat of a victim than to see you as someone I fell is a good and sincere person but at the same time teaching things that I strongly disagree with.

I also may have been reading the situation wrong but it seemed like your family was living in not just voluntary poverty but in circumstances below what some of the others in the community were (the posts on bugs in the flour and saving salt to reuse) and I thought I remembered you mentioning that some of the brothers did not feel like eating certain things were fit for them but it was OK for your family. That just rubbed me the wrong way because it looked like you were trying the best to be hospitable and share yet will still expected to give them better than what you were subsisting on. Having had a close friend who joined what was supposed to be an communal Christian group but ended up being very hierarchical and unequal in practice, I'm sort of sensitive to those things. I guess I looked at working the same way - if they are getting paid fairly and are learning then that is a good thing, but I've seen too many groups that expect a lot of work with little renumeration for it.

Do your children have many friends their own age? Are they involved in activities with other children their own ages inside or outside the church? I can understand if you don't want to go into details, but I noticed you haven't really mentioned that much. As an adult, I found that when I dressed more plain (cape dresses and a longer white veil covering) a lot of people shied away from me because of their assumptions- I knew people but didn't have any close friends & some of my friends now said my way of dressing made them reluctant to get to know me. It just seems like it might be hard for your children too, at least your daughter, whose clothing stands out more than the boys does. I'm not saying you should let them do worldly things just to make friends but, at the same time, it's hard to connect with people without some common ground. Also, you can be well-known and still be lonely, but it's great if that's not the case for your family.

First, this is from Deut. 24, not 14. See what Christ said in the gospels and also what God said in Jerimiah 3. You can listen to Moses if you want, but you cannot just listen to him in this one instance; be consistent and obey all that Moses said. I choose to listen to the Lord.

You're correct, I mistyped the reference. I read Jeremiah 3 and it mostly condemns the adulterous behavior of sleeping around after the divorce and then attempting to return to the previous spouse. Deuteronomy also forbids going back to the first spouse after a divorce as adultery, while permitting remarriage to another so I don't see a contradiction.

If neither of you were Christians at the time, then it applies even moreso.

Great. Then if I was a theif before becoming a christian I can keep being a theif. If I was a murderer before becoming a christian then I can keep on murdering. If I was gay before becoming a christian then I can keep on being gay. If I was an alcoholic before becoming a christian then I can keep on being an alcoholic.

[Guest Anonymous]

I'm doing my children a terrible disservice because I transposed two letters? Seriously?

Plus the fact that your blog is riddled with spelling and grammatical errors. And you didn't transpose two letters once, as a typo, you clearly don't know how to spell the word because you did it twice in a row. It's an elementary school level word. Not to mention that you're making them live in a basement, eat food with bugs in it, wear ridiculous clothing, and you're denying them a decent education.

[Fluffy-Boo]

Yes, I am familiar with that passage and it's a good one to use when people say God would not expect a family to be torn apart. You seem to not understand the difference between the old and the new covenants, but maybe you don't even believe in God so why would the difference matter to you? It seems like many on this forum are atheists, is that true?

Actually, Joanne, I am very familiar with terms such as old covenant and new covenant. I am also familiar with many versions of dispensational theology as well as preterism, partial-preterism, the vastly different branches of eschatology, soteriology, tabernacle symbolism, and whatever trends have flown through the last 2000 years of Christian history.

But that's the problem. You are arguing Ezra from a theological perspective. I'd ask you not to do this, as theology is just the deism-oriented version of philosophy. What I mean is, your esteemed theologians are no better than the philosophers who argue about the actual existence of the chairs upon which they sit.

In all perceptible reality, there is NO SUCH THING AS A NEW COVENANT. The NT is written consciously using the old testament. Books like Revelation are simply a random regurgitation of Ezekiel and Daniel. And to this day, we don't even know who wrote revelation. If you believe differently, please prove otherwise.

And there is a reason why Paul's divorce theology is different from that of Jesus. After all, Paul includes an abandonment clause that Jesus gives no account for? Why? For the very same reason Paul never quotes the gospels even ONCE.

Because the gospels were neither written or in circulation at the time of Paul. This is also why Paul includes all sorts of interesting theological precepts that exist nowhere in the gospels...such as 1 Corinthians 6:3.

Before you can attempt to argue your way out of Biblical inconsistencies using theology, you need to know the physical makeup of scriptures. You need to know why you use certain translations, and what version of the Greek New Testament upon which your translation is built. And even before that, what compilation of manuscripts are used for you GNT. AND the dates of these manuscripts. After all, archeologists are still extracting manuscripts and dating them as I type.

Problem is, most people choose a church first, they choose a pastor to choose their hermaneutic for them, and then they begin to tell everybody else what the Bible says.

I don't know whether or not you are a bad person, but I do know that you don't know your Bible at all. Most Christians are as unfamiliar with their Bibles as they are with the rich and inconsistent history of their faith. If you are going to attempt to speak authoritatively about Scripture, then you should know scripture, not theology. The interpretation is never as important as why the text actually exists.

Btw-I am hardly the voice for anyone on this board, but I am not an atheist--not even close. But I do know enough about the Hebrew (and Septuagint) scriptures to tell you that you'd be better off as a an Old Testament Jew than a New Covenant Christian, if you actually care about literalism. And you'd be better off as neither if you care about founding faith on truth.

[kb2]

It's easy to read the bible and make it say what you [anyone] want it to say, especially if you have something to defend or are trying to persuade someone in one direction or another. It does not take a rocket scientist to understand the simple teachings of Christ. Confusion comes when the reader does not want to believe a particular teaching of Christ because it would cost them too much to believe it. They look for loopholes, and loopholes are easy to find if one does not have an honest heart that is trying to please the Lord.

I don't think hardest path always equals the right path. It's possible to work very, very hard, and sacrifice a lot, and make the world a worse place. What you call loopholes may be people doing the right thing where you're wrong--but you feel that because you have caused yourself pain that you have "paid." Are there any areas of your faith in which you can follow Christ but it doesn't cost you anything?

[joannesmith]

Mainly the idea that you were bound to leave your husband and that all remarried people are as well. That has always confused me because it seems like it creates more divorces and broken families. God hates divorce, so I don't see how adding another divorces is right, even if it is supposed to be the final one.

It's been a while since I'd read your blog because I have cut down on internet time in the past few months, so I apologize for insinuating that Joanna or the church was the cause of your divorce and for other false assumptions I may have made. I think I remember now that you had come across these ideas in your own study and then later found that the church believed the same things. At the same time, I think this is a false teaching but I doubt either one of us will change our belief on that point because of a discussion thread. Honestly, I think part of it is that I like you as a person - you seem really sincere, but I really disagree with some of the things you say, so it was easier for me to see you as being somewhat of a victim than to see you as someone I fell is a good and sincere person but at the same time teaching things that I strongly disagree with.

I also may have been reading the situation wrong but it seemed like your family was living in not just voluntary poverty but in circumstances below what some of the others in the community were (the posts on bugs in the flour and saving salt to reuse) and I thought I remembered you mentioning that some of the brothers did not feel like eating certain things were fit for them but it was OK for your family. That just rubbed me the wrong way because it looked like you were trying the best to be hospitable and share yet will still expected to give them better than what you were subsisting on. Having had a close friend who joined what was supposed to be an communal Christian group but ended up being very hierarchical and unequal in practice, I'm sort of sensitive to those things. I guess I looked at working the same way - if they are getting paid fairly and are learning then that is a good thing, but I've seen too many groups that expect a lot of work with little renumeration for it.

Do your children have many friends their own age? Are they involved in activities with other children their own ages inside or outside the church? I can understand if you don't want to go into details, but I noticed you haven't really mentioned that much. As an adult, I found that when I dressed more plain (cape dresses and a longer white veil covering) a lot of people shied away from me because of their assumptions- I knew people but didn't have any close friends & some of my friends now said my way of dressing made them reluctant to get to know me. It just seems like it might be hard for your children too, at least your daughter, whose clothing stands out more than the boys does. I'm not saying you should let them do worldly things just to make friends but, at the same time, it's hard to connect with people without some common ground. Also, you can be well-known and still be lonely, but it's great if that's not the case for your family.

You're correct, I mistyped the reference. I read Jeremiah 3 and it mostly condemns the adulterous behavior of sleeping around after the divorce and then attempting to return to the previous spouse. Deuteronomy also forbids going back to the first spouse after a divorce as adultery, while permitting remarriage to another so I don't see a contradiction.

Great. Then if I was a theif before becoming a christian I can keep being a theif. If I was a murderer before becoming a christian then I can keep on murdering. If I was gay before becoming a christian then I can keep on being gay. If I was an alcoholic before becoming a christian then I can keep on being an alcoholic.

I guess it depends on your way of looking at it and where you believe the sin in that relationship would be.

If you are correct, and the marriage itself is the sin of adultery, then you are right to divorce. I think you are wrong and that your church is wrong to teach that as a general rule but, since it would be a sin on your conscience, it may have been the right choice for you in that situation.

On the other hand, I do not believe that the marriage itself is adultery if the first divorce was for a biblical reason (an unbelieving spouse refusing to live peaceably with the other [abandonment or abuse] or sexual immorality). I do believe that a divorce would be a sin in that case if there was no biblical ground, and I think that couples should try to reconcile in most cases rather than divorce even in cases when it may be "allowable".

No, this does not work does it? Christ calls us to REPENT and follow him. We cannot repent of something if we are continually living in it. We are not following Christ if we are not putting his teachings into practice.

If we don't want to follow Christ, then we have no business calling ourselves christians.

I agree with you there, but here are many different interpretations of what following Christ actually looks like and I think it is dangerous, as individuals or as churches, to think that we have the only correct one. I know I fall short a lot, especially in certain areas, but I do try to follow Christ and to avoid or stop sin in my life. At the same time, I think some ways of trying to following Christ can end up turning more people away from Him than drawing Him to them and I think we can show more love than condemnation to seekers without necessarily compromising or selling out to the surrounding culture to do so.

[joannesmith]

You are arguing Ezra from a theological perspective. I'd ask you not to do this, as theology is just the deism-oriented version of philosophy. What I mean is, your esteemed theologians are no better than the philosophers who argue about the actual existence of the chairs upon which they sit.

Theology confuses me. I just try to follow Christ. All those big words you used ... I have no idea what most of them mean and I don't care.

[formergothardite]

It always surprises me what questions fundies pick and choose to answer. There were obviously some (like atheist ones) that she went out of her way to avoid answering.

[joannesmith]

Ok - I am done here. I cannot keep up with all these comments and have so much left to do today. If anyone seriously would like to talk, please email me joannesmith6819 at gmail or call me (free on weekends, please stick to weekend hours or verizon) XXX XXX XXXX.

and formergothardite ... I just do not have time to answer all the questions. If there was one you seriously wanted answered, please send me an email and I'll get to it asap.

phone number edited out by admin

[formergothardite]

I'll send it via pm and just letting you know I will copy and paste the whole reply here.

Wait, I bet you can't pm because of your low post count can you? Never mind then.

I really just want to know how it is modest to dress in a way that attracts attention to yourself.

[Austin]

It always surprises me what questions fundies pick and choose to answer. There were obviously some (like atheist ones) that she went out of her way to avoid answering.

I always get suspicious when fundies try to draw people into private conversations. . .

[joannesmith]

Plus the fact that your blog is riddled with spelling and grammatical errors. And you didn't transpose two letters once, as a typo, you clearly don't know how to spell the word because you did it twice in a row. It's an elementary school level word. Not to mention that you're making them live in a basement, eat food with bugs in it, wear ridiculous clothing, and you're denying them a decent education.

Lisar, I tried to comment to you in private but your profile provides no contact information. It's not about being a perfect speller. If you equate a good education with being a good speller, then I am sorry to know that. I equate a good education with having children that enjoy learning, know how to learn, and have good character. Here is a post I did on education if you are interested: http://fewtherebethatfindit.blogspot.co ... thood.html

Please direct future responses or comments to me directly. joannesmith6819 at gmail

[Guest Anonymous]

I always get suspicious when fundies try to draw people into private conversations. . .

I don't get what the issue is with having a conversation here on the board, if she does indeed want a conversation. What's with crying off a public conversation on the grounds of having no time to talk and then inviting multiple private conversations that will surely take much longer to engage in....?

And why don't our fundie friends understand that we will talk about them here for as long as we want...if they don't want to join in, that's fine, but it won't greatly affect our decisions to talk about them.

[Guest Anonymous]

Theology confuses me. I just try to follow Christ. All those big words you used ... I have no idea what most of them mean and I don't care.

This is the scariest thing Joanne has said so far: I don't understand or care what my religious beliefs are, but I am following Christ and he told me to get a divorce.... :?

[Austin]

This is the scariest thing Joanne has said so far: I don't understand or care what my religious beliefs are, but I am following Christ and he told me to get a divorce.... :?

No kidding. Just dump your husband, screw up your children's lives, and then claim no real understanding for why? Because Jesus told you to? I think there's medication for that. :shock:

[formergothardite]

Yeah, I don't get why she has the time to comment privately but not on here. Fundies almost always try and take it private.

[Guest Anonymous]

Lisar, I tried to comment to you in private but your profile provides no contact information. It's not about being a perfect speller. If you equate a good education with being a good speller, then I am sorry to know that. I equate a good education with having children that enjoy learning, know how to learn, and have good character. Here is a post I did on education if you are interested: http://fewtherebethatfindit.blogspot.co ... thood.html

Please direct future responses or comments to me directly. joannesmith6819 at gmail

My profile doesn't provide any contact information because I don't want random internet crazies contacting me. Funny how that works.

Spelling is an essential part of a good education. Being able to write and communicate clearly is of vital importance, and if you think employers like to see misspelled words on applications then you are very wrong. I'm damn sorry to know that you don't think it's important for your children to know how to spell.

I'll direct future responses and comments right here, I'm not interested in having a private conversation with you.

[Confused_by_religion]

Theology confuses me. I just try to follow Christ. All those big words you used ... I have no idea what most of them mean and I don't care.

This leaves me speechless. How can anyone presume to know the "truth", make life difficult for others in its name, insult others in its name AND coyly explain that one isn't really that interested any background information to that "truth". Dear god.

[jesssnerch]

So atheist take more vacations? Am I getting that right? And is there any solid proof for that statement?

How do I become an atheist so I can get the vacation packages?

Why do think people cross over to the atheist dark side? For the vacations. And the cookies.