Call for Prayer

So I have this dilemma.

Its called the Student Loan dilemma.

Fiance and I have determined that until my student debt is paid off, I will be working part time to pay them off.

I see no end.

I need prayers for wisdom in managing my finances and time, peace of mind while paying off $30,000 in student debt, and strength of will in making it through work and home life.

I figure that if I can scrape together $2000/month between now and baby born, that'll knock it down to $20,000. $1000/month after that will take me 2 years.

I can do it, right? Or should I just be more practical?

Why do Women Fall for Jerks?

I finally stumbled on the answer to this question.

In a movie theatre.

Narrator:
A girl will never forget the first boy she ever liked.

Queue 4-year-old girl being pushed over by a 4-year-old boy
Little girl: "Why did you do that?"
Little boy: "Because you smell like dog poo!"

Tears and running to mommy, mommy's response was this little tidbit of pathetic "wisdom":
"Honey, do you know why that little boy did those things? Because he likes you."

That's the beginning of our problem. We are all programmed to believe that if a guy acts like a total jerk, that means he likes you.

I have to go see this movie. It's He's Just Not That Into You With 2 of my girlfriends that went for 19+ years not knowing "does he like me, does he not", falling for the wrong guys (but never dating) only to find ourselves all getting married within a year of eachother.

I've never read the book, but the movie kinda looks cute for girls which kinda watches the misadventures and mistakes of attempting to fall in love =p And not quite succeeding...for some (not so odd) reason.

Altars and Diapers

I opened my eyes this morning to feel kicking somewhere in my lower abdomen (he's kicking me right now, actually).

I laid there with my eyes closed, my hand on my tummy, a smile of contentment as I left the Bride's Room, traced the steps that I've walked countless times to the Sanctuary, dropped a bouquet of flowers at the Memorial behind the church, and continued my little procession to the back door of the church.

There, my dad met me, and I knocked on the church door. My youngest brother opened it and asked me if I was sure I wanted to marry this man. "ABSOLUTELY!" was my reply, causing laughter among the congregants who heard.

Then the organ started that march. And all the pews groaned as they relinquished the weight of all their seated guests. And I walk into the sanctuary...and I'm about to round that corner to head to the front of the church...and right before I get there, that line from How Beautiful by Twila Paris echoes in my mind:

How beautiful the radiant bride
Who waits for her groom
With his light in her eyes

And there he is. Standing at the front of the church. With a smile as big as the sea.

*kick*

Ok, so its not going to be everything I've dreamed about since I was 13...but I don't think its possible for ANYTHING to ruin that day (that's only 8 days away!!!)

Alas, dreaming seems to be only conducive to my bed these days. Outside of it, I feel like a zombie marching to the Death March as I plod through the remaining 4 days of work (TGIF!!!) I anticipate Christmas Afternoon, with belly full of mom's yummy goodness, when I get to take a LONG and (IMHO) well deserved nap before New Mom feeds me dinner (fingers crossed for her wonderful twice-baked potatoes). Then perhaps I'll feel better :)

Lately, as I go through the daily routine of work, I've found myself apprehensive at my parenting skills. Specifically, discipline. I know I can do the playing thing...especially the "let baby explore" thing. But discipline? All these do's and don't's have me questioning my ability to do this. But then I have to remind myself that I really am well equipped for this.

I mean, I'm no push-over. I may come across as such on occassion, but really I'm not. I know its different, but I seemed to have done really well with my cat. Though as soon as new hubby is gone for travel after the honeymoon, some much needed RE-discipline is in store for that cranky, jealous, feisty Kitty.

And that's something else that concerns me. She pounces, bats, and FIGHTS with the man when he's around. But as soon as its just the two of us, she's sweet as pie! I'm only a little nervous how she's going to handle a baby. I know she's good with kids...she handled my best friend's baby superbly! But I don't know how she's going to take to MY new baby. After all, Kitty had been the love of my life for 18 months before new hubby came along. The only other person she had to share me with was her "daddy" (my last bf). She gets along great with him =p Good thing he'll be taking care of her while I'm on my honeymoon =p

If that's what cats are like during a "divorce", I don't even care to imagine what it would be like with kids. Luckily, I have no intention of going there =p

Baby Name Baby Name

Hmmm...

I'm a german, blonde, blue eyed (well...one eye is blue)...

Perhaps THIS would make a good name?

Or maybe not...

I read once that courts can deny a request for a baby name when making the Birth Certificate official.

Where were they on this one (or should I say 3)?

Industrialization and the Decline of Families?

I found this article and it got me wondering.

Lets see if I can come up with an order of events that seems to make sense:

1) Industrialization leads to a more demanding work environment.
2) In a culture where men are the primary workforce, it leads to absent fathers in the home due to long working hours.
3) Absent spouses leads to disgruntled marriages and *somewhat* higher divorce rates.
4) *Somewhat* higher divorce rates leads women to seek financial independence prior to a marriage that might fail.
5) Additional bodies in the workforce (now men and women) leads to increased industrialization.
6) Increased industrialization leads to a demanding work environment on the entire populace.

In America, (7) is thriving day cares, single mommies (no hubby to worry about) and child support when poorly nurtured relationships fall to pieces due to increased work hours and an entire society and culture with backwards priorities.

In Japan, (7) is men who still expect the traditional lifestyle and a working culture that doesn't allow it. And to couple that, now a society that REQUIRES female workers WHILE married...or their industrialized society will collapse from the lack of labor. They are stuck in a perpetual circle.

I wonder if America would be able to survive without a female workforce. I think they could. I don't know if Japan could, though.

And from what I know of work + family-life, I think I'd die if stuck in the work environment I'm in now while trying to care for a household, children, and making time for the quality of relationship I want with my husband.

Its TOO demanding.

I'll trade in my badge for an apron and a vacuum cleaner any day.

Blatant Inconsistency

I seriously detest when so-called "Christians" blatantly disregard scripture and decide they are themselves God's gift to mankind and its up to them to side with the secular world against other Christians.

I can understand trying to come up with an argument that doesn't use scripture per se in order to use against secular arguments, but why are they so blatantly inconsistent with scripture by taking the clearly unscriptural position?

God created mankind male and female. Male and Female he created them.

Oh, but animals have homosexual relations, so THAT'S natural, too.

In a fallen world, sure it is. But CLEARLY that was not God's design.

Male and Female he created them. He created mankind - the crown of his creation.

Wait...are we different than animals?

I can hear it now - no. Which is biologically and anatomically correct. But they are so quick with that answer that they don't ask themselves and take into consideration their own beliefs. If I'm biologically and anatomically an animal, why didn't Jesus die for ALL of creation and not just humans?

What makes ME different than an animal that God would die for me?

And go ahead and answer that question using a secular argument. I don't mind. Because at least you'd be consistent with your beliefs.

The Paradox

I always saw the people that comprised the liberal left to be the artists, the philosophers. The ones that questioned and thrived on deviating from the norm, presenting questions for the conservative right to be challenged to come up with good answers to.

They're the ones that move us forward while the conservatives keep those new, revolutionary ideas within solid boundaries rather than racing headlong into something that wasn't well thought out. Conservatives stop and analyze. They apply logic to the creativity. They apply standards to it. If this new creativity is worthy of pursuit, they join the drive...only they hold it back and give it reason without the headlong crash over a thought-less cliff of revolutionary ideas.

And I see that the liberals have moved quite head-long to their cliff. Liberal creativity and questioning cannot exist in the government that liberal minds think they want. They haven't stopped to analyze and apply logic to their creative and innovative ideas of a liberal government.

Conservatives have. And they know. They know that the creativity that makes America unique in the fields of Entertainment, Medicine, and Technology can only thrive under a conservative government. The more liberal the government, the more suppressed creativity and questioning becomes. It has a more decisive role in how you run your life, in what your allowed to do, in what your allowed to think.

One of the most liberal governments out there consists of China - a country that isn't allowed to question their government. Is not allowed to question what they are taught. Is not allowed to question what they are told to believe.

Do liberals really want this? Or have they just not stopped to analyze? After all, its not the liberals role to analyze. That's the conservative, logic-confined, religion-confined types to analyze and ensure it's good. They have found it lacking. And rather than work cooperatively together, we have completely and totally split at the seams.

The Threat

It looms always over me (unless I am medicated) - that ever persistent feeling of nausea.

It just won't go away on its own! And as I struggle to keep what I just ate down (especially the pepperoni hot pocket that I know will taste just horrible in a 2nd go around), I find my lips pursed and my brow wrinkled.

After sitting this way for 2 hours, I no longer wonder my cat has this sour expression when she looks at me - she just mimics my facial expressions.

And my mouth and head are starting to hurt.

Can I just go to sleep until this is over?

No Place Like Home

You ever find a church that just FEELS right?

It's like putting on a pair of well-worn gloves. Comfy, solid, warm.

I found that church. 2 years ago when my parents decided to do this new family tradition and go to Washington DC every Christmas just to keep the family together. My sister had married in February of 2006 and had moved to DC sometime that summer with her husband. Mom & Dad (especially Dad) didn't like the idea of the family not being together for Christmas. So, we all packed into Mom's new Ford Explorer and drove up to DC for the weekend.

My parents took us to Truro Church for the Christmas Eve service. If I could explain the amount of JOY and PEACE and absolute solidity of that church to you, I would. Active young adults that participate in the service (in REAL roles...like organist). Preaching that brings scripture home to you in a relevant way without putting you to sleep. High church liturgy and eucharist with a PHENOMENAL choir. A choir that sings all hymns in 4 part harmony with descants, sings all worship songs in 4 part harmony with an electric guitar and drums. Yes...Organ, electric guitar, and drums. You never knew classic hymns could sound so joyful and upbeat, did you?

They held to the sacredness of the service while bringing home to you the reason for rejoicing.

It felt like home. I was going to relocate myself to DC just so I could become a member of that church. Then I started dating someone here in Florida. I fell in love. Now I'm getting married.

Now I have to find a church HERE that takes liturgy seriously without sacrificing worship (which seems to be a really tricky thing to do).

And I find myself comparing every church with Truro. Time for me to stop. Today, I went to a church with good solid preaching, took liturgy seriously, and has a very good choir. Its very high churchy and extremely classical (no new music for them), but it was good. No Truro, but I'll continue visiting DC twice a year to get my Truro fix.

Fireproof - Why I don't want to see it...

I was pretty frustrated when Boundless wrote up their very profuse endorsement of this movie.

I just listened to the Plugged-In guy and what he had to say about movies that are out and I think I finally can answer Ted's question to me on why I am so opposed to it.

Here it is - I can not stand the blanket approval given to something without question.

Yeah, this movie is put out by a church. Woohoo! But does that mean its going to be perfect?

Countless times, I've seen Plugged-In and Boundless come down REALLY hard on movies that were good with some negative elements (I'm not talking about Sex in the City, here, as I completely agree with Boundless's views on that particular movie...but Prince Caspian and The Dark Knight?)

And yet this movie gets a free pass? No where will you hear tell of the fact that there's an adulterous relationship going on in the movie. No where will you hear tell of the husband's porn addiction. Lets gloss over those for the sake that this movie is about redeeming marriage through thick and thin.

Oh...but yes...when any other movie has those elements (even for the sake of the plot line) the movies are painted with a red X and people are told "not recommended".

Never mind that Prince Caspian managed to hold on to the theme of trusting in that which you can't always see. Never mind that The Dark Knight had an incredibly profound story of self-sacrifice with the intent to redeem.

I just sometimes really wish Boundless and other Evangelical Christian mainstream outlets could actually manage to let go of their biases long enough to question. Long enough to seek truth and be willing to acknowledge when something that comes from a place they "should" endorse might actually be wrong, might actually have a negative element, might actually be worth questioning instead of blindly accepting.

Maybe that's why I was so vehemently opposed to Fireproof.

Too Picky? Or just careful?

I found an interesting little bit of info...

Baby Center conducted a poll and polled over 22,000 women who had children over the age of 35.

The reason(s) they gave for waiting is not what you'd think...

7% waited for an established career.

The overwhelming winner, though, was a whopping 45% to waiting to find the right "one". Second in the winning was a 10% on not wanting to wait, but couldn't conceive.

Now, either the answers are bogus, times have changed, or some people really have no idea why women are waiting... Although maybe finding the right one has been largely eclipsed by the career, though the career was never the primary reason...

What these women thought was worse was also interesting -
Only 32% thought it was worse to end up infertile than to have children when emotionally or financially not ready.

I'd agree, but I wonder at their definitions of "emotionally or financially ready".

I somehow think they are a wee bit unrealistic.

Great Quotes

Lately, I've been bombarded by some great quotes (most from Smallville).

Its amazing how one disk can contain such a treasure trove of great things to say :)

Pardon my word for wordage, they aren't completely accurate...except the last one.

Sometimes, you need to treat feelings like dollars and put them in your piggy bank cuz you can't afford that bike yet. And when the time is right, you crack open that piggy bank to discover that instead of saving up for a bike, you were really savin' for a Harley.
~Lois Lane to Clark Kent concerning his feelings for Lana Lang

Experience is overrated. Especially in Washington.
~Lionel Luther to Martha Kent when discussing her qualifications for Senator

So this is how liberty dies. With thunderous applause.
~George Lucas

Role Reversal

Today, the expansion pack for World of Warcraft was released.

I used to be a WoW addict. I stopped playing about a month before my fiance and I started dating.

I met a lot of my guildies in real life and loved it. One of them is coming to my wedding :) (She better, anyway...)

Lately, I've been really missing my tanking awesomeness with my little warrior and desperately missing all the friends I made.

Went in to Best Buy last night and I made a comment about it to the man...he told me "You are never playing that ever again."

/sigh.

Quote of the Day

Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job.

~ Douglas Adams

A Silver Lining

I have Hope for Change.

Regardless of how good a president President-Elect Obama will be, there WILL be change after these 4 years.

He will either do really well and the change that HE is promising will come to pass, or he'll do so crappy that there is no way we can move forward without MAJOR political reform.

Is Now the Time...

To fly the flag half-mast?

I kinda knew this was gonna happen, but I was really hoping it wouldn't.

Ah well...we'll find out in 4 years whether America made the worst mistake of its young pathetic life.

Life Goals

I should really take what I write here and share it with my husband...

I wonder how surprised he'd be when he realizes that leaving me at as a SAHM will NOT make me a "Desperate Housewife" (He blames idle hands for their desperation).

1) Have a dozen children (this has been nixxed because he wants no more than 2. We compromised at 3)

2) Homeschool those children or volunteer at their school as a tutor.

3) Get involved with women's ministries at a church.

4) Start a women's choir at the church (have you noticed that choirs are vanishing and in their place, you have a male guitarist and lead vocalist, a male pianist, and 10 female back up singers??? And NONE of them sing harmony...PLEASE give them something better to do...)

5) Volunteer at a women's crisis pregnancy center and take courses in counseling.

6) Volunteer as a counselor for post-abortion women.

7) Start a type of home that helps women with many children and no financial support (they exist when they can't afford to go through channels for child support or they are married to a guy in just as much of a predicament as themselves) to develop the skills they need to find jobs that may help bring in a little added (and needed) cash flow.

There was a girl who worked for $5.15/hr as a concessionist who had a new baby boy. Her husband had just lost his job and her parents couldn't afford to let her live at home. The only job she could get was as a concessionist, even though she was a hard worker - why? Because she didn't have the skill set needed for a job that could use her brains and work ethic and she couldn't afford the training needed for it. She ended up pregnant again and was forced to find something that paid more. She left our work to work at Long John Silver's for $5.50/hr.

Some access to affordable computer training (free?) and affordable business attire (donated?) coulda landed her a job making at least $7.00/hr or more.

8) Operate/Open/Volunteer at an Orphanage and/or do Foster Care.

I'd adopt, but I'd rather help provide kids that are well cared for and well taught to people who can't have their own. I'm quite capable of providing my own :)

And considering my little issue with the Twin Gene, one pregnancy is all I need to provide more kids than I can handle =p

Introducing: The Husband Headache

I'll start with:
I HATE THIS COMMERCIAL

I'll end with:

I'm ready for the world to acknowledge that women are not always right, that they are not above reproach, that they have an ego larger than any man's that prevents them from admitting to wrong and being reproachable but you STILL need to tell us when we're being bitchy and/or wrong.

Please stop letting women get away with EVERYTHING.

And why is it that the majority of men LET us get away with it? I have yet to figure that one out...

Even men with balls and the strength of mind to say it often refuse to - why?!?!?

The Discipline of Love

Its amazing how the things you were told to do when you were younger without being given any reason for them can come back and haunt you years later...only with reason that was never revealed to you by parents who love you.

I remember getting into countless fights with my sister. We'd scream at eachother, kick, bite, tear eachother's hair out...ok, never that bad - mom usually got in the middle before it reached such heights! But we didn't get along that well. We still don't. Every time we'd get into a fight, mom would make us go and tell eachother we were sorry and that we loved the other.

I remember gawking at mom - "I have to tell her I love her?!?! WHY?!?!?!"

In my mind, if I didn't feel like it, I shouldn't say it - I thought I'd be lying. My mother's response? "You WILL tell her and you WILL mean it."

I remember years later how it felt to feel a thousand miles away from God - I felt like he wasn't anywhere near me. My head told me he was, my heart said he wasn't. I knew that the right thing to do was to continue in my discipline of being his child even though I didn't feel much like his child. Read my bible, make good decisions, think on good things.

It dawned on me yesterday in a way that hadn't really occurred to me before - I'm giving my life to one man for the rest of eternity. I'm promising to love him through thick and thin. What makes me think I'm capable of that when I can't seem to remain civil with my siblings for more than a few hours at a time? And our relationship is going to be MUCH more intimate than that of me and my siblings. Sure, I get to choose my husband whereas I had very little option in siblings, but after this decision of "I do", I no longer have a choice. He is my HUSBAND.

And the lessons taught me by my mother while having to tell my sister I loved her even when I didn't feel like it washed over me.

There will be moments when love is no longer a feeling. There will be moments when I will detest him and want to scream at him and tear his hair out. There will be moments when I don't want to have anything to do with him.

But through ALL of that, one thing will always be true - I WILL love him and I WILL mean it...because that's what I'm promising him, that's what I'm promising God, that's what I'm promising our family and friends, that's what I'm promising our children.

And in those moments when the entire world feels like its caving in on me, that's when the strength of my love for him will be on full display. Not when its easy, not when everything is beautiful...but when I don't "feel" it.

Florida Fall Memories

I don't know what it is about this time of year that has my spirits so incredibly high.

The weather just turned to colder (high of 65 today with a low of 44 tonight). Normally, I can't stand the cold. But the last two days I've been dying to be outside at all hours.

I've been trying to think of WHY I have this feeling of contentedness with this weather and I think I'm realizing what it is.

From barbeques with Hot Dogs in the back yard, to soccer matches in the field across the street... There were Football games and madrigal dinner rehearsals in high school.

I remember outings to the park with the biggest wooden play ground in Ocala. I remember my birthday parties and getting ready for Christmas. Its the time of year of camping and canoeing, being harrassed by my cousin, sitting down to delicious Thanksgiving Dinner at my Uncle's, and flee markets for little kid affordable christmas shopping :)

I remember walks to the Tobacco Barns, hikes through the woods searching for wild boars (I do not recommend doing this in an area that actually has a risk of finding one...). I remember tree climbing and just curling up with a book and a blanket on my grannie's front porch.

And...this is actually Christmas Weather for Florida...so I'm reminded of Christmas presents, learning to juggle, playing with bubbles, cousins jumping in the pool (yeay for growing up in chicago and switzerland...). Baking cookies and decorating them, Advent dinners, hand bell rehearsals, nursing home rounds, and christmas pageants.

I remember acting out nursery rhymes for parents, aunts, and uncles with cousins and siblings. I remember cold toes, smores, tree houses, and bon fires. Jumping in leaves, pancake breakfasts in the motor home, cranky grandparents, and the coolest cookies you ever did see.

I really hope that I can capture for my own children the spirit of this time of year the way my family did for me. So well done, that I walk out the door and try to think - what is it that I should be doing right now?

I vote for smores :)

For Learner

I'll add to this as I can, but you can start with this blog post I wrote a while back.

I'm not certain how well written it is or if it is viable - the only comment I got on it was from a guy who knows very little about scripture and christianity =p

I do like studying world religions. Islam is not mentioned in this because it is not an ancient world religion and, in fact, adopted heavily from Judaic history in its religious formation (again, Islam was first introduced around 600 c.e - 400 years before the crusades began).

All Those Roads

Zoroastrianism - Wikipedia
Lists the tenets of zoroastrianism as belief in one universal and transcendental God, the uncreated creator to whome all worship is directed.

Ahura Mazda's creation is truth and order.

Active participation in life is essential to ensure happiness and to keep "chaos at bay" - meaning actively participating in good thoughts, good words, and good deeds (sounds a lot like something christianity teaches, though not worded quite the same way)

Ahura Mazda will ultimately prevail, at which point the universe will undergo a cosmic renovation and time will end. At the end of time, a savior figure will bring about a final renovation of the world, in which the dead will be revived.

History of Zoroastrianism

This site gives a very brief history of Zoroastrianism. I guess I'm more prone to fall in line with conservative zoroastrians in that I think there was some of this theology alive and well in the Babylonian Empire at the time of Israel's exile there (time of Daniel). Like I say in my post, this is when apocalyptic writings are first introduced and it's also about this time that I think the idea of a savior is introduced into hebrew writings... even though the wording in the pentateuch is very "plural" when referring to God.

Overall, Zoroastrianism more closely resembles Christianity out of any other world religion. I realize this doesn't make it true, but it still holds that Judaism probably learned a lot from it. And given my post, I think you'll understand where I go from there =p

I guess something else I should add so you get a better idea of why I'm going here with this -

I strongly believe that the location of Israel is strategic. For such a small and "insignificant" nation, it has been exposed to the greatest civilizations of histroy...and they all knew about Israel. I strongly believe that God chose this spot for Israel so that he could display for the rest of the world what he was all about through his covenant with Israel. And I think that is what actually happened.

However, I also think putting Israel in that location also provided Israel with exposure to other peoples and their beliefs. Especially during Exile - first with Egypt, several times with Babylon, and again with Persia. The nature of Judaism never really changed - it maintained itself when surrounded by Asher, Baal, Ra, and Isis. However, it still managed to pick up some crucial elements...and I don't think it was by accident.

Purpose of Marriage

I had a debate with my cube mates about the ammendment to the Florida Constitution about marriage being between one man and one woman.

The concensus of my cube is that "why do we care?!?!?" Well, that depends on what you think the purpose of marriage is...

Is it
1) The institution in which a couple finds satisfaction solely in their own relationship, therefore having no impact on anyone else in a culture or society
2) The institution that provides a stable environment and economy for raising children, therefore providing a strong nucleus that helps create a stable society

So...when you give your answer, also provide whether you think the Government should endorse such an institution and why you think that =p

In God I Put my Trust

I wrote this a long time ago (last June I think). I was going through a lot of pain when I heard this song...as well as engaging in a debate on Abraham's sacrifice on a literature forum... When I heard this song, something just CLICKED. I don't know how it happened, but it just did.

So now, while discussing abortion on the last post and writing about trusting God, I remembered it...

Wake up little Isaac
And rub your tired eyes
Go and kiss your mama
We’ll be gone a little while
Come and walk beside me
Come and hold your papa’s hand
I go to make an altar
And to offer up my lamb

I waited on the Lord
And in a waking dream He came
Riding on a wind across the sand
He spoke my name
“Here I am”, I whispered
And I waited in the dark
The answer was a sword
That came down hard upon my heart

Chorous:
Holy is the Lord
Holy is the Lord
And the Lord I will obey
Lord, help me I don’t know the way

So take me to the mountain
I will follow where You lead
There I’ll lay the body
Of the boy You gave to me
And even though You take him
Still I ever will obey
But Maker of this mountain, please
Make another way

You know, imagine how difficult it would be to trust God enough to take up your own child to sacrifice. Now lets put this in perspective. We have an idea of God's nature. Abraham had none. Looking back through the Bible, we can get an idea of what God would or would not do, though we don't have a perfect understanding. Abraham couldn't do that, and yet, thinking God was just like any of the other idols that required human sacrifice, took his son up the mountain to sacrifice him. He trusted God. He put all his trust in God. He had absolutely no clue what to expect, but God said do it, and so Abraham did it. God had said he would make a mighty nation out of Abraham through his children with Sarah, and yet he trusted God and went to sacrifice his and Sarah's only child out of obedience.

So, having a better idea about who God is then Abraham did, why do we still seem to cling to things that God asks us to give up? We know that God has a plan for us, that he has promised to build us up and not destroy us, yet we constantly respond with stubborness when he asks us to sacrifice something and trust him. He's not asking us to sacrifice our first born or any other human being, yet we still struggle with obeying him. Why?

Since when did God ask us to do something that would cause us harm and destroy us? Why can't we trust him? Why can't we rest in the promises he has given us? Why can't we just give up our desires in exchange for trusting and desiring him?

What is our Goal?

When fighting against abortion, I have to question what our goal is.

1) Is it to avenge the lives that have already been taken?
2) Is it to prevent future lives from being taken?
3) Is it to punish the mothers that have had abortions?
4) Is it to protect women who would have abortions from committing an atrocious act?

Honestly, I think people over-focus on 1, 2, and 3.

I'm not certain what happens to babies when they die, but I believe in a just and merciful God and I trust that he'll do whatever is right - even if my feeble, limited mind can't comprehend the "rightness" of what is done.

When it comes to abortion, for some reason my heart is more for the woman than the lost child. Don't get me wrong, I feel VERY strongly for the lost child...but its much much more for the mother.

We treat women who have had abortions with so much contempt, consigning them to death - "You've committed a SIN!!! The penalty of which is DEATH!!!" Good, you know your bible. Let's see if you remember the rest of the gospel.

Do they do this because they are concerned for future lives at stake? Somehow, I don't think that's what they are thinking...rather, they're thinking more about the life that's already been taken. What do you plan to accomplish here? Revenging that child's life? Are you a holy crusader for God, now, cursing people to hell for the sins they have committed? YES, what she did was WRONG! But that life is already gone, now. Revengence is God's and God's alone - leave it in his hands. But I believe the rest of scripture says that he LOVES us and wants us to be with him so much that he gave up his own son for us.

There's a life still living in spite of the loss of an innocent child at the hands of a not-so-innocent adult. God wants her life as much as he wanted that child to live and grow. But we can't bring back what is already lost...however, we can fight for that which has yet to be saved. If you want to be a crusader for God, fight hell for the heart of the woman who's mind and heart has been decieved with the worst lies to leave the spiked tongue of Satan's mouth.

Show her that if she acknowledges that what she did was wrong, than new life is at her fingertips...all she need do is repent of her actions and embrace Christ's cleansing gift. Don't force her to acknowledge death with no hope for life. God NEVER did that. Even as he sent Adam and Eve away from his garden forever to face the gaping mouth of death, he left a promise for New Life.

Are you willing to fight for her, too? Because she needs life just as much as the unborn child.

What I REALLY want to say...

There's a fun discussion going on over at Boundless

I don't agree with Driscoll, that its a MUST to have men be the providers (meaning no SAHD's whatsoever), though I don't think that's completely what he's arguing for. However, I think its a VERY big mistake to allow SAHD's to become the norm and not just the occassional exception.

#96 on was my first post...this is what I want to post, but decided against it. Let #96 speak for itself.

Oh...

More to go with #96...

There are a ton of modern conveniences that have been invented over the years.

We have the refrigerator, CD players, and computer chips...

I read somewhere not so long ago that communities that were led by women (matri-focal societies) were not technologically advanced like their patriarchal counterparts. The societies focused on the men being primary care-givers. Eventually, the societies would die out.

Did you know the vast majority of the technology created (its not that women aren't SMART enough to do this) would have been near impossible to do if relying on women to carry us forward to the future?

First of all, heavy machinery is not safe.

Second of all, radiation is a common hazard in the development of the vast majority of our technology.

Maybe its just THIS culture and THIS society that doesn't get this, but previous cultures and societies placed GREAT importance on protecting the children of that society - why? Because they were the ones that would make sure the civilization would continue growing. Children were taken more seriously as an investment...especially healthy ones - mainly because the death rate of infants was so high (probably as high as our pre-birth death rates...)

Everything would be done that was known to be done by all involved in the society to ensure that healthy, hardy children were produced - including protecting women capable of having and raising young children (while the man worked).

Its odd that our society is so willing to go backwards and completely reverse itself. Even jared in #95 is willing to let it reverse itself... let women work. When they stop, I'll step up and get a job. But until then, I'm staying home - cuz its damn hard getting a job with my skill set cuz I have to compete with so many women.

Seriously, there's a reason Madame Curie was one of the ONLY women to pioneer radiology...

Why do I feel a need to add to this?

First of all, I'm not saying men are incapable of raising children. I am, however, saying they are incapable of bearing and nursing children =p (I'm correct here, right? Or did I miss something in Biology class? The Pregnant "Man" notwithstanding...)

I AM saying that society would not be able to have made the kinds of technological progress (or intellectual progress) if women were solely in charge - because until VERY recently, progress included dangerous work not suitable to a pregnant, breastfeeding woman (I'm not talking about paper pushing and desk jobs). Which, if you're a woman (back then) and being pregnant about 12-14 times, maybe 3-4 miscarriages, 1 stillborn, and 2 early-infant deaths, you'd be out of commission for 3 months for each miscarriage (1 full year), 9 months for the still born and infant deaths each (27 more months) + 3 months for each early infant death (breast-feeding...) (30 months now?) and then 1 yr + 9 months for pregnancy and weaning for 7 kids...lets be generous and say she'd get pregnant about halfway through the first year...apprx 7 years on top of 3.5 years - THAT'S 10 YEARS OF STALE MATE IN WORK OUTPUT!!!

Oh...but wait...they could just NOT have kids...

Its a good think we have patriarchal societies...let me tell you...

Cuz of them, we have buildings, houses, roads, cars, electricity (in light bulbs), cd players, tv's, radios, microwaves, refrigerators...the list could go on and on and on...

The Song of the Shrew

Kiss Me Kate is playing in Orlando. My fiance leaves next week for 2 weeks of travel and I desperately want him to take me to see it before the show closes next week.

Because I'm starting to doubt whether I will get to see this wonderful musical based off of my favorite play-wright's Taming of the Shrew, I've been dabbling in some You-Tube searches of songs (I have a strange feeling the show I'm going to see is of much higher caliber than what I'll find on the tube...)

Among the searches, I yielded the deleterious I Hate Men sung by the infamous Katherine, whose shrewish voice yields such a tasty phrase as "For husbands are a boring lot that only give you bother..."

And then there's darling little Bianca, with her lovely little antics, singing her declaration of love to Tom, Dick, or Harry - she'd take all THREE!

If you know the story, forgive the recap, but here it goes - Bianca is the youngest of two (Katherine being her older sister) in a society that requires the oldest to marry before the youngest. Woe be to lusty Bianca, whose older sister thoroughly despises men and refuses to EVER marry. A suitor is on the horizon, though, and together with Bianca and dear father, schemes to match Katherine with a suitor that will not take no for an answer - and the story continues with Katherine's re-education on the importance, necessity, and desirability of...men.

I just realized while thinking random thoughts how much this story is like everything I've been struggling with since stumbling onto Anakin Nice-Guy's and MLV's blogs. My issue with them was that the stance they took on marriage hindered any progress - specifically for the ones that actually WANT to marry and actually do the right thing as wives.

And then this thought comes up - hey...me and girls like me are the Biancas of modern society...and our big sister that's ruining our chances at marital success are all the feminists and women that willfully tear down their husbands by refusing them access to their children and sapping them for all they're worth.

I wonder if its possible to find Petruchios willing to marry all those Katherines and re-educate them so the rest of the unmarried Biancas have a shot at some marital success ;)

Qualified or Not?

I'm not a big Sarah Palin fan, to be quite honest.

It has my dad's toes curled to think that I may not vote for McCain/Palin. Nevermind that I've made it quite OBVIOUS that I will NOT (absolutely with no question) put my vote to that horrific man named Obama.

God help me if I ever choose to vote for him.

There are a lot of duplicitous opinions out there concerning Obama and McCain.

Here's an opinion I find very duplicitous.

My question is: Would any of these corporate success stories hire a similarly thin-resumed job candidate (male or female) to be their number two? To run their multi-billion dollar banking division? To launch their satellite into space? We've all interviewed the candidates who've been pushed too rapidly up the ladder, who can talk the talk but can't really walk the walk.

No, not a fan of dear Mrs. Palin and her Lipstick Campaign, but are you willing to give your number one slot in your multi-billion banking division to someone with a resume slim enough to rival that of Sarah Palin?

What good business sense have you really? Especially since your number 2 does significantly less (almost nada) in the running of your corporation while the number 1 is running the entire show...

I Know Why Women Nag

Fear.

Such a simple and humble answer, isn't it?

Seriously, I've promised myself to never nag...and the fact that I'm marrying a guy who strongly enjoys saying things simply for my reaction is not going to help me keep that promise.

He's a very social guy. Previously, he's stated he wants to entertain friends in his home when he buys a house (Football parties, cook-offs, etc). Of course, ALL of this sounds like fun to me, as well, and I'm looking forward to getting to play hostess and throw on my new NY Giants jersey (I must tell him that I want that for my birthday) and waddle around with a growing tummy, replenishing popcorn bowl, ice bowl, and enjoying the Super Bowl on our giant TV Screen (that he absolutely wants) with all our friends.

Or experimenting with my cooking skills and inviting friends over for a friendly poker game, serving stuffed shrimp or home-made mini quiche...

When I mentioned to him today that I want to get addresses to start inviting people to an engagement/bridal party and so that I have them for a HOUSEWARMING party, he said "Absolutely Not!" He didn't want all those people in his new house making a mess (that he will have to help clean...). I found myself wondering if I really knew him...

The need to keep him in the category that he was in when I agreed to marry him is strong...its not that I won't love him any less...its not that I don't think I'll love him if he changes...its that I like who is right now... I already KNOW this is easy for me to love... Its like the song by Sara Groves called "Painting Pictures of Egypt" - we want to go back to where we've been, even with its faults and all, because the future feels so scary...simply because its unknown. We don't know what to expect, we don't know what we'll find. It could be amazing and SO much better than anything we could have imagined...but it could also be painful, scary, and dark. And we all know its going to be a little bit of both...

So, I find myself insisting (strongly) on him letting us throw parties in our new home... not nagging...not yet... but somehow it felt wrong.

Even though it turns out he was just messing with my head...

The History of Women

First of all, I am NOT a feminist. Just because I actually studied history and (whether they were written by feminists or not) I happen to go with what has been presented to me until I or someone else provides me evidence contrary to what I've found doesn't make me a feminist. It makes me a student. If someone reading this has other resources for me, give them to me.

I'm writing this because someone accused me of being a feminist because I dared voice something along these lines on a comment that he failed to publish. Lets not even dare mention that he posts comments that he can come up with a rebuttal for and not the ones he can't. He just published a comment and responded to it, claiming that I had no rebuttal for him because I have no point. To protect my intellectual honesty, this is my response to him.

Where do I start, its a bit long to cover all of history, but where the hell does one start?

There have been periods of time that I'm 100% certain of that had a prevalence of feministic thought - The Etruscans were largely (as Elusive Wapiti would say) matrifocal. They weren't a strong civilization, so I won't call it a matriarchy. They were, though, egalitarian with a strong leaning towards matriarchy. They are the forerunners of the Romans - who, at first, were incredibly patriarchal and the women didn't have much place in society - much like parts of Greece. However, there is a period of time in Roman history where the women became much more extraverted - lesbianism became more prevalent, abortion - both in-utero and infanticide - became more common... strangely, right before the fall - and i wonder how many of those insane and corrupt emperors had feminist mothers?

Another civilization, Greece, has an interesting history of feminist thought. The Spartans were LARGELY patriarchal, where women had absolutely no role in society except raising kids to the ripe old age of 4...which is when their sons were removed from them and put through military training. Athens, at first of course, SO devalued women that they weren't allowed out of the homes. Women were not allowed to be seen in public. If her husband were entertaining guests, she was seen and not heard...if seen at all. Male company was considered more honorable than that of female company (and you wonder where homosexuals came from...). Even at the deathbed, a close male friend was preferred over the wife. Why? Because the wife's only role was to provide heirs. That was what they did.

Of course, then you have the island of lesbos, where a certain poet praised the beauty of the female form, glorified female companionship, and provided a haven where women could feel worthy. I'm fairly certain that her brand of thought didn't remain on that island for long, and began infiltrating Athenian culture...and eventually making its way into Roman culture.

Yes, feminism has definitly been around for a LONG while. And it has done some horrific things to American (and British and any other culture that embraces it) culture.

However, to deny that misogyny did not exist, did not have a prevalent foothold in society at ANY one time is as much a lie as women claiming that women were "oh so trampled" until the 1960's.

You have chinese culture, clearly patriarchal, where women have no ability to support themselves outside of the men in their lives. If there are no men, then they are destitute. They have been physically abused to gain a perception of beauty - foot wrapping. They were not allowed to look a man in the eyes - at ANY time. They wore clothes that wrapped tightly around their legs and hips so they would shuffle - and unable to run away from their husbands...why?

Of course, there will always be the husband that treats his wife respectfully, but power has this unusual affect of corrupting people - and it DOES corrupt. And to think that 100% of all men were immune to such corruption when they held all the power over the female members of their society, do you really think they treated them well 100% of the time? Fairly certain that wasn't the case.

This isn't about the work that men and women had to do, though have you ever had to make lye soap? Both men's and women's labor was significantly harder in centuries past - it was not by any means a picnic for either, but that was by no means my point.

My point was that there were points in history where children were forcibly removed from their mothers, when women were beaten just for the heck of it, where women relied solely on the good will of their corruptible men-folk to provide for them.

Where the only way a father could secure the future of his daughters was to *hopefully* marry them off to good men (assuming, of course, the father cared about his daughters) - money or my daughter's well being?

I'm not trying to excuse feminism - absolutely NOT. I think feminism has taken their cause to new heights at the expense of men, completely reversing the problems. But the darling little wounded man does not have an innocent history. And if they are SO opposed to what feminism has done, then they need to evaluate what the best way to go about getting their freedoms back is going to be.

And it won't be doing what the feminists have done, meaning elevating men at the expense of women. If they really want things to be better for themselves, they're going to have to come up with ways that elevate them and still provide necessary protection to the female. Without that, it'll be a lost cause - and with that, I can't see how respect would be lost for them...just don't expect women to be the one's to change the tide ... it won't happen.

Obama's "Equal Wages" Campaign Ad

Now that I've gotten my anger out of the way, I can do what I originally logged on to do.

I saw this commercial for the first time tonight. I find it frustrating, for a couple reasons.

I recently found something out about myself that is a FEMALE problem - it is ONLY a female problem, no MALE can ever have this issue.

I'm one of those few "lucky" women who works in a corporation that pays equal wages in spite of not being forced to. Let me tell you, it really ain't that lucky.

Because my "problem" is inherrently normal to the female body, I'm not allowed to use "sick" time - even though, technically, I really am sick. Because its normal, I can't justify getting off that list of employees required to put in mandatory overtime - which are mostly men and menopausal women on my team (I'm one of two pre-menopausal women on my team of 20).

Do you want to know why? BECAUSE IT WOULD NOT JUSTIFY MY BEING PAID THE SAME AMOUNT AS MEN TO TREAT MY BODY IN THE UNIQUE WAY THAT IT NEEDS. I run the risk of termination - because I'm not working NEARLY as much as my peers and haven't earned my salary...problem is, they run the risk of a law suit if they terminate me because of my female "problems".

For the companies that actually DON'T give equal pay, the jobs are usually those where paternity leave is not offered, or in hourly wage jobs where the risk of hiring a pre-menopausal woman means internalizing the risk of her getting pregnant or periodically not being able to perform her job affectively.

IF women were paid the same rate as men, the men that have families to support lose their potential earning capacity, limiting how much they can support their families and locking their wives (who could get pregnant at any time) into their career to help support the family - and it simply is not THAT healthy to carry a baby for 9 months, have it, and be back into work in 6 weeks (standard maternity leave).

So, for the women who actually WANT to work, by demanding this "Equal Pay" when the chances are, it won't be "Equal Work", it hurts the women who have chosen to NOT be feminists and stay home raising their kids and caring for their husbands and homes.

To bad McCain would get even more black-balled then he already is if he were to argue for this instead of claiming women just aren't smart enough.

The One Thing I Hate About MRAs

A very wonderful man that goes by MarkyMark has this little thing.

It's flawed logic, really, but he holds to it nonetheless.

You see, in his opinion, anyone who even ATTEMPTS to claim that women really aren't that well off - or ever were not well off - is accused of Feministic Brainwashing, or of being a feminist.

You know that little post I wrote about "I Hate Feminists" and it's follow-up? He's done the EXACT SAME THING.

When him or any other MRA (or anyone PERIOD) makes that assumption, I'm going to start lumping them in the Feminist group.

Sure, they probably don't care that I've black-balled them on my list, but they need to get their head out of their little whiney asses and grow up.

This was written by someone who I usually strongly disagree with on BiblicalManhood:

You cannot have a "balance" to what you identify as "man bashing" by calling everyone who dares to mention any hardship for women as "feminist".

She is 100% right on that one.

Exception to Every Rule

I wonder, sometimes, what God's plans are for me.

What exactly does God want me to be doing to further his kingdom? It seems to me that I've screwed up in my walk with him so many times that I can't possibly be a viable witness, anymore...

Especially right now.

What would you say if I told you the secret that I'm hold close to my heart as a mother holds her infant to her bosom? That I'm a disappointment and a hypocrit?

Trust me, I know just how much of a hypocrit I am...and EVERY Christian is... I mean, we're a people that believe in a God that saves us from sin in the past and future that look down on anyone (other than ourselves) who sin. We're a people that believe no matter how hard we try, we're all sinners, but we try our damndest not to sin. We're a people who believe we are all sinners and in need of a savior, but reaching out to sinners to tell them about our savior is against every fiber in our being...

And yet, as I've lived, God has used me as the perfect witness in every situation he's placed me in....whether I was aware of it or not.

An example of genuine belief, genuine desire to do right, inclinations to do wrong, and never perfect... An example of progressive work. I really hope that the grace and gifts God has shown me are enough to convince people that he still loves me when they find out my secret.

Topic for discussion:

Is the sentiment that women don't need a husband to be "complete" truly a biblical sentiment or a consequence of feminist thought?

And is the sentiment that men don't need a wife an indirect consequence of such thought?

**Disclaimer: I am not saying that celibacy is not a worthy calling. Because I'm usually interested in the aspect of marriage, celibacy doesn't come into play around here much, but I recognize it as a worthy gift.**

They Say...

They say that when a girl dreams about getting married from a young age and makes that her chief aim in life, that she idolizes the wedding day and forgets the marriage.

But what if its possible that she dreams about that day and plans for that day, not as simply a moment in time, but as the beginning of an entirely new life, what does that do for the marriage?

I've been dreaming of marriage since I was 5 years old. I've been planning my wedding since I was 13. Though everything is not as I envisioned it in teenage innocence (lawl at that seeming oxymoron, but it's true I was as innocent as can be), my future day is much much more.

You see, I could never have imagined a better suited man for myself. I could never have picked out all the window dressings that would set my heart ablaze and make me blush just from looking at him. I never could have furnished his heart and soul with all the values that would've made him believe in RIGHT over wrong but with the tender mercy of forgiveness. I never could have wired his mind in such a way that he would score as my exact opposite in a personality test, know how to make me smile when I'm too serious, and know when to talk serious with me.

I never could have come up with a man that makes me yearn for my wedding day more and more and more everyday - not because of the sex, not because of the social status, not because of the companionship...but because on that day and forever after, we get to be TOGETHER.

And I'm willing to fight through this so-called temper he has (which I have yet to evidence). I'm willing to serve him as my husband. I'm willing to keep his home the way he wants it. I'm willing to give him children. I'm willing to raise them the way he sees fit. I'm willing to spend all the time he needs to be with me with him.

And I look forward, not simply to the wedding day, but to the life that we're going to build together.

And I could never have asked for anything better.

One more thing about Feminism

They stand by the theory that following taditional female roles of caring for the family, having and raising children, and keeping the household clean is a culturally and socially influenced trait.

They stand by the theory that anyone who follows those roles do so, not because they WANT to, but because they were "raised to believe that way".

They nullify an individual's ability to think for oneself, mitigating a woman's choice to follow that role as one of "brainwashing".

Feminity becomes stupid and inferior.

However, the "intelligent" women are the ones that "throw off the shackals of slavehood and become liberated", finding fulfillment in being powerful CEO's and VP's.

I want to laugh when they shout "I am woman, hear me roar!" because they've thrown away everything female about them. Their Ovaries, their hair, their vaginas...all to be more like MEN.

Maybe they should change their rant...and leave the women who embrace their identity as female to be proud of their biolgoical traits.

I Hate Feminists

There are few things in this world that I truly hate. Feminists have the #2 slot, right behind Satan.

Do you know why? Because they push their agenda down everyone's throat, claiming that ALL women are in ONE category. What category is that? Oh...the one that claims that the only place to find fulfillment is in the middle of a career. The one that claims that being a "good little housewife" is dull, boring, and lacks intelligence. The one that claims children are parasites on women and all women are happy to be rid of them.

They make me Sick. With a capital "S".

I wish they'd pull their $100.00 colored, permed, and styled no-hair-out-of-place heads out of their perfectly shaped derriers and look around at the real world.

First of all, women who choose staying at home over working are not "afraid of the big bad world". In fact, their probably a lot braver than any feminist around. Why? Because a woman willing to stay at home has to trust that her man will support her and come home to her every night. To a feminist, that's the impossible. Stay at home mothers also have to deal with the atrocities of raising teenagers in this day and age...which is no small feat. From fielding abuse of drugs and alcohol, to dealing head on with a teenager who just lost 5 of their best friends in a brutal car accident, to educating their children enough to know better to stay away from sex - and if the kids still don't learn, handling the mess of STD's and teenage pregnancies. Raising kids is NOT a walk in the park.

Second of all, unintelligent work? Say what? Did you know that staying at home requires good management skills, financial skills, and scheduling management skills? Did you know that learning how spices work and how they can affect health can be interesting and...*gasp* intelligent? Oh...and if the hubby really feels like coming home to an interesting conversation, I suggest you discover the joy of popping a load of laundry in the washer and dryer, folding quickly, putting a pot of pasta on the stove to boil, and grabbing the latest Wallstreet Journal or DrudgeReport. Or if hubby is more into philosophy, grab that classic by Thomas More that goes by the title of Utopia...or how about Brave New World by Aldous Huxley and take note how feminist agenda has made what used to be a fantastic horror world into a reality? Oh...and if hubby is into video games, you could play a round of Soul Caliber IV before he gets home and then show off your gaming skills to your awed hubby when you beat him at one of his favorite games (zomg...a girl that playz games!!!). Did you know that spending hours and hours and hours micromanaging a program at work is going to provide for much less satisfying discussion than discussing current events, philosophy, religion, or playing video games?

Oh...but the feminist doesn't even stop to consider that there are MANY different types of men and women out there. Instead, she disrespects men and women by putting us all in the same stereotypical category.

Well guess what, Feminism? I don't buy it. I never will buy it. I'm intelligent, sophisticated, fun, AND a good housekeeper. And I'm gonna keep it that way.

Pre-Disposition to Statehood

I hear a lot (a LOT) about how the Constitution of the US was written to give more authority to states than to the federal government.

I don't usually argue against this...because I believe it is true. But apparently, it has NEVER been very clear which gets more power - state or nation?

I've been to Washington DC like 2x a year for the last 3 years. I love it there...I enjoy it immensely. My sister recently bought a house all the way out in Warrenton, VA, SW of DC. I went to visit this last weekend. You take I-66 all the way out to SR-29... The traffic was SOOO bad when we headed out there, though, that we got off an exit early (Exit 44) and as I was directing my boyfriend down roads and consulting my map, one of my glances out the window afforded me the view of an ancient blue (lead?) cannon sitting at the top of a hill. I squealed and searched the map. Sure enough, we were in the middle of the National Bull Run/Battle of Manassas Park. I don't know WHY I never thought to look for Civil War stuff while visiting DC, but you usually think Revolutionary War...and stick with Smithsonians, the Capitol, and White House tours (I got a tour of my sister's White House this year). But out in the outskirts of DC, in the countryside of VA, you will find Civil War (and Revolutionary War) parks.

So, I scheduled a day out there :) It was wonderful. And I was reading one of the plaques in the little museum visitor center...

Essentially, that little sign said that since the beginning of the nation, the country has debated who gets more authority - state or nation? Up until the Civil War, the primary authority was given to States. But upon secession, and Abe Lincoln's unwillingness for this country to be divided ("A divided house can not stand"), he fought for the country's wholeness. By the end of the war, I'm going to take a wild guess and say that a lot of the states' authority was removed from them...one being the ability to secede.

So...is it worth giving states the authority that they used to have if they can secede at any time? Will that help keep our nation's leaders more accountable? Or will it be another monster waiting in the wings, abiding its time to devour unsuspecting trustees of the "original" purpose of the Constitution of the United States of America?

More Christian - Conservatives or Liberals?

Last time I tried to argue this, I did so on Boundless and was accused of having a distorted view of Conservatism...

I thought that funny, because it came straight from the dictionary. And the guy failed to provide me with a definition. So until he does, I'll stick with the dictionary.

Conservativism - a political or theological orientation advocating the preservation of the best in society and opposing radical changes.

Problem with that definition is the use of "best in society" - who determines what is best? Lets find another one that's less objective.

Conservative - disposed to preserve existing conditions, institutions, etc., or to restore traditional ones, and to limit change.

Now with the next one:
Liberalism - a political or social philosophy advocating the freedom of the individual, parliamentary systems of government, nonviolent modification of political, social, or economic institutions to assure unrestricted development in all spheres of human endeavor, and governmental guarantees of individual rights and civil liberties.

And...
Liberal - favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs.

You know, traditionally (*giggle*) Christianity and Judaism are Conservative. You do things because they've always been done that way. At some point, tradition is accepted simply because that's the way its always been. Other times, tradition is held to beyond rationalization...to the point that the reason for it is completely lost (Pharisaic Sabbath, anyone? Mark 2:23-3:6).

However, Liberals are guilty of the same exact thing. Yes, I did just say that. Conservatism and Liberalism are far more alike than either would like to credit the other with.

You see, Liberals will debunk tradition and traditional values SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY ARE TRADITIONAL. They automatically assume that there was no good reason for the tradition and throw it out. They are against doing "what has always been done". They will refuse to look into reasons of why that tradition is in place.

You see, contrary to popular belief, we really aren't that much smarter than people were a thousand years ago. Notice how society and knowledge fluctuate through time? I even heard it mentioned we could be in a Dark Age NOW. Though I'd never go so far as saying THAT, per se, I will acknowledge that there were far more brilliant minds in existence a thousand years, two thousand years, even three thousand years before now.

I think that both Liberals and Conservatives need to stop doing things simply because "that's the way its always been". They need to stop and ask themselves - what is the BEST way? Even if occassionally it means holding to tradition or completely debunking tradition.

And Christians, like Christ, need to do the same thing. Of course, we define the BEST way by Biblical standards - and therefore everything needs to be tested by the scriptures (1 John 4:1). Sometimes, Tradition is biblical (like remembering the Sabbath and the Lord's Supper). Sometimes, its not (like praying to Mother Mary and the Saints). Sometimes, we'll be conservative - like Christ. Other times, we'll be liberal - like Christ.

Who does more work - Men or Women?

I've heard this before - that men will work their 40 (sometimes more) hours per week and then come home and do some things around the house... their time working comes up to more a week than women.

Is this true? Maybe I just came from an EXCEPTIONAL family background, but my experience has been thus.

Roles of dad:
Up at 7, out the door at 8 - took those who went to school to school (unless gram and gramps were around).
Got home around 5 or 5:30.
Watched TV til dinner was ready (or played with us some).
Ate dinner.
Went and watched some more TV.

Roles of mom:
Up at 7, getting us up for school. Dressing anyone under the age of 8 so they could sleep longer. Made breakfast and made us get out of bed. Those that went to school, out the door with packed lunches.
Homeschooled those left behind, did laundry, cleaned kitchen, kept most of the house "tidy".
Made dinner, ate dinner.
Busy-bodied around the kitchen until my dad *literally* forced her to have a glass of wine and watch tv with him.

Roles of kids:
Get up at 7:30, eat breakfast, go to school (or be homeschooled)
Come home, do chores (clean bathroom, vacuum, dust, clean bedroom...depended on day of week), do homework/play.
Eat dinner, help mom clean kitchen, do homework/play.

Weekends - dad mowed lawn, mom/kids cleaned pool, kids raked yard/picked up sticks, mom did grocery shopping (not for things SHE wanted...dad had to force her to spend money on herself...and still does) and balanced the checkbook.

I don't know - everything felt BALANCED. I know (now...not when I was a brat of 15) that my dad did a lot of work outside the home. I know (now) that the work my mom did in the house was NOT easy and not minimal. She worked just as hard as my dad...do you know how much clothes pile up in a family of 5 kids??? Or how often the kitchen floor has to be mopped (which is everyday in that big a family)? How often dishes need to be done (often twice a day, unless its a weekend - then maybe 3x's a day...all by hand because we didn't have a dish washer)?

Ok - so not every family is like that...I do recall friend's homes where clean and dirty laundry are indistinguishable because they're all piled up in someone's room (usually the parent's). I have seen homes that rely on tv dinners and the mother sits in front of the tv all day. But there were families that were just as balanced as mine...and it WORKED. It just DID.

I just wish a little more respect and credit would be given to the mom who actually does WORK AT HOME. It really isn't THAT easy. Maybe it is when your the only one, but not so much when there's 7 people your cleaning up after.

Self-Control

The Fruit of the spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self control. On this, hangs all the law.
Galations 5:22

I have the feeling that Americans today have not been taught self-control. No matter, its a christian discipline so I can't expect the world in general to hold to it. But it also seems to me that American Christians are lacking in this discipline, as well.

There's this general consensus on this continent that following your heart, and doing what you feel like doing, and trusting emotions is a GOOD thing - and evidence of a free life; a liberated mindset.

As such, the consequences that have been born out of the lack of self-control are being worked through and dealt with by the government. Such issues include (but are not limited to) Abortion, No-Fault Divorce, Welfare, and the bailing out of the Credit Industry.

I will have a follow-up on this, but first feel free to leave your comments on agree/disagree. I get much more controversial in my next couple of posts, so establishing my premise is incredibly important here.

Don't Look in the Mirrors

Much to my chagrin, I did in fact see this movie.

It was one of those joke things that guys who don't really think about it take their girls to a scary movie just to get the girl to cling to them all night.

I think my bf realized how dangerous that was when he almost had his thumb broken. I spent the entire evening with my face buried in his chest praying "God, keep me safe!"

Normally, I don't have a problem with dark movies. I have a HUGE issue with blood and gore (yet I can stomach The Patriot and Gladiator well enough...). But this movie went beyond the blood and gore and got me in the darkness of it. That's unusual for me - but I know exactly why it did.

The Grudge was a great (melodramatic, yes) thriller movie. Still violent, but it had some truth in it. Holding a grudge can turn into a nasty and evil feeling and almost take on a life of its own. I liked that about The Grudge - the way to defeat such evil? Don't hold a grudge! Simple as that.

The Exorcist (have not seen this, so I may be wrong), the defeat was found *in movie* in Christian Theology. That works for me - Christ defeats demons. No matter how theologically incorrect movies can be, Demons will not dwell where Christ is.

See that last line? Demons will not dwell where Christ is.

**SPOILERS BELOW: BUT PLEASE DON'T WATCH THE MOVIE YOURSELF!!!**
That's what my issue with Mirrors was. There was a great evil present in that movie. It was very much like Legion was inhabiting the mirrors. He had been removed from a girl and captured there. And there they wreak havoc until someone can return them to that girl. And where is that girl? In a monastery. Afterwards, she became a nun. A rather devout one. So, she had Christ in her heart, right?

And yet that did not stop the demons from reinhabiting her. THAT bothered me. I coulda handled anything else, except that. That the movie portrayed an evil *more powerful* than Christ bugged me.

Now, I know this is NOT true. And I really wish I hadn't watched the movie. I know that Christ defeats all. And I will trust in him to keep me safe from the evil that dwells around me.

Thankfully, my boyfriend now knows what I can handle and what I can't. And he understands and agrees with my reasons. He just has a higher tolerance than I do, apparently.

I can do all things...

This made me cry. Make sure you have tissues nearby...

The Cliche'd "Perfect Man"

I was flipping through channels while curled up on the couch with my Prince Charming when the Keira Knightly version of Pride and Prejudice came on.

And I started thinking...

What was the cliche'd Perfect Man before Mr. Darcy? It certainly wasn't always so cliche. And this cliche was even around in the 1890's with the birth of Anne Shirley - her prince was tall, dark, and handsome... All of Montgomery's princes were so. And the 5 Little Peppers? Mary's prince (Jasper) grew up to be tall, dark, and handsome... And how about Joe's Boys (Louisa May Alcott - continuation of Little Women), when Nat sweeps Daisy off her feet?

There was a time that blonde was in (especially in Rome), but not so much anymore.

You think its possible that Mr. Darcy has subliminally altered young women's minds over the course of 200 years?

Generalizations, Specifics, and Spirit of Words

I have a very odd background in academics. I thrived in mathematics while being horrible in all things science. I'm incredibly gifted with words and communicating while being horrific with grammar.

While writing and commenting in the blogosphere, I've found myself constantly ending up in the circles of Engineers. This is ok, because engineers and I have much in common. The number one being that I'm an engineer, too.

However, I'm not your typical engineer. I'm good at communicating with people who aren't engineers. I don't need my words to be as precise and locked down as an engineer needs numbers and logic to be exact to the most miniscule detail.

I spent half a semester of college taking nothing but English courses. I did incredibly well in English in High school, especially when it came to literary criticism. I am incredibly good at seeing details in light of the big picture (one of the things that distinguishes me as an engineer, because I'm really not that good at writing code). I can easily look an entire picture and then focus in on one detail while keeping in focus the entire picture. This isn't exactly a common trait. Its why I'm so good at Calculus - I'm spatial, visual, AND able to think in the abstract; Geometry, meet Algebra.

So, when I write, I tend to not be as - what would you say? - exact with my words. Yes, prejudices may creep up into my writing. But more often than not, an engineer needs to apply a bit of grace to my words. I'm not above using traditional literary means to communicate my message as succintly as possible. I'm not going to place a "/Woman" to every "Man" I write. I'm not going to always write "with exceptions" or "in general" when writing about generalizations. I will not always clarify that I'm stereotyping just to avoid offending someone.

I'm not as meticulous in that way as some are. Like an artist, my goal isn't to accurately depict how something looks to the observer's eye, but to capture the spirit of my subject.

Yes, there are times when I will be cool, methodical, exact, and completely logical. But that will not happen every time I take pen to paper. I do not write to be logical. I write to communicate. And sometimes, communication requires logic. Other times, it requires words used in such a way that it conveys the feelings that are not tied to logic.

If there is EVER a phrase that sounds as if I am over-generalizing, stereotyping, male-bashing, female-bashing, please feel free to let me know, but keep in mind that there is more to my words than may meet your eye and I would appreciate a bit of grace being extended to me in your critique of my word use.

In other words, don't assume the worst from me.

Complacency

What is it about the world being rose-colored that cultivates a sense of complacency in your walk with God?

I definitly have cycles...and its not that I think any less of God...its just that...well...I don't know, really.

When I pray, my heart is overflowing with joy and thankfulness for what he's given me. But there isn't this NEED for him that is there when my world is crumbling around me. Of course, I always need him...and this is where the mind comes over the heart in terms of spiritual walk - I KNOW I need him to live. But I don't FEEL like it. Just like in those dark times, I KNOW he loves me and cares about me, but I don't FEEL like it.

It seems that in times of comfort, discipline becomes ever more crucial.

Cold-blooded Killer

For the record, I absolutely DETEST people who villainize all women who have had an abortion.

Yeah, some of them just get one for their bodies, money, irresponsibility, lifestyle and fully know exactly what they are doing.

But not all of them. And it makes me sick to my stomach and want to scratch a man's eyeballs out when he refers to all of those women as cold-blooded killers.

I have no idea why I'm so passionate on this subject, but it is one of the ONLY things that has truly found a home in my heart...a passion to have compassion for pregnant women seeking an abortion and women who have already had one.

Doesn't make me pro-choice, as I'm an incredibly passionate anti-abortionist...but I will not villainize those women simply because they felt they had no other choice.

Is there anything I can do?

A polite question... especially when asked while cleaning the bathroom.

"SURE! Grab that toilet brush and go at it at that brown stain on the bottom of the toilet bowl!"

Yummm...

Well, what would you think if your making your secret recipe of that absolutely DIVINE cheese cake? "Eh...they just want the credit for my delicious food..."

I was reading a review of Albert Mohler's Bible Q & A over at this blog. He discusses Semi-Pelagianism and why it would be so attractive to human nature. The thought that began echoing in my cerebral chamber had something to do with how well it echoed Genesis 3:16,

Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you.

Here's how he defined Semi-Pelagianism:

• Rather than being morally evil at birth, humans are morally neutral


• We need some help to make ourselves holy, but holiness is attainable

Compare that last one to some of the passages in Romans. Its kind of an elusive heresy, but it is subtly there.

Here's what Mohler had to say about why people would accept this view, undermining the Biblical portrayal of Grace. (Quoted from Dr. Ransom's blog)

“Why do people not see the doctrines of Grace?” The answer is that “we would like to have a part in this thing —” that is, being redeemed by Christ. This is similar to the scribes and Pharisees in the New Testament, he said, who just continually miss the point. “We can see ourselves among the scribes and Pharisees too, because — we would like to have a hand in this! This is just us — and we all know we need Grace, but what most of us want, or think we want, is enough Grace to get by. And thus, a semi-Pelagian system makes perfect sense.”

It was interesting, because this is kind of the reason why wives so adamently want to share in their husbands authority. They want to have an equal say in this, because they want some credit if all goes well, too! And if its an utter failure, "Well God shoulda made it easier..."

Because husbands are humans too, this leads into a lot more problems between wives that want to have an authoritarian position and their husbands...namely, this: Husbands ain't perfect. And they will mess up. Which makes justification for women helping out SO much easier. "Well, you were involved in the decision making process too, so it isn't all my fault!"

I think this is where Mohler's Headship theology finds its definition and meets its doom (short-lived, I know). IF the woman actually DOES submit, and leave all the decision making to the husband, giving him FULL authority in the household, than yep - its the man's fault when things go wrong. BUT (BUT BUT BUT!!! <- don't miss all those BUTS!!!) We don't live in a perfect world. And no man is going to make perfect decisions and no woman is going to live in perfect submission...there will be tension as sinful natures struggle for dominance; as Eve deals with her curse, and Adam gets fed up with dealing with Eve. Unlike the Christ-church relationship, both of our members are not perfect.

I just found it an interesting parallel between semi-pelagianism in the church and the desire to usurp authority in the woman.

So, some advice for the women - submit. We don't know why God tells us to do so (certainly we're not inferior to men?!?!), but he DOES. And that is key, here. He DOES tell us to submit. So do it.

However, I would also encourage women, when seeking a husband, to find one such man that you CAN submit to. One who you can trust to make sound decisions for your family, one you trust to respect your dignity and your own gifts, one who is strong enough to deal with rebellion when it creeps into your daily life (because it WILL). Those things are a thousand times more important than good looks and money.

Circles

Man: "I won't protect a woman unless I can trust her to submit"

Woman: "I won't submit to a man unless I can trust him to protect me"

And round and round we go.

WEEEE!

Dream Man Revised

Every girl has their ideal man. He's the one that floats in their minds when they have no other man to dream about. Famous male literary figures take on that shape as your reading...with the minor changes that the author deems important for us to take note of.

The ideal?

- Tall
- Dark
- Handsome
- 5 o'clock shadow

Lol. Cliche, ain't it?

Well, today I'm modifying it. Five o'clock shadows are NOT ideal. Let it be clean shaven or full beard, cuz 5 o'clock shadows are PAINFUL...so says my very raw chin and nose.

Silver Anniversary

Today is a very special day. Today is one of those rare occassions that you don't come across so much these days.

Today is my parents' 25th Wedding Anniversary.

My cubemate thought it funny that I'd want to buy something for my parents on THEIR anniversary. He was under the impression that it was something they did for themselves.

Well, that's the difference between dating and marriage...the difference between cohabitation and actually making binding vows between yourselves and God before your family, friends, church, neighbors, and community.

You see, their marriage isn't just for their benefit. I have been blessed by my parents being committed to themselves for 25 years. I have grown to cherish the institution of marriage, recognize its worth among myself and my siblings, and am eternally grateful that even when they didn't feel like it, they stuck together.

They have been examples of what it means to exhibit self control, self sacrifice, unconditional love, communication, compromise, and simply what it means to be in a relationship with people.

And here they are celebrating their 25th :)

Its amazing!

To Submit an Intelligent Mind

My boyfriend and I had a very interesting discussion tonight...

Apparently we have vastly different views of submission and authority. I'm more traditional, and he's more egalitarian - figure that one out.

Oh, he's not emasculated...oh that's DEFINITLY not him. In fact, he is a rather good leader and has no problem taking a role of authority.

No, he happens to like an intelligent woman...and to him, the role of submission is a complete waste of her intelligence.

Me, I didn't think submission came at the cost of my intelligence. But he seemed to think so and he was against it. So, is it possible for an intelligent woman to benefit a marriage with her intelligence if she is truly being submissive? Or is it up to the husband (and a demonstration of his true leadership) to take into account his wife's intelligence when making a decision that affects them both?

Undeserved Mercy

I'm listening to the Adventures in Odyssey episode from Saturday. These two episodes have been my absolute favorites since I first heard them OH so long ago.

There's a line in there that completely starts the roller coaster of emotions that Digger Digwillow goes through and what I went through when I first heard it.

On the night of Jesus' crucifixion, a notorious murderer was released at the request of the people. It was tradition for the governor to release one prisoner at the passover feast, and at his wife's request, Pilot offered a choice to the people on that passover night. "Who should I release - Barrabas or Jesus?"

"BARRABAS! RELEASE BARRABAS"

In the AIO episode, the roman gaurd is releasing Barrabas, and as he lets him go, Barrabas is flabbergasted. "Where am I to go?"

The Roman Centurion answered, "You are free to go; Jesus has taken your place."

Barrabas, no matter how good we are, is ALL of us. And Jesus took our place. When we were fully deserving of our punishment, Jesus took our place.

I think that seeing myself as Barrabas makes the sacrifice that Jesus made mean SO much more. No, I've never murdered anyone, but I've surely done my own fair share of dispicable things. The state of my soul was no better off than Barrabas'...and yet, Jesus died for me...and took my place.

For me.

Nurture Protection

I was reading Heather Koerner's piece on Nurturing Protection over at Boundless.org today, and she quotes John Piper as saying this (emphasis mine):

"Nurture" means that a mature woman senses a responsibility not merely to receive, but to nurture and strengthen the resources of masculinity. She is to be his partner and assistant. She joins in the act of strength and shares in the process of leadership. She is, as Genesis 2:18 says, "a helper suitable for him."

That line, "Shares in the process of leadership", is getting a lot of scorn from a bunch of men on another blog. They seem to think that this line says that the woman shares in leadership. Or they actually do take issue with the sharing in the process. If its the former, they're right to have some issue with it - a woman's role is to submit to her husband's leadership. Not share in his leadership. Although, it could be argued that she shares in his leadership every time she acts in his authority when he is absent (i.e. making financial decisions, caring for the children when he is not available). It is not good for a husband to nullify his wife and revoke her of ANY authority whatsoever in his household - but neither is it wise to give her as much authority as he is supposed to have.

However, if they take issue with the latter, than I believe they are missing something in scripture. Woman was created to complete man - not be his doormat. She was created to be his companion, not his subject. She was created to be his "life giver", as I've already written about. "The process of leadership" is the growth of leadership, the developing of leadership, and the display of leadership. She SHARES in that process, as she steps down and lets him lead, as she encourages him in his strength. She is a PART of that. With marriage, they are ONE. So yes, she DOES share in it. She is a part of him.

There is a very important role for each gender. It is important that women relinquish whatever claim they think they have to authority and leadership, so that men can LEAD. But at the same time, its very important that men affirm the importance of women in their God-given role, whatever that may be.

Are we indeed unnecessary and only good for bearing kids? Or are we actually important in "completeing" a man, being his companion, and sharing in something that sincerely affirms and affects our husbands? Are we just as disposable as many women have claimed men to be? Or do we sincerely NEED eachother. Like really really need eachother.

The Woman in Ministry

This is by far the best way I have ever seen this presented. Jen at Boundless had this to say:

Concerning all the comments on women as pastors, I thought it might be helpful to go through a few passages on the subject, as it is a vital one but one that is often misunderstood. I hope and pray these will be of some help to anyone who may be confused or need reassuring. I will start by going through 2 key passages in the New Testament that pertain to the order of leadership in the local church. Then we’ll go through the examples of Deborah and Priscilla, which are brought up frequently, and Galatians 3:28 which is often taken out of context, and finally pastors and elders and spiritual gifts, which can help put these teachings into perspective. Note, this is only a brief overview as I don’t have time to go over everything. If you’re looking for an excellent resource that covers the topic in more detail, I’d recommend “Men and Women Equal Yet Different: A Brief Study of the Biblical Passages on Gender” by Alexander Strauch.

Headship in the local church
For whatever reason – and we don’t need to understand the reason why – God has ordained that men be the leaders in the local church. This does not mean that women are never leaders. They may lead women’s ministries, etc; this will be discussed further in another section.

The bible is absolutely clear about this and to dispute this matter is to not only to make a mockery of God’s Word, but to disobey Him. Scripture speaks for itself:

1 Corinthians 14:34-38 “Let your women keep silent in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak; but they are to be submissive, as the law also says. And if they want to learn something, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is shameful for women to speak in the church. Or did the word of God come originally from you? Or was it you only that it reached? If anyone thinks himself to be a prophet or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things which I write to you are the commandments of the Lord.”

The last verse says it all: If anyone thinks himself to be a prophet or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things which I write to you are the commandments of the Lord. How can one argue with that? The only way to argue with it is to deny Scripture. Or will we also deny 2 Timothy 3:16: “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.”?

1 Timothy 2:11-14 “Let a woman learn in silence with all submission. And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression.”

For all those who want to say that Paul was writing this in a particular period of history when women would shout out in the middle of the service or whatever, there is no way that this passage can be dismissed on cultural grounds. In 1 Corinthians Paul says clearly “the things which I write to you are the commandments of the Lord.” Here, Paul appeals to Creation. He is not giving cultural reasons. Unless we want to deny that the Scriptures are the infallible Word of God, there is no way we can deny that it is not God’s will that women remain silent in the church, that they do not have authority over a man – ie, they are not to be in leadership over, or to be teaching a man, in the local church.



Deborah
One OT illustration that is often used to suggest that women should have positions of leadership in the church is that of Deborah in Judges 4. However, if you read the story carefully, the exact opposite point is clear: God has ordained that men should be leaders.
1. The Israelites were not exactly following the Lord during this period (4:1-2 “When Ehud was dead, the children of Israel again did evil in the sight of the Lord. So the Lord sold them into the hand of Jabin king of Canaan, who reigned in Hazor.”) So to begin with, Deborah was judging Israel at a point when they were not following the Lord. She is not commended for this; it is stated as fact, and to take an example for women leadership from a period when God’s people were not following Him is probably not a good principle.
2. Deborah herself rebukes Barak for not taking more of a leadership position in leading the Israelites into battle against their oppressors (4:6-7).
3. Barak doesn’t want to be a leader. In the case where the man called to take leadership refused to take it, God in His mercy used a woman. In verse 8 Barak says to Deborah, “If you will go with me, then I will go; but if you will not go with me, I will not go!” Deborah responds, “I will surely go with you; nevertheless there will be no glory for you in the journey you are taking, for the Lord will sell Sisera into the hand of a woman.” Here, Deborah is again acknowledging the Barak should be the leader, but that the Lord will use her because he refuses to take on the responsibility. As a result, he will not receive any glory. Deborah is to be admired as a woman who followed the Lord when no man would, and for that she is a great example. But she is not an example of the norm, and that is clear.
4. To an extent, this is not even a relevant example for the discussion of whether or not women should be in leadership in the local church. Although male leadership is the norm throughout Scriptures, and is commanded in the New Testament for the local church, it is not wise to take examples from the Jews of the Old Testament and apply them to the way the local church operates. We have been given ample instruction in the New Testament dictating how the Lord would have the church operate. (Note, many people are confused about the Jews and the church – they are not one and the same. I don’t have the time to go into detail here).

Aquila and Priscilla
As previously mentioned, Aquila and Priscilla work as a team to correct a young man who is zealous for the Lord. Notice, Priscilla is not working alone but with her husband. Also, this is not within the context of the gathering of the local church. See….

Galatians 3:28 (“There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”) To use this verse to say that women can have roles of leadership over men in the church, is to a) take the verse out of context, and b) to make the Scriptures contradict what is clearly taught in other passages. Taken in context, this verse is talking about the availability of salvation to all believers. Galatians 3:26 says, “For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus.” In the Old Testament, the Jews were God’s chosen people. Jesus was prophesied to the Jews as their Redeemer. What was not universally understood at the time was that Christ also came for the Gentiles. Here in Galatians, Paul is reassuring the Gentiles in Galatia that salvation is for all men, not just the Jews. The phrase, “for you are all one in Christ Jesus,” further proves the point. This is not a verse suggesting that there is no order in the church, that there is no structure, that there is no distinction between the roles of men and the roles of women in the local church.

Pastors and Elders
There is much confusion in the local church today about pastors and elders. Nowhere in Scripture is there a pattern for modern-day pastors. Nowhere does it suggest that there should be one or two men solely responsible for all the teaching in the church and for all the caring of the spiritual needs of the church. In the local churches in the New Testament, the spiritual leaders were elders. 1 Timothy 3 outlines the qualifications for elders (those responsible for the spiritual care of the local church) and deacons (those responsible for maintenance of the local church – this might include being responsible for the church budget or for coordinating ministries under the elders, etc).

Today, churches hire a “pastor,” who is primarily responsible for the spiritual care of the local church. The term is somewhat unfortunate, as a pastor could technically be someone who has the gift of pasturing – caring for and being spiritual leaders, in any capacity. So technically, a woman can be a pastor.

I bring this up because I notice at times in this debate that some people, saying that women can be pastors, simply mean that women can be the leader in a ministry involving the spiritual well-being of women and children, which is absolutely correct. However, it doesn’t mean that a woman can be in leadership in any capacity over men.

Spiritual Gifts
One of the women people bring forth in the debate over whether or not women can be in leadership positions in the local church is that of spiritual gifts. Nowhere does Scripture say that any spiritual gifts are only for men, or only for women, so if a woman has the gift of teaching or pasturing, why would God have a structure in place that doesn’t allow them to teach or pastor?

This stems from a misunderstanding of spiritual gifts. In 1 Corinthians 12 Paul says, “Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I do not want you to be ignorant.” He goes on to say, “There are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit. There are differences of ministries, but the same Lord. And there are diversities of activities, but it is the same God who works all in all. But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to each one for the profit of all.” He goes on to list some spiritual gifts.

Notice: there are different gifts, different ministries, and different activities. So perhaps a man has a gift of teaching. This does not necessarily mean that he is gifted to preach from the pulpit in the local church. Perhaps he is gifted in teaching one-on-one. Perhaps he is gifted in teaching and evangelizing, to clearly explain to the gospel to non-believers. As such, he may be involved in a ministry of teaching outside of the local church, in street ministry or something. Or perhaps another man is good at teaching through writing, and is involved in writing books or articles to teach others. This is just discussing one gift – teaching – but there different ministries and different activities that it can be used in.

As such, a woman may have the gift of teaching. The Lord, in His wisdom, has ordained clearly that women should be silent in the church, that she should not be teaching and leading and having authority over the men in the local church. But perhaps she can use her gift in Sunday School, or at a girls camp, or as a speaker at a women’s conference.

Perhaps a woman has the gift of pasturing. She may have a ministry of overseeing a ladies’ bible study, or of meeting with women in the local church to pray with them and encourage them in times of need. She doesn’t need to be standing at the front of the church to be used mightily by God.

I think she articulated it very well and I'm grateful to her for spending the time writing that! I once wrote the following and it can be found here:

When claiming that God created you in some way, always remember that you are a fallen creature. You are not without sin. Your natural desires, talents, and skills must be harnessed to God's will, not allowed to reign freely. Yes, he gave you skills, talents, and desires that he wants you to use and have fulfilled. But he wants you to submit those to his will and keep them under his hand.

It has always bothered me that women who are gifted in teaching and "pasturing" as Jen put it would rather go against scripture and lead an entire congregation than go with scripture and teach women about what it means to be a woman of God. I've long contested that if those women had embraced women's ministries, then the women's ministries wouldn't be in such shambles right now.

And finally, an awesome quote from Jen that she ended her post with:

What is more important, our society’s view of what is just? Our society’s view of what men and women should or shouldn’t do? Our own sense of what is fair and right? Or what God has plainly instructed?