Go Home, False Teachers

This weekend, John MacArthur got in trouble for associating the words “Beth Moore” with the words “go home.”

That’s right. Two words.

In fact, it was part of a rapid-fire question-and-answer panel he was participating in. The moderator–a former comedian–gave each speaker two words, and they were only allowed to answer with two word responses.

…Now, some people see MacArthur’s statement and the ensuing controversy as the beginning of a dialog. Some of us appreciate the opporunity to listen to MacArthur’s perspective (including his more in-depth comments later in the panel). Some of us enjoy being challenged by theological questions, checking what the Scriptures say, and wrestling with the Spirit that leads to Truth.

But, unfortunately, a large and growing group of Christians don’t need to hear anything on this subject other than “A man told a woman to go Home.”

For them, that’s the END of the discussion rather than the beginning, because criticizing a woman in that tone is–like–automatically hateful and inexcusable…

And even if MacArthur’s Theology is pretty accurate, it doesn’t matter since he’s clearly just attacking Beth Moore for no other reason than being a powerful male who doesn’t want women to have voices… Or something like that, I guess?

I could share comment after comment after comment from women who are acting like their very existence is under attack, just because of what the Bible says about female pastors.  But let’s just consider this Girl Power Speech (written by a woman) that came to my attention yesterday.

I’ve included my notes in bold brackets:

I had to gather my thoughts after I listened to John MacArthur’s remarks on Beth Moore. My initial response was nausea, then anger, then sadness, then fire.
This type of exchange was common where I grew up, so it didn’t surprise me that there are pastors who believe these things. [What things? If you don’t quote him, then how can people judge his words for themselves?]

I have been removed from this type of dialogue for awhile now, so when I heard it again after over a decade, I was shocked and saddened. This is sin, through and through. [No, questioning a woman’s role as pastor is not a sin… Disagreeing with your perspective during the dialog is not sin.]

Let’s be real here, JMac’s remarks were not just shaming Moore. His words showed the state of his heart and was a slam against every woman who steps foot in a church. [Wow…. WOW. So quickly we’ve jumped from judging words that we haven’t seen to judging a HEART we haven’t seen! If all the women in Paul’s church said/wrote stuff like this, I can see why he asked them to be quiet.]

I know that God can and wants to work in John MacArthurs heart and in the hearts of every pastor in that room who laughed at the expense of a godly woman. [Google “begging the question.”]

I also know that God is a God of justice and we must call out lies when we see them for the sake of our friends, mothers, and daughters. [Does that include when it’s our friends, mothers, and daughters who need to be called out?]

When it comes down to it, I care about the opinion of one person; Jesus. [It sounds like you care pretty deeply about John MacArthur’s opinion, but okay…] What did Jesus do?

Scripture shows us that he engaged with women in theological discussions, taught women as his disciples, in His parables he included women (which was unheard of in his time), and he called out the voice of women. [Definitely true!]

Women stayed with Jesus at the cross.
Women were the first to share the good news of the gospel.
In the Bible women were military leaders, apostles, prophets, disciples, helped fund the ministry of the local church, and more.

[All of this is true.  And it has nothing to do with John MacArthur’s criticism of Beth Moore.]

It is time for women in the church to be allowed to freely use their gifts.
It’s time for women who feel called to lead in the church to be allowed to be who God made them to be. [Yes! And it’s time for women to stop confusing “feeling called” with BEING called to do whatever they want.]

Let’s stop forcing these gifted women to look outside of the local church for ministry.
When half of the church is told that who they are and what they have to offer has little value, the enemy applauds. [Nobody is saying Beth Moore has “little value.” But if women think the pastoral role is more “valuable” than other roles–and if they feel entitled to demand that particular job as some human right–then we’ve spotted the problem right here.]

The church needs women too. Full stop.

Let’s pray for men like MacArthur and the pastors in that room, and in the next breath lift up the woman next to us. [I will not “lift up” a false teacher just because she’s female…] 

Women, let’s direct our gaze to Christ and do the opposite of what MacArthur said. Let’s SHOW UP.

Well, I’m here, Ladies.

I’ve shown up because it’s clear that a WOMAN is going to have to help other women see when they’re being led astray by self-centered, envy-fueled Feminism. 🙂

But it’s not just me.

There are other female writers, speakers, and teachers who are part of this conversation–maybe even LEADING (gasp!) the discussion–because we recognize that men have the disadvantage of being assumed “misogynists” as soon as a woman gets offended.

Here’s an open letter to Beth Moore that was written by a half-dozen women last summer, after Beth started Tweeting questionable things about homosexuality. (She never really answered, maybe because she is more focused on what male critics are saying and doesn’t think female critics should be taken seriously?)

And this is an episode of the “Sheologians” podcast, in which a group of women explain the common areas of disagreement between Complimentarians and Egalitarians:

https://www.sheologians.com/women-behind-pulpit-bible-say/

[I strongly recommend you listen to that. ^^^ It’s thought-provoking.]

Women like Summer White and Joy Temby (and Rachel Jankovic and Bekah Merkle and Alissa Childers and Carmen Schober) are SHOWING UP to help their friends, sisters, and daughters become scholars of Scripture and worshipers of God rather than followers of the culture and worshipers of themselves. 

If you’re just going to share your feelings and hunches about a bunch of Bible-sounding stuff, it will be better for all of us if you just go home.

Feminism and Transgenderism Collide

Pete Heck published an article with DISRN today called “The Coming Collision of Feminism and Transgenderism.”

He writes:

“Feminism, by its very definition, seeks the betterment, promotion, and advancement of femininity and the female sex.

Transgenderism, by its very definition, seeks to obscure, blur, and eventually eliminate all boundaries of sex and gender.

How anyone can think that those two positions are compatible defies common sense…

[Several examples of female athletes being punished for saying that male and female bodies are different.]

At some point soon, society is going to have to acknowledge this argument and settle it. Will there continue to be women’s sports? Will there be women’s world records, women’s tees, women’s gold medals, and women’s divisions? Or will science and common sense take a back seat to this latest manifestation of mankind’s rebellion to God’s moral order?

If it’s the latter, let’s be clear it isn’t just Christians and conservatives who are going to be thrown under the bus. We’ll have to make room for the feminists to join us.”

 

You can read the whole article by clicking here.

And, if you have a looooot of patience and a looooooot of time, you can check out the comments on my last blog post: If “Common Courtesy” Won’t Work, then Abusers Will Raise the Stakes.   I wrote the post to explain how abusers try to gain power by making people afraid to say what they really think/believe… They often use verbal intimidating language and “you started it” justification…

Then, for some reason, “Grey” showed up in the comment section (commenting as “Lucy”) to kindly demonstrate this cultural collision that Pete Heck describes.

New thought-cults always start with the claim “Everyone belongs! We hate gatekeeping!” But it quickly progresses to “except those people who [challenge me somehow]” and then it becomes, “Those far-left Lesbians are spreading propaganda, and no one should be their ally.”

Looks like Pete is right. The Feminist-Religion and the Gender-Fluid-Religion cannot coexist.

Click here to see the rest of the comments on my last post.

If “Common Courtesy” Won’t Work, Abusers Will Raise the Stakes

A couple days ago, I shared a real-life example of a common abuse tactic where a person pretends to ask a “simple request,” but then punishes you for disagreeing:

“Today, I very clearly told a man “NO, I am not comfortable with what you’re asking me to do,” but, still, he kept trying to shame me into feeling differently…”

I was talking about Trans folks (and their allies) who say that it’s “common courtesy” to let individuals define their own pronouns and control the English language.

Unfortunately, a dear friend of mine discovered first-hand what happens when you point out that it’s not really a “simple request” so much as a DEMAND which will be met with rage if you fail to meet it.

Do you think an abuser will be grateful for having his or her behavior checked?

Do you think he or she will say, “Wow, I can see where you’re coming from!” or “In the future, I will try to demonstrate the same courtesy for YOUR beliefs that I expect you to have for mine?”

Ha!

But before I share the actual screenshots, I need to offer a LANGUAGE WARNING: Abusers often use very angry words while trying to gain power through intimidation OR in effort to provoke an equally-aggressive response from the person they’re bullying.

So, if it’s hard for you to watch while someone unloads their rage on innocent people who don’t deserve it, please be warned:

Note: I was told just a few days ago, “It’s a simple request for common courtesy to use certain words when you’re asked…”

And now?

“You owe me because YOU are all murderers.” Interesting, isn’t it?

“You brought my anger on yourself…”

“If you don’t want me to use strong language, then learn…”

Is this as obvious for everyone else as it is to me?

Later, a new person tried to calm the agitated Trans individual:

Red also tried again to take the high road by appealing to Grey’s humanity and saying (correctly) that EVERYONE needs grace…

But abusers literally cannot allow others, like Red, to share stories of their own suffering for any amount of time. When Red was vulnerable about injustice she has experienced, Grey could not allower her to keep those feelings without trying to one-up her:

Note: Many abusive individuals DO have histories of being abused, and they often use their stories to justify perpetuating the cycle.

“You’re hurting me…”

“You started it…”

“I’ll stop when you stop deserving it…”

“My rage is warranted…”

“If you loved me, you would listen…”

Do you see how this works, Reader?

They believe this so thoroughly that they have standard responses when an outsider tries to stop the abuse, too! They say things like:

“You don’t understand our relationship.”

“I’m doing this because I care about him/her”

“This is for her own good…”

It’s important to understand that this person actually believes all of the verbal abuse is self-defense.

In Grey’s world, having chronic pain and a “friend” who shares the wrong blog posts is an attack which counts as “torment,”and all of it is a good enough excuse to unleash rage.

Yes, RAGE!

When you try to defend yourself against an abuser, no matter how careful and gentle you are, they will simply double-down on the idea that they are the victims, and the people they are hurting deserve it, somehow.

Abusers will insist, over and over, that what has been done to them is of huge consequence, but what they do to hurt others isn’t that big of a deal…

They will start by demanding “common courtesy.”

But if that doesn’t work to bring you under control, make no mistake: they will take it further.

An Example of a “Grief Sage”

Awhile back, I coined the term “Grief Sage” to describe those people in our culture who try to use their suffering as a Teaching License.

Rather than humbly seeking answers to some of life’s deepest questions, a Grief Sage expects the right to SPEAK THEIR OWN TRUTH, without being questioned…because they’re hurting and no one feels confortable contradicting a hurting person.

The post I wrote on the subject is long, and I took great care to say things gently (while using personal examples of my own grief) so that I wouldn’t upset anyone too much. But I don’t have the space to repost the entire thing here, and I’m aware that sharing a shortened excerpt gives people the opportunity to misread my tone. 

Here’s an excerpt anyway:

“It worries me the way our culture tends to elevate and revere people who are suffering, WHILE THEY ARE IN THE THICK OF IT.

…my frustration comes from the power we give those who want to use their suffering as a Teaching License.  I’m fine with letting a person feel their emotions as long as necessary–but let’s notice the difference between asking “is this God’s will?” and declaring, “this did not happen for a reason.”

There’s a subtle difference between someone who is asking for help and someone inviting you to sit in their lecture hall, while they proudly share their wisdom.

If the person grieving is still in the question-asking stage of their journey, then they’re already processing things, exactly as they should be.

That’s a good thing!

But, when a person demands the final word because she believes that suffering gives her the right to construct her own Truth, she is in a dangerous place.  

Today, I just want to share a brief dialog, to better illustrate how a Grief Sage might behave in the wild.

(For clarity while you’re reading this exchange, “Grief Beyond Belief” is a support group for Atheists who have lost loved ones. The Rules for Conduct page on their website specifically says, “Religious, spiritual or pseudoscientific content is not permitted anywhere on this site…”)

I know some of my readers already recognize the contradictions within a “Grief Beyond Belief” philosophy.   (Namely, that Atheism IS a philosophy–and nobody can stop being religious.)

But, I’m going to highlight just three of the quotes that make this a perfect “Grief Sage” situation:

#1. “You must speak to me respecting MY background–not yours.”   

This is the mantra of the Grief Sage in a nutshell.  “I’m the one hurting, so I’m the one controlling the rules of this dialog.”  (Well, not just her, but also the rest of the Grief Sages over there proudly enforcing a “Code of Conduct” and calling themselves Freethinkers.)  There is no reason given for WHY a person’s Atheism gets blind respect, just because they lost a loved one.  That’s just what they’ve decided and it’s a rule they tell people who dare try to offer condolences the wrong way.

#2.  “They think their religion, out of 4000 others in the world, is superior.”

Atheists love this talking point whether they’re grieving or not.  The problem for them is, they clearly believe their way of thinking is superior as well. This particular Sage actually tells us the point of her whole comment is to help another person do better “in the future,” so she won’t make the same mistake of recommending a video with the word “faith” in it again. (Bad person! You don’t own your words when a Sage is Grieving!)

Further more, she says, “This [tragedy] didn’t happen because a god/goddess needed [my loved one] or because I didn’t believe in [God].”  That’s not the position of a neutral party who is refusing to pick sides in a 4000-religion battle: that’s a Sage who believes very firmly that she has some answers, too, and she’s preaching a powerful sermon.

Which brings me to…

#3.   “I’ve had to become a spokesperson for other people in my position…”

Obviously.   All you have to do is change some words around, and The Sage is saying EXACTLY what I’ve been saying:  “I’m in a position (because I’ve experienced loss) to speak [my wisdom] to others.”

—

Of course, no one dares make any of these points directly TO the Sages, or even in the presence of their Friends/Fans/Worshippers.  We must be careful who’s listening when we ask, “Um, do people become good teachers with true things to say, just because they’ve experienced pain?”

Don’t ask that question in public!

If you do, hundreds of Devotees will rise up to “support” the Grieving Person and defend her from your insensitive words. (Honestly, you might as well recommend a religious movie. THAT’S how dumb you are.) In an effort to help you do better next time, the Supporters will shout:

“How dare you invalidate her feelings?”

or

“People leave the Church because of bigots like you!”

and

“Why can’t you just be nice and let the Sage boss you around, like the rest of us do?”

Nobody wants to add extra pain to someone who is already hurting.  No one wants to contradict a Grieving person, for fear of making their suffering worse…

And so, Grief Sages continually shift entire cultures, leading people astray with their bad philosophies and almost unlimited power.

“Preferred Pronouns” and “Common Courtesy”

Today, I very clearly told a man “NO, I am not comfortable with what you’re asking me to do,” but, still, he kept trying to shame me into feeling differently…

—-

It started with a very clear explanation from Matt Walsh about WHY words matter and WHY going along with the LGBT language-butchering (with “preferred pronouns”) actually harms both the transgendered individuals and the rest of society.  (You get your own name, but not your own pronouns.) You should read the post, but the clincher paragraph is this one:

“Shouldn’t we just be polite and call people by their preferred pronouns, anyway?”

Answer: No. And here’s why.

First,…He/she is essentially saying, “Whenever you refer to me, even if I am 10 thousand miles away, you must abandon the rules of grammar and parrot whatever nonsense I assign to you.” That’s not only absurd — it’s also arrogant in the extreme.

Second, using an incorrect pronoun is not only nonsensical but also dishonest…I am lying. I may be lying with the best intentions, but a lie is a lie.”

The whole article does a great job outlining the objections to the idea that using a person’s “Preferred Prononun” is what any decent human being should do.

There are hundreds of thousands–probably millions–of people who feel genuinely uncomfortable about being asked to affirm a Transgendered Person’s Alternate Reality. 

It causes genuine anxiety to put them in a position where they have to choose between one person’s deeply held convictions and their own… 

Yet, still, right there in the comments of Matt’s article, this guy mocked the deeply held convictions of those millions of people:

Several people jumped in to explain that this actually is NOT harmless and it actually DOES affect their lives if they are expected to agree with untruths in the name of keeping the social peace…

But our beige friend kept insisting that it doesn’t hurt them and they’re only objecting because they’re hateful:

At first, I tried to help Beige understand that small things can have big consequences, by referencing children who want to eat entire boxes of cereal.  I said, “they are little people in a big world” and “it’s such an easy thing to help them be happy” and “it doesn’t hurt me at all” to give them what they’re asking.

But, he didn’t like that comparison, of course, because children and adults are not the same.   Apparently, we cannot learn lessons from people younger than we are…

So, I switched tactics.

It’s true that children are just being CHILDREN when they test boundaries and try to win battles of will with their parents, through crying and demanding and saying “you’re mean!” if they don’t get what they ask…

But the analogy doesn’t work as well when it’s an ADULT using those same tactics to impose his/her will on cis-Society.

Children who don’t take “no” for an answer are being children; but adults who don’t take “no” for an answer are being abusive.  

And that’s when I realized…

…oh my goodness…

…I actually agree with a Feminist premise here.

It’s not fair to tell me to “just be nice” when a person is making me uncomfortable and asking me to violate my conscience.

And I realized….oh my goodness…if LGBT people were the ones being lectured about “basic courtesy” (and told their discomfort is “not a big deal”), they would flip out! They would stand up with the Feminists, who have long been arguing that it’s not “just basic courtesy” to smile at any man who requests one, even if you think it’s not that hard to be a nice person…

No.

“Basic courtesy” does not mean submitting to your expectations for how I should feel.

“Basic courtesy” does not mean making sure your comfort comes before mine and then  adjusting my behavior whenever you decide it’s an easy thing for me.

No.

Only abusive jerks will make a “simple request” and then punish you (by calling you “angry” or “hateful”) if you refuse. And I illustrated that point by using direct quotes from Beige:

 

 

The point is really simple. Every abuser in history genuinely believed he was only asking for “common courtesy”–for something he was ENTITLED to have just for being human–and then he shamed the person who wouldn’t give it to him.

Telling another human, “Hey, come on, this isn’t hurting you,” is CLASSIC abuse coersion. It’s sneaky and slimey and sometimes difficult to catch because the abuser pretends to be asking for permission–he pretends to take the moral high ground.

But, when you try to decline you will discover there are consequences. He doesn’t take “no” very kindly.

I’m not “bent out of shape” or “discriminatory” or struggling with “disdain/hate,” you gaslighting imbecile.

You’re simply struggling to accept that no means no.

I will retain my right to my own thoughts and feelings, even if you make sarcastic comments or use shaming language and imply that I’m not a very Nice Girl.

No. Transgendered people (and their allies) do not get to decide what “easy, simple, harmless” thing they’re entitled to receive from anyone.