Controlling the Words

Anyone who reads the blogs of the leaders and celebrities of the Patriarchy movement is aware of their ongoing fascination with the Reformation. From the Reformation 500 to the many Reformation Faires held by Family Integrated Churches across the country, it is clear that the followers of patriarchy adore the Protestant founding fathers. Yet, one of the key points of the Reformation is ignored by the majority of Patriarchy leaders and followers. That is: having the Bible in your own language so that you can read it without the help of anyone else. Yes, you’re probably confused now so let me explain…. To quickly review, in the Middle Ages, the Catholic Church controlled Christianity because the Bible only available in Latin―which was not the common languages of the people. Once the Bible was translated into other languages, the Reformation began to take shape. Why? Because the people could read the Bible for themselves and they realized that many of the traditions found in the Catholic faith were not found in the word of God. In short, they found that their traditions were pure legalism. Now, this is not about bashing Catholics. If anything too much of that goes on in the Protestant church anyway. Still, I think most of us can agree with that when it comes to scripture, understanding the words and their meaning is vital to a growing relationship with Christ. However, do those in the Patriarchy movement truly understand scripture? It is common knowledge that Vision Forum and many of its associates promote the use of the Geneva or King James Bible. Now, there’s nothing wrong with these texts; they’re beautiful, historic, and very important for Biblical studies. However, it seems rather impractical for these translations to be the only ones read or used. For one thing, it seems silly to insist that one must buy a new Bible in order to fit into any group. Moreover, I believe that it is easier to promote false teaching with these versions of scripture because most people, especially tired homeschooling parents, do not have the time to research the full meaning of the words on the page in front of them. I hope it’s clear to everyone that we’re not living in Elizabethan England anymore and quite honestly, the language of the KJV and Geneva Bibles is almost a different language. Some words have nearly ceased to exist while others have completely different meanings. Back in the days when I liked Vision Forum, I read a King James Bible for my daily devotions. While I love the language, in the same way I love Shakespeare, it takes thought and time to understand what the words are saying. When you’re tired and have spent the day working on math equations and reading Dickens, you really just want to be able to soak in the Bible without the linguistic effort it takes to untangle Elizabethan words. Most of the time, I simply could not connect with the King James Bible. Finally, I switched to the NIV. It was wonderful; the Bible truly came alive in modern English and spoke to me in a way it never had before. I thought it was amazing to hear Jesus speak in my own dialect, as if he was speaking directly to me. While I kept and still like my KJV, I just use it for cross-references now. From my own experience, I can see that perhaps using the KJV and/or Geneva Bible alone is a dangerous thing. I’ve studied linguistics and even so, it can be difficult for me to decipher Shakespeare, let alone the KJV. If Doug Phillips or one of his cronies uses the KJV or Geneva Bible alone, he can probably say whatever he wants and twist the scripture to fit his theory. It’s easy to do when no one really understands the words. Do you honestly think anyone will dare admit they don’t adore, let alone understand, the translation of the Bible that Doug Phillips insists that they read? In addition, when we insist on reading only the Elizabethan versions of the Bible, we can make serious errors in understanding it. As Phil Vischer, the creator of Veggie Tales writes in his book Me, Myself and Bob,
“There’s that verse―Proverbs 29:18― “For lack of vision, the people perish.” Ha! I was big on that verse. I’d even been introduced with that verse. “Where there is no revelation, people cast off restraint! Here’s Phil Vischer!” Yet….when we quote Proverbs 29:18, we always quote the King James Version. Check a modern translation like the New International Version and you’ll find the verse reads, “Where there is no revelation, the people cast off restraint.” What? Why so different? Because the King James Version was completed in the sixteenth century, long before the word vision had become a descriptor of creative brainstorming…. What we have here is a linguistic issue. Proverbs 29:18 has nothing to do with the children of God being “visionary thinkers” and everything to do with the children of God falling into chaos and sin when they ignore what God has revealed to them through his Word.”
Strange that one of the key verses behind Vision Forum is one of the most often misunderstood, isn’t it? Vischer continues,
“But I didn’t seem to be alone in my delusion. Megachurches, megaministries, mega Christian celebrities―we all seemed to be drinking the same cocktail. We were all casting our visions, emblazoning our BHAGs on banners, lapel pin, and PowerPoint presentations. And quite often, as the crowds cheered, we were standing behind entirely inaccurate interpretations of one little verse in Proverbs.” 1
It honestly disturbs me that the Patriarchy crowd is so obsessed with the KJV and Geneva Bibles, to the point of spurning all other translations. What’s wrong with reading the Bible in modern English? I seriously doubt that any of the reformers, especially the likes of John Wycliffe or William Tyndale, would be pleased with anyone clinging to their versions of the Bible and declaring them the only ones to read. They gave their lives, some literally, to translate the Bible into their language and they would expect us to use the Bible in our language. The Bible is a living book, so why must we try to make it a dead one?

Ingrid

1. Vischer, Phil. Me, Myself, and Bob. Nashville TN, Thomas Nelson, Inc. 2006. 240-241

All Commandments Are Equal But Some Are More Equal Than Others

“All Animals are Equal but Some Animals are More Equal than Others.” – A very famous line from George Orwell’s Animal Farm.

Certain parts of the patriarchy movement are very interesting to me and by turns, quite hilarious. You see, I just finished A Year of Living Biblically by A.J. Jacobs. It’s basically Jacobs’ journal as he spent one year trying to follow every single rule in the Bible. It’s a thought-provoking read and I really enjoyed the insights into fundamentalism that Jacobs took away from his project. One of the biggest insights: even fundamentalists pick and choose which rules to follow from the Bible. Different groups get hung up on different rules, found in both the Old and New Testaments, and then they expect everyone to follow them. Fundamentalists also take the Bible literally in some places and figuratively in others―this seemingly hinges on how well a verse fits into their preconceived theory. I find it amusing (and sad) that patriarchy people are so hung up on the Numbers 30 vow passage that they believe binds daughters to serve their fathers until marriage. (Of course, I’ve never heard of a Jewish scholar ever coming up with that interpretation of Numbers 30 but who’s keeping track?) Yet, they don’t make their daughters or wives follow the monthly female impurity laws. As Jacobs points out, no one individual law in the Torah is specified to be more important than any of the others. (Except maybe the Ten Commandments… but still, they’re all given equal weight.) Isn’t the monthly impurity law as important as the (pseudo) command to stay at home and not go to college? For that matter, why do patriarchy followers wear clothes with mixed fibers? Or cut the hair on the sides of their heads? Do they always stand in the presence of the elderly? (Lev 19) If a man isn’t supposed to wear women’s clothing, (Deut 22) why can men in the patriarchy movement wear kilts? They are *cough* skirts *cough* and are worn by women as well as men. Of course, the women of the movement are (generally) not allowed to wear pants... hypocritical much? Moving to the New Testament, why doesn’t the patriarchy crowd steal the Shakers thunder and encourage celibacy instead of all these courtship ideas? After all, Jesus and Paul encourage believers not to marry (Matthew 19, 1 Cor 7) and courtship isn’t even in the Bible! It seems that the men leading the patriarchy movement have carefully chosen which rules they want to follow and ignored others that don’t fit into their theory. Who knows? Maybe Doug Phillips will suddenly advocate following the mixed fiber law and then sell special non-mixed fiber costumes? It could happen. :-D
Seriously, taking the Bible too literally is dangerous. In doing so, one misses the spirit of the whole. As A.J Jacobs wrote, “Here’s the amazing thing: those who overliteralize the words of God are mocked in the Bible itself,” (290). Jacobs then discusses Nicodemus’ literal understanding of Jesus’ telling him to be born again. “Nicodemus is like a sitcom dunderhead here…. He can’t see that Jesus’ words were figurative and poetic,” (291). Far too often, we focus on the wrong part of scripture. We take verses out of context, overliteralize them, or simply fail to grasp the true meaning in and behind the words. I think we all have a little bit of fundamentalism inside us and we have to fight it. Instead of just forgiving and letting go, we keep track of the 490 times we have to forgive. We lash out at our neighbors in “righteous judgment” instead of turning the other cheek. When the time does come to judge, our leaders especially, we are too scared or in awe of man to stand up for truth. We tell women and minorities to be silent and forget that Jesus talked to and loves the poor, the outcast, the hated, and the sinner. We fight about whether or not women should wear head coverings instead of caring about what’s going on in their hearts. In the 1850’s, we preached that slavery was biblical from the pulpit but ignored the fact that it just wasn’t right. We buy what we want instead of what we need in order to give away the difference. We truly do not know what we have done. Within the patriarchy movement, it all goes back to the same idea of picking and choosing which rules to follow from the Bible. In the patriarchy movement especially, some commandments are more equal than others―particularly the ones limiting women and children. By doing this, those in the movement are totally missing the spirit of the Gospel. You cannot approach the Bible with your own system and pull out verses that support your theory while ignoring contradictory passages and the spirit of the whole. However, that’s exactly what the patriarchy movement does. It’s a top-down, male dominated system and I find it amazing that free, redeemed people would want to shackle themselves to such a movement.

Ingrid

Falling off Again

“The world is like a drunken peasant. If you lift him into the saddle on one side, he will fall off again on the other side. One can't help him, no matter how one tries. He wants to be the devil's.” - Martin Luther.1

“I’m choosing to stay at home and joyfully serve my father as God as called me to do. The world tells me that I can go to college and have it all: a career and a family but I know this is a lie. The world hates us for being keepers at home but I know that I am glorifying God.”
“Courtship is the best road to marriage. Through courtship, one does not experience the grief of giving one’s heart away through many casual dating relationships. I’m glad that I will avoid the pitfalls and immorality of the world...”
I read a lot of blogs written by proponents of the patriarchy and stay at home daughters movements. Most of them are written by young women and they’re all the same… or at least, it often feels that way. I actually wrote the two entries above; they refer to a couple of the most discussed topics on these blogs. Do you see the common theme in the entries above? That’s right; they go from one extreme to another.
In the first, the writer assumes that college for women equals balancing career and family. So in one sentence, we’ve moved from simple studying in college to being a career woman putting her children in daycare in order to be in the workforce. Believe it or not, many women actually go to college, marry, and then chose to stay home with their children. That’s what my mother did and that’s what I plan to do if God blesses me with marriage and children. Patriarchy people seem to think that college equals going far from home, partying, and becoming a feminist and a career woman. It doesn’t have to be any of those things. I, as well as many of my friends, live at home and commute to school; we don’t party and our faith is strong. In the same vein, I often see the idea that “the world hates us for being keepers at home” and I always wonder, “Does it really?” From what I see, homemaking is in vogue right now. I meet women everywhere who stay at home with their kids. Many women love babies and cooking and aprons and interior design… they just don’t obsess about these things. I honestly don’t understand where proponents of patriarchy are getting the idea that the world hates homemakers. Still, such comments are a good marketing scheme for selling more copies of Passionate Housewives and So Much More to “encourage” stay at home daughters and housewives in their desperate battle against the world. *rolls eyes*
As for the courtship paragraph, this recurrent jumping from a discussion of courtship to casual dating drives me nuts! So many patriarchy people decide that since the culture casually dates and hooks up, we should all practice courtship and betrothal. In courtship proponent’s minds, there is no middle ground! The examples of dating that they give are always about casual dating. Casual dating is NOT what my parents and many of my friend’s parents did! They had lots of friends, dated very few people, met the right person, dated them (as in going out to eat, hanging out with family, etc.), and then got married young. That’s what most of the young adults in my church do as well. I like to call it purposeful dating. It doesn’t have the pressure of courtship (i.e. on the first “meeting” you’re talking about getting married!) and it allows young people to be friends and then pair off if something develops.
Extremes don’t just belong to proponents of patriarchy… I also see extreme behaviour in people who have left the patriarchy movement. It is easy for them to declare that they don’t want kids or that they will send their kids to public school, or even believe that the government has a right to oversee homeschooling and/or parenting. They see abuse in everything because they have been abused and thus, jump to an extreme. It’s really sad. Unfortunately, it only encourages proponents of patriarchy to continue in their extreme behavior and convinces them that all who are outside of the movement are against them/hate them/etc. I find myself jumping to extremes sometimes too…. I read blog entries about how controlling the men in this movement are and it scares me to the point of praying, “I’m never getting married! What if I end up with some control freak who only cares about himself and beats our kids!!” Then after a moment, that still small voice says, “But, Ingrid, don’t you trust me? There are many kind, caring young men who would be just as offended by these men as you are.” And then I remember how many nice young men I know and I realize that I’m going to an extreme. It’s that pervasive. I always go back to that quote of Luther’s, “The world is like a drunken peasant. If you lift him into the saddle on one side, he will fall off again on the other side. One can't help him, no matter how one tries. He wants to be the devil's.” Just because we have escaped from falling into patriarchy doesn’t mean we should fall off the other side of the proverbial horse. It’s actually letting the patriarchy people win because we’re reacting to the point of being exactly what they thought we’d be if we “rebelled.” So be on your guard and try to be balanced.
Living your life by bounding from one extreme to another isn’t what we were created to do. For the most part, people jump to extremes because they are afraid. Afraid of pain, afraid of losing their faith or God’s (or their family’s) favor, or even afraid of being trapped within a legalistic lifestyle. We’re not to live our lives in fear or as a reaction to someone else’s bad behaviour. We need to trust God and realise that He is in control and He gave us “a spirit of power and love and self-control.”2

“Do not be overrighteous, neither be overwise—why destroy yourself? Do not be overwicked, and do not be a fool—why die before your time? It is good to grasp the one and not let go of the other. Whoever fears God will avoid all extremes.”
– Ecclesiastes 7: 16-18.

Ingrid

1. Table Talk #630 (probably recorded around 1533), which can be found in volume 54, page 111 of the Luther-Werke, Luther's works. http://ask.metafilter.com/118341/Help-me-track-down-a-quote-from-Martin-Luther
2. 2 Timothy 1:7.

Sheep in Need of Shepherd: Apply Within – Part Two

This builds upon my last post...so, if you're new I'd suggest reading Part One first.

"As the letters poured in, I realized that while God had graciously used my book to help some people, it had also raised a lot of questions…." "The main point of I Kissed Dating Goodbye was: "If you're not ready for marriage, wait on romance." But now my fellow singles were asking, "How can you know when you are ready for marriage? And once you're ready, what should you do?" To be honest, I hadn't figured that out yet. I never meant to become an expert on relationships…."– Joshua Harris, Boy Meets Girl. 1
Okay, I do appreciate Josh Harris. I like his book I Kissed Dating Goodbye; it helped bring people back to common sense. It's a big duh to me that if you're not ready to get married, (basically between the ages of 14 and 18, most people would agree that you're not going to marry at 15!) it's smart just to abstain from romantic relationships. Just wait until you're more mature and can handle the pressures. Smart. Great Idea. Bravo Josh for having some sense. Now, back to the subject at hand, Josh had some major sheep writing to him. No, I'm not being mean, I'm stating a fact. Why would anyone be so needy as to feel the have to contact the author of the book for advice on their romantic relationships? Why did Josh even write Boy Meets Girl? All I would have said is: "Sorry, guys, you're going to have to make it up as you go. Read your Bible and talk to God. Be an adult and use your head." No one can lead you by the hand as you grow up. That's something I've learned more and more as I become an adult. One thing I've learned is to rarely ask for advice, to rarely accept advice, and to only give advice when pressed. It's not to be cocky or because I think that I'm above other's advice…it's that experience tells me to listen to God and my own instincts. As I was reading Lord of the Rings, I was reminded of this by a certain quote. "Elves seldom give unguarded advice, for advice is a dangerous gift, even from the wise to the wise, and all courses may run ill. But what would you? You have not told me all concerning yourself; and how then shall I choose better than you?" 2 Advice is a dangerous gift. Use it wisely.
Back to Josh Harris, why did he write Boy Meets Girl? I can think of a few reasons…the chief one being…uh, money. The first book sold well…people seem to need guidance…a new book will likely do very well…it's tempting to write more. Do you really blame him? Well, I guess I do. Personally, I wish he'd stopped while he was ahead. Courtship and Dating are so complicated that writing a book about how to do it will always be controversial and subject to lots of criticism. Well, it should be; because, there is no correct way, there is no easy way, and there is no method for success. Love is not a thing that you can diagram like a weather pattern. You don't wake up in the morning and think, "I'll fall in love today and it'll all work out beautifully." If you read a love story somewhere, you may as well say, "Well, it won't happen to me like that,"—because it won't. No two stories are ever exactly alike. You could live for a hundred years, travel the earth, hear many stories, and still not have scratched the surface of possibilities. The Gospel doesn't give us a list of do's and don'ts—it gives us principles for life and everything attached to it and that's called flexibility. God knew that rules don't work for everything and part of his plan is to make every person's story different. Love is a strange thing. "There are three things that are too amazing for me, four that I do not understand. The way of an eagle in the sky, the way of a snake on a rock, the way of a ship on the high seas, and the way of a man with a maiden."3 If the Proverb writer could not understand it…you're not going to be able to either. But when the time comes, God will give you understanding and then you'll know what it's all about. "Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own."4

Ingrid

1: Joshua Harris, Boy Meets Girl: Say Hello to Courtship, Moltnomah Publishers, 2000. Quotation from Chapter 1, page 19.
2: Gildor Inglorian, The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, Book I, Chapter III, Page 83.
3: Proverbs 30: 18-19.
4: Matthew 6:34.

Sheep in Need of Shepherd: Apply Within – Part One

Many people in this world are like sheep, needing a shepherd. They have to be led. They have to follow what someone else says. They settle for second best. History shows this in every era. "What is has already been, and what will be has been before."1 Only a few people are brash enough to seize the leading position and only a few people are brave enough to stand up against them. The rest follow like sheep to slaughter. People like Doug Phillips show up every few years, proclaiming that they hold the answer and encouraging the populace to "think for themselves." In actuality, they are taught to think, talk, and reason like their leader. They have no minds of their own and are constantly looking for guidance. All their young men and women can recite is the gospel according to Doug Phillips and his minions. They are taught to believe that every word he says is true. That what he believes is the right and true thing. "Just because you are taught somethin's right, and everybody believes that it's right, it don't make it right."2 What a tremendous weight to put upon a sinful human being. I pity Doug Phillips and Scott Brown and Jonathon Lindvall and Little Bear and Mr. Botkin and his daughters and the Harris Twins and their brother Josh and everyone else in a "position of honour." Someday, these mere mortals will pass away and will go back to dust as all things do in their time. What happens to the sheep then? Their shepherd is gone… where will they go? Why must people be lead from one place to another? And Christians too! People that claim to be followers of Christ! Just who are you following? Jesus or someone else? Are you living according to His words or by a mere mortal's words? They're going to die eventually and so are you. Will what they say even matter in 50 years time? Yeah, patriarchy people are trying to extend themselves beyond their years…but I don't think it'll work. They're not God. They're not even close and neither is anyone else. "As for men, God tests them so that they may see that they are like the animals. Man's fate is like that of the animals; the same fate awaits them both: As one dies, so dies the other. All have the same breath; man has no advantage over the animal. Everything is meaningless. All go to the same place; all come from dust, and to dust all return. Who knows if the spirit of man rises upward and if the spirit of the animal goes down into the earth?" So I saw that there is nothing better for a man than to enjoy his work, because that is his lot. For who can bring him to see what will happen after him?"3 People do need guidance. It's a fact. But the only guidance that you or I need comes from the Good Shepherd. It's amazing how, if every day, you spend quality time reading your Bible and praying and trusting in God—you don't need any other books. It's as if your need for guidance just drains away and if you do need direction, you look to your Bible and prayer before anything or anyone else. Don't ever put anyone in Jesus' place as your Shepherd.

The Shepherd and His Flock – John 10:1-18

"I tell you the truth, the man who does not enter the sheep pen by the gate, but climbs in by some other way, is a thief and a robber. The man who enters by the gate is the shepherd of his sheep. The watchman opens the gate for him, and the sheep listen to his voice. He calls his own sheep by name and leads them out. When he has brought out all his own, he goes on ahead of them, and his sheep follow him because they know his voice. But they will never follow a stranger; in fact, they will run away from him because they do not recognize a stranger's voice." Jesus used this figure of speech, but they did not understand what he was telling them.
Therefore Jesus said again, "I tell you the truth, I am the gate for the sheep. All who ever came before me were thieves and robbers, but the sheep did not listen to them. I am the gate; whoever enters through me will be saved. He will come in and go out, and find pasture. The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full.
"I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep. The hired hand is not the shepherd who owns the sheep. So when he sees the wolf coming, he abandons the sheep and runs away. Then the wolf attacks the flock and scatters it. The man runs away because he is a hired hand and cares nothing for the sheep.
"I am the good shepherd; I know my sheep and my sheep know me—just as the Father knows me and I know the Father—and I lay down my life for the sheep. I have other sheep that are not of this sheep pen. I must bring them also. They too will listen to my voice, and there shall be one flock and one shepherd. The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life—only to take it up again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command I received from my Father."

Ingrid

- Works Cited -
1: Ecclesiastes 3:15.
2: Jim, The Adventures of Huck Finn, Walt Disney Pictures, 1993.

3: Ecclesiastes 3:18-22.