Eve Ill Idolaters

Locking down the wild hamster is tricky business.

Readership: Men

Dalrock issued a Thought Experiment in a recent rant about Gregoire. This challenge intrigued me because it seems to be a necessary point, and I thought I could offer some perspectives on this.

Dalrock quotes Gregoire as stating that women should submit to God and not to man, including their husbands. Dalrock’s challenge was this.

“Assume you had to either defend or debunk Sheila’s argument using only previously published quotes from Pastor Doug Wilson to found your arguments.”

Of course, I would be more interested in debunking her argument. So in this post, I’ll debunk the argument using Christian RP tenets. In the future, I may follow up with another attempt using Wilsons drivel, as Dalrock specified.

First of all, why is there even an argument that women should NOT submit to their husbands, when many passages in scripture clearly say they should?

Why do women think it is impossible to submit to both God and their husbands at once?

Do they truly believe their husbands are Eve-ill beings, enemies of God who are bent over leading them to hell? In such a case, it would be impossible.

Oh, no… that was Eve, I mean, Adam. It was the man! Yeah, heh heh…

But if so, then why did they want to marry, and thereby become accomplice to all of mans’ (presumed) sin? Is it because he is supposed to supply everything good, and ‘fix’ everything bad?

Do they think they can reform him, or do they only reserve their savior complex for domesticating Alphas? Isn’t this just more solipsistic hamster hoop jumping?

Honestly, isn’t all of this just a Churchian, Drive-Through scripture? A talking point to white-wash their motives, signal virtue, and justify their rebellion?

The real issues at stake here are faithfulness, loyalty, and trust. Gregoire blasts all three.

Abraham’s wife, Sarah, is cited as an example of faith. Gregoire rolls the hamster wheel through four examples in scripture, and concludes that,

“Sarah’s life was hardly the picture of a wife obeying her husband in everything!”

She misses the point. Sarah was considered faithful (and righteous) because she did not think of herself first. She cooperated with Abraham’s plans no matter how crazy they sounded. (…and they were pretty crazy!) Sarah showed her faith in God by trusting Abraham’s leadership, and also by trusting God to lead Abraham in the right way, or else to correct Abraham when he was wrong. In the cases where Abraham was wrong, God stepped in to make things right. Sarah did not take it upon herself to be Abraham’s judge, and decide for herself whether he was right or wrong. But somehow, christianeasy wimminz have totally missed this point.

Gregoire cites the story of Ananias and Sapphira in Acts 5:1-11 as a cherry picked example of how it is a d@mnable folly for a wife to remain loyal to her husband. Never mind the fact they colluded to cheat the church. Chances are, it was her idea!

Gregoire argues that women should not just follow men and do whatever their husbands wanted, because that’s putting the husband in the place of Jesus, and that’s idolatry!

However, we know that women will eagerly do all kinds of crazy things, including blatant, immoral sins, in order to cooperate with a top Alpha, tingle-inducing male. Women don’t sit around cooking up Bible verses to justify riding the carousel at the moment they jump into bed with Harley McBadboy. They do, however, hamsterize excuses to justify their decision to do so, after Harley skips town.

Sin is characterized by a warped, self-interested mind. But guilt, shame, and heartbrokenness are always reliable vectors that bring people to contemplate on God and holiness in the abstract. Also, when women trust their desire for a bad boy, they inevitably become the victims of transgression, which plants the bitter roots of fear and suspicion.

Much later on, after sticking the necessary landing by settling hard, the subsequent lack of Tingles, combined with the aforementioned fear and suspicion, always translates into a sore lack of faith, loyalty, and trust. It is at this time, women must defend their unwillingness to cooperate with the man they now call their husband.

Rest assured, if Harley ever came back to town with a condom in one hand and a bank roll in the other, all these biblical arguments and virtue signals would be quickly forgotten, because their true God has appeared into their lives once again. These women’s hope in their romantic dreams will once again be resurrected, because that’s putting the Tingle in the place of Jesus, and that’s idolatry!

But they are, of course, deceived. The fact that a woman will willingly submit her body and soul to a liar, but resist submitting to the man she promised to love in the presence of God and all those attending her wedding ceremony, shows the true loyalties of her heart, and it’s not to God, much less her husband.

I wonder, how does God view this tangled mess? If Harley was her true spiritual husband (by virtue of a sexual covenant and the related soul ties), then she committed adultery by marrying Mr. Betaboy. If Mr. Betaboy is her true husband (by virtue of her marital vows), then she dishonors both him and God by calling him out as being unworthy of her trust and loyalty. Either way, there’s definitely some kind of sexual sin going on here. But instead of waking up and confessing this mess as iniquity, the hamster chugs through a frivorce in order to preserve the holy lip stick ego.

And… Gregoire often writes posts on how women should handle a husband’s sin that is endangering the family. Mite and Beam… (or Speck and Log, depending on your translation).

The real question is, who is the woman’s true god? Is it the hamster reinforced Feelz and Tingles, or is it the God ordained authority of Jesus and her husband?

She who permits her hamster to chase after the Feelz will lose the Tingle in the end, but she who forsakes her hamster for her husband’s sake, will find them.

Related

• Dalrock: Rules of the Road for Fornication (March 30, 2012)