On the Concept of Sin and the need for Marriage

If your soldier is standing at attention, ready to defile, it’s wise to give him a mission before he can debouch.

Readership: All;

This post is the third in a series of articles that examine several aspects of the Purity Movement.  For an introduction to this study, please read the first post, Picking through the fruit of the Purity Movement (2020-4-20).

the-look-of-love

What is Sin?

Sin is commonly depicted as an action, such as lying, stealing, adultery, etc.  But these actions betray the deeper nature.  A truer appreciation of sin recognizes it as a natural inclination — like the cat craving bacon in the above photo.  Whether or not the cat actually eats the bacon, the cat’s natural behavior remains unchanged.

A while back, I wrote this description of sin: The Blue Pill, Feminism, and Sin (2018 October 16).

“The idea of Sin is one of those concepts that is shrouded in a lot of confusion.  Christians hear this word often, but they don’t really know what it means.  They think they do, but not really.

So what is sin?

Sin is when you don’t want to accept reality.  You’re always trying to change your reality into what you want it to be.  You always have the opinion that you’re right, and other people are wrong, and you might even have the habit of saying so.  Your deceitful heart resorts to various defense mechanisms in an effort to protect your thoughts and ego from the vicious assaults of the truth.  You’re relying on a wide assortment of tricks, lies, deception, slandering, stealing, killing, and so on, all done in an effort to change the world according to your comfort and liking – that’s sin.”

“One prominent example of this dynamic of sin is the “planning” aspect of Planned Parenthood.  Young wimminz want to ride the carousel, and they don’t want to marry and have children (“yet”, so they say), so they sacrifice their sexual purity, their honor, their unborn children, and with them, their opportunities to start a happy family, all in order to control their own lives, and fulfill their own will about how they think their life should turn out.

Of course, it never turns out exactly as they imagine, and that is the deception of Satan.  The strategy of Satan (their god) is to forbid that they should ever offer their bodies to inspire and motivate a husband or their reproductive ability to produce Godly children.  For the family to be destroyed, such noble purposes must be calumniated, as they currently are.”

Sin includes, but is not limited to, fornication

Back in January, Richard P left a long comment under a post at Spawny’s Space, By Their Fruits You Shall Know Them (16 January, 2020).  His comment was a reaction to one of my posts covering one woman’s testimony about her experiences with the Purity Movement, The Sin of Prioritizing Purity above Marriage (2020 January 17).  Readers who are unfamiliar with this post may like to read it before continuing on here.

@Jack said: Churchians with a superficial understanding of sin would be tempted to conclude that the fornicating is the sin, but it is not.

Richard took this quote out of context.  The next sentence in that post reads,

“Fornicating is merely the fruit of the sin.”

By that, I mean that sin is not superficial.  It’s deep.  However, most people can maintain an outer façade of decency, in spite of their sin.  If sin erupts into an observable behavior, then that is when the person is losing control of the façade.

Richard followed this partial quotation with the following argument,

There is sin.

There is that which will cause God to reject you at the Judgement Seat.

Which of those two is more important?

“Fornication” is on the list of things that the Bible says will cause God to reject you at the Judgement Seat.  If you care about whether God rejects you or not, then you should care about whether you are doing that which will cause God to reject you.  Since “fornication” is one of those things that the Bible says will cause God to reject you, it is probably important to give a damn about whether or not you are fornicating.

The Bible says nothing about God rejecting someone at the Judgement Seat because they didn’t get married.

Not so fast, Richard…

Are you talking about God’s judgment in the here and now, or the final judgment after we die and come before His throne?  I interpret your phrase “Judgement Seat” to mean the latter.  Jesus said this about the final judgment.

“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven.” ~ Matthew 7:21 (NRSV)

If we don’t pay attention to God’s judgment in the here and now, then there is little left to be said once the grand finale judgment rolls around.

The Sinfulness of Fornication

Richard P concluded,

“Jack – don’t get out into the weeds.  Just say what the Bible says.  And – in this case – the Bible does say that fornicating is the problem, not staying unmarried.  Contrary to what I quoted from you at the top of this post, those with a non-superficial understanding of what the Bible says understand that the Bible DOES conclude that fornicating is the sin.”

Richard, I’m not saying that fornication isn’t sinful.  I’m saying that the defilement and sin that led to fornication started long before the fornication happened.  For men and women both, the sin is lust, denial, cultivating a sexual poverty mentality, and fantasy.  The act of fornication is the cherry on top of the cake of a prolonged, habitual, sinful disobedience of the heart.  Thus, fornication is not only an outward sin of the flesh, it is also evidence of a deeper sin of the heart, and therefore, it is a natural consequence – or a fruit – of that deeper sin.

The brokenness of the culture and the church only serves to obscure the better way, and increases the probability of error.

18847510-qjvigC8-1516027392-650-7717abf1f6-1516343412

When does marriage become necessary?

Given all the risks and difficulties that are associated with marriage, and the eternal consequences of fornication, I’m sure many will wonder at this point, why not be celibate?  Why not avoid both marriage and fornication?

For most normal healthy young people, having a supercharged libido is strongly associated with frustration if such a one remains celibate.  This frustration, combined with tempestuous day-to-day temptation, causes so much distraction and anxiety, that a person cannot get their mind off the flesh, cannot experience spiritual growth, and cannot enter the Kingdom of God.  I know this to be true from experience.

As a result, one can suffer a prolonged and painful struggle against sexual sin, even while still remaining a virgin (by whatever definition you choose), and this condition can be quite fatal to one’s spiritual peace and growth.

If one is suffering in this condition, it is an obvious sign that it is better for one to marry.  St. Paul abridged the whole she-bang by saying,

“If anyone thinks that he is not behaving properly toward his betrothed, if his passions are strong, and it has to be, let him do as he wishes: let them marry—it is no sin.” ~ 1st Corinthians 7:36 (ESV)

In fact, the Biblical prescription for one who has a supercharged libido, and who lacks sufficient self-control, is to marry.

“It is better to marry than to burn with desire.” ~ 1st Corinthians 7:9 (HCSB)

But not everyone is successful in resisting the desires of the flesh.  For many people who lack the necessary self-control, remaining unmarried for many years eventually culminates in fornication.

Here in this sense, I agree with Richard’s statement, “It is probably important to give a damn about whether or not you are fornicating.

For this reason, I believe that for many people (including myself), it is God’s will for them to avoid fornication by getting married, not by diddling around with false notions of purity, and postponing marriage.

Also remember, lust and sexual sin are not limited to men only.  Women lust too, and really need to be married for the same reasons.

In summary of this section, if either sex, or the lack of sex, is impeding one’s faith and spiritual growth, then it needs to be resolved somehow.

wedding 12

Concluding Statements

There are several reasons for marriage, which include the following.

  1. Marriage is intended to Glorify God.

Our spiritual obedience serves to manifest God’s nature, love, and glory.  A strong marriage is a reward of continual obedience, and as such, is a powerful way to glorify God in this life.  If you want a good marriage, you have to glorify God.

  1. Marriage is intended to foster our Sanctification.

It is God’s will that you should be sanctified: that you should avoid sexual immorality;  that each of you should learn to control your own body in a way that is holy and honorable,  not in passionate lust like the pagans, who do not know God;  and that in this matter no one should wrong or take advantage of a brother or sister.  The Lord will punish all those who commit such sins, as we told you and warned you before.  For God did not call us to be impure, but to live a holy life.  Therefore, anyone who rejects this instruction does not reject a human being but God, the very God who gives you his Holy Spirit. ~ 1st Thessalonians 4:3-8 (ESV)

  1. Marriage is an alternative to a lifestyle of debauchery.

As discussed in a previous post On the Definition of Virginity (2020-4-22), the real task of retaining one’s purity is in keeping one’s self undefiled.  If one can remain undefiled, then sexual purity should be a natural consequence.  But as defilement accumulates (over time), it becomes more difficult and more unlikely to avoid sexual sin.

If marriage can perform the function of helping one maintain self-control, and to monitor defilement, then it is immensely wise to consider marriage as an indispensable vehicle of desire fulfillment, which will not only avoid Sin, but also fulfill God’s will for our sanctification.

Of course, this is highly idealized, and fails to account for the fact that marriage continues to be a terrible option for men.  However, for those who are naturally prone to lust and lechery, it may boil down to a clear choice between continuing on that path, or choosing a better way that God provides.  Thus, maintaining one’s sexual purity unto sanctification remains as a strong and legitimate reason for pursuing marriage.

If one recognizes that his/her libido is an insurmountable weakness, and he has the faith and ability to pursue a life path of marriage, then his soul may see everlasting rewards.

Related

About Jack

Jack is a world traveling artist, skilled in trading ideas and information, none of which are considered too holy, too nerdy, nor too profane to hijack and twist into useful fashion. Sigma Frame Mindsets and methods for building and maintaining a masculine Frame
This entry was posted in Courtship and Marriage, Desire, Discernment, Wisdom, Maturity, Personal Growth and Development, Models of Success, Purity Culture, Purpose, Questions from Readers, Respect, Sanctification & Defilement, Self-Concept, Stewardship, Strategy and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

31 Responses to On the Concept of Sin and the need for Marriage

  1. Sharkly says:

    Jack Says: If one recognizes that his/her libido is an insurmountable weakness …
    “It is better to marry than to burn with desire.” ~ 1st Corinthians 7:9

    I don’t even think it has to be insurmountable. It is just better to marry than to burn with desire. I believe I could have kept myself a virgin for my entire life. But why spend my entire life fighting my natural self, my constant urges, my natural desires, battling a battle I am not required to fight? Unless celibacy is your gift, and you are free from that burning desire. Why burn with desire every day and spend my life just battling to keep my sex drive from exploding into grave sin, when I can, at a young age, make peace with mating instinct by marrying a godly woman who recognizes her purpose is to satisfy and fulfill her husband?

    I suppose that brings us back to the lack of such unicorns.
    We got here by letting women go rancid, thinking themselves to be goddesses. And what else would they think, if we taught them to believe they are equally in the image of a deity. We need to correct the most fundamental beliefs underlying society. It needs to once again become accepted truth that women were created second class, and clearly inferior, by God, for man, to help, serve, and reverence God’s own image, which men are, through God’s creation, having made men stronger vessels built to bear God’s image and glory.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Jack says:

      “But why spend my entire life fighting my natural self, my constant urges, my natural desires, battling a battle I am not required to fight? […] Why burn with desire every day and spend my life just battling to keep my sex drive from exploding into grave sin, when I can, at a young age, make peace with mating instinct by marrying a godly woman who recognizes her purpose is to satisfy and fulfill her husband?”
      For me, this battle consumed all my energy for close to two decades. It did not make me more holy. All the temptation and frustration made me twisted, bitter, and cynical, and this hampered any emotional maturity or spiritual growth that I might have otherwise obtained. I totally recognize the need for marriage at a young age.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. Jack says:

    In this post, I have only addressed the need for marriage and its intended purpose. I haven’t touched the issue of how marriage actually fulfills this need, or whether it even has the potential to do so. That is a much bigger can of worms, and it is outside the scope of this study of the purity movement.

    But from a broader viewpoint, I expect the Christian manosphere will eventually narrow down to this question: What is actually required to make male-female relations (i.e. marriage) “work”?

    Liked by 2 people

    • cobaltsheath says:

      “But from a broader viewpoint, I expect the Christian manosphere will eventually narrow down to this question: What is actually required to make male-female relations (i.e. marriage) “work”?”

      “Complete social overhaul” and decentralization would do the trick. Simple enough, right? Make pornography illegal, make prostitution illegal, more financial incentives to get married and have lots of children, disincentive divorce, social media, thot, cad behavior, etc.

      On a smaller scale, we could do with a separate, Biblical community, set apart from American society, based on religious rules. Something similar to the Amish. It would take a few millionaires to buy some land and set it all up, but I don’t hope for much in that area. Financially independent men – I don’t expect rich women to care about this idea at all – in America are too busy jerking off with their money to be of any use to us.

      The concept of the Alpha Male Magic Wand is oversold and exaggerated. Not matter how much game or red pill behavior you have, an alpha husband is at the mercy of his wife and a phone call to a lawyer. Hence the need for an entire community to enforce the proper marriage roles.

      Liked by 3 people

      • larryzb says:

        That is an interesting point you make: “Hence the need for an entire community to enforce the proper marriage roles.”

        The fact that there is no social disapproval (from family members, and from peers) to seeking and obtaining a divorce does much to encourage it. You tell someone you know that you are going to get a divorce, and it is of no more significance than if you told them that you were going to buy a Ford truck rather than a Chevy truck.

        The fact is that individual actions in the aggregate greatly affect the community, the society. So individual cases of divorce do add to the collective harm to the society in addition to the harm on the individuals (especially the children) involved.

        Liked by 3 people

      • Jack says:

        In one post I wrote a while back, I came to the conclusion that one man alone is not strong enough to discipline a wayward wife. It requires a larger social network to hedge her into a state of containment. This is because if hubby says “no”, then she’ll run to someone else who protects and supports her rebellion. This could be just about anyone – another man, her family, the police, a lawyer… It takes a whole community to keep a family together.
        https://sigmaframe.wordpress.com/2018/11/24/is-there-any-honor-or-benefit-to-slut-shaming-an-adulterous-wife/

        Liked by 1 person

    • larryzb says:

      Jack:

      Yes, the critical question is as you state it: What is actually required to make male-female relations (i.e. marriage) “work”?

      A comprehensive approach to that question is needed. There are many Christian marriage bloggers and authors out there, but it seems that only a relative few take on all the aspects, all the dimensions of the above question. It is great to get wives to overcome their damnable sexual gate keeping, but more needs to be done than just make the sex better in the marriage, although that is very important.

      Liked by 3 people

  3. Scott says:

    ;But from a broader viewpoint, I expect the Christian manosphere will eventually narrow down to this question: What is actually required to make male-female relations (i.e. marriage) “work”?

    From my persepctive, Sharkly has the right of it– this is mostly a messaging issue. (Although, clearly social pressures and enforcement from a societal level are also super important.)

    Currently, men are held to the same, if not higher standards in marriage than ever before. They must be honest, hard working providers. They must be gracious and kind when that is what is called for. They must strong and aloof when that what is needed. They must instinctively know the difference and seemlessly transition from “beta” to “alpha” behaviors with utter perfection. They must be accountable, head over heals in love with their wives, drooling over her and praising every thing she does, everything she wears, etc. They must do this in front of all her friends, until she doesn’t like it. Then, change. They must change diapers and do laundry, and look totally hot doing those house chores. They must curb their violent tendencies, until those violent tendencies are required by some woman nearby. They must wear stupid t-shirts about shotguns and dating their daughters, or dress like a fairy and put on make up for Halloween. They must mentor the women they work with, unless “mentoring” comes across as creepy to that women, in which case they are sued for harassment. They must take risks, but not too much risk. They must not ask any questions of the woman they are dating related to her current situation. This makes you judgmental.

    That is the message men receive. All day, every day, from every corner of life.

    Women, in contrast get: Show up, you are awesome exactly like you are. There is no need to challenge yourself to do better. No need to be introspective about what a woman naturally brings to the table, or what drawbacks her feminine nature contains. You go grrrrrl. Any man is lucky for you to look in his direction.

    Multiply that by 3 or 4 generations, and here we are.

    Liked by 6 people

    • Sharkly says:

      Ideas eventually have consequences. Between 300-500 AD the Catholic church “appropriated” for women the image of God. That belief gives women a moral basis to claim equality. However, for the next 1400 years all dominions were ruled by men who acted in the belief that they were in fact superior and they ruled believing it a naturally good thing that the most superior men should legislate for the whole of the mass of their people.

      All people hold racial beliefs of some fashion, but it doesn’t generally become a public issue if people don’t start applying and enforcing those ideas on others. Nazi Germany is still notorious for their engaging in “applied racial science”.(angewandte Rassenkunde)
      In the same way a person’s/society’s aberrant belief about equality, or even the relative superiority of the female sex, carries little consequences so long as they don’t try to legislate or enforce that depravity on others. For 1400 years false religious beliefs about female greatness filled romantic literature, but men still ruled everywhere as the superiors.

      Democracy has been chided as a system where, “the side with the most fools always wins”. And so it was that after 100 years of America’s model experiment with a democratic republic, ruled by men, that the majority of fools who believed women to be morally superior, allowed women to have a vote and to gain real political power. From there women have fought to gain the “right” to draw & quarter men’s children in their wombs, and now even infanticide, the “right” to desert their marriages for “no fault” on their husband’s part, with cash rewards forcibly extracted from the defrauded husband, adultery has been legalized, equal pay is required even for inferior work, and men are routinely ruined by dubious “sexual harassment” accusations. “Women’s issues” have been enacted into law and these laws are now quickly ruining the whole world.

      So …. We have to start back where things went wrong, with the messaging about women. We went from wisely understanding that God wants all women to adorn themselves with shamefacedness,(1 timothy 2:9) and why God wants that, to now teaching every last “goddess” how to elevate her narcissistic self esteem still further. We need to teach these women that they are not the image of deity, because that is truth,(1 Corinthians 11:7) and the truth will eventually set us free from the political rule of women, who are natural defilers(Revelation 14:4) and have now defiled our whole world with the God-opposing Feminist influence of their rule. We need to teach women from a young age that due to their Eve-like inherent propensity to usurp men and bring defilement, and ruin paradise, that they should never be trusted to rule over men, as God tells us.(1 Timothy 2:12) Teaching women to look up to all men, will abate many of the destabilizing effects which natural hypergamy has wreaked, as hypergamy will always be unfulfilled and a source of constant discontent in an age of presumed sexual equality. And we begin to teach others how to respect men by first demonstrating it ourselves!
      Romans 12:10 Love one another with brotherly affection. Outdo one another in showing honor.

      Liked by 1 person

  4. larryzb says:

    For me, i think the commandments call men (and women) to freedom. The purpose of sexual morality (which includes the condemnation of fornication) is to protect and promote marriage, and by extension to promote and protect the nuclear family as the basic social unit of society. We see in the toxic, post Christian culture of the West today the destruction of the family, and the social evils that come from that (no need to give a lengthy litany of these here).

    Perhaps the greatest source of sexual sin is sexual frustration. And, we have asked for that in the West by accepting and encouraging the lengthy postponement of marriage for earthly purposes (like career and making money). Whether one sees the sexual drive in man as punishment for “the Fall”, or as something good that can serve to bond the spouses together, there is no denying that the sex drive is potent in both men and women. We are highly sexed beings, for better of for worse. Why cannot Christians get on the same page here? Let us promote healthy sexual intimacy within marriage.

    As an aside, Neitzche (1844 – 1900), who was very critical of Christianity (see his various works on it), wrote that everything natural in life Christianity distorts and attacks. We are born in sin, we fear death because of fear of Hell fire for eternity, and marriage (the fruit of the natural love of a man and a woman) is burdened and is only for reproduction. We may reject Neitzche’s atheism and purposeful rejection of, and animosity towards Christianity, but there are some criticisms we ought to consider. Christianity does have some baggage that needs to be let go of. (Sorry, to get off topic.)

    Like

  5. Ed Hurst says:

    The shorter definition of sin I’ve heard is: Asserting or living by anything different from what God says. More bluntly: God says, “this.” Sin means saying anything else.

    And yes, we would have to rebuild a society that acknowledges the definition of sin, and God’s intentions in marriage in order to change what we experience now. It would be a radically different society from the one we face now in the US.

    Liked by 2 people

  6. lastmod says:

    Instead of “getting some millionaires to buy some land, and live like the Amish, pretty easy to do”

    How about just joining the Amish?

    Oh? What’s that??????? You couldn’t leave your cushy lives? Be “not of this world” but all the simps, and blue-pillers need to learn this and put this into practice. Oh? The Amish on some bible verse you disagree with, and well………you couldn’t do that or live with them?

    All of your comments here are on the “do as I say, but not as I do” stripe.

    Sounds real appealing to a vast swath of unmarried christian men who burn “we need to separate from US society…..set up our own thing where marriage is community enforced / policed”

    You would still be calling the single men who didn’t spark “meet cute” in this community as blue-pilled, and woman pedestalizing.

    How about “working with your hands and leaving people alone” to paraphrase that verse in Thessoloins

    Like

    • Jack says:

      Jason, I’m going to delete your last comment because of your repeated use of the vague and inflammatory pronoun “you”. But before I do that, I’m going to give you some time to reword and rewrite your comment. Please describe your objections clearly and give us a brief reason why you believe the item in question is not feasible. Let’s keep it objective! Thanx!

      Like

      • cobaltsheath says:

        If it means anything, I don’t care if you leave it up. He’s responding to assumptions that exist in his head, not to anything I actually posted.

        Liked by 4 people

  7. lastmod says:

    I’ll make it even more clear. No one’s wife is going to “move to a farm, off the grid, live a simpler, god fearing life and be not of this world.”

    It will be expected that the simps, cucks, pastorbators, and blue-pillers who are supposed to do this, while the “elect” in the man-o-sphere and the christian faith will pontificate about how they have all the solutions to the world and not live it. ‘

    If one wants to “find a millionaire, buy some farmland, live like the Amish” they go ahead and move to PA and indeed “live” with the Amish. More of a “do what I say, and not as I do” attitude which is prevelant in the christian world

    Liked by 2 people

    • ramman3000 says:

      “If one wants to “find a millionaire, buy some farmland, live like the Amish” they go ahead and move to PA and indeed “live” with the Amish. More of a “do what I say, and not as I do” attitude which is prevelant in the christian world.”

      Do you understand what it means to “be not of this world?”

      Having lived in or near ‘Pennsylvania Dutch Country’ most of my life, I’ve coexisted with the Amish quite easily and they with us. I just drove by one of their farms today where they were selling homemade face masks. It is not difficult or unusual to engage them in either commerce or conversation. As we passed one of their buggies today, their children waved at my children and we waved back.

      Only something like 25% of Amish actually farm in Lancaster County, and in other places it is 10% or less. Joining the Amish would almost certainly mean not farming. While joining the Amish would be a huge commitment, joining one of the other Anabaptist sects that don’t have the same restrictions on technology would be fine. There are theological differences, but unless you have a very simplistic, black-and-white, inflexible view of “be not of this world?”, you could accomplish the same goal.

      “…do what I say, and not as I do…””

      I wonder who, besides me, has actually suggested joining an Anabaptist sect? Every time I’ve floated the idea out there, there was always something they couldn’t give up: alcohol, cussing/swearing, divorce/remarriage, various doctrinal sacred cows, or who knows what else.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Jack says:

        “So likewise, whoever of you does not forsake all that he has cannot be My disciple.” ~ Luke 14:33 (NKJV)

        I also grew up in a rural Midwestern area where the Amish were frequently seen. When I was younger, I often thought about becoming Amish and doing carpentry. But I didn’t know how to “get in” to that community. When I was in college, I attended a Mennonite church for a while, but I was always seen as an “outsider”. Later in life, I found acceptance among Taiwanese – who have a patriarchal society like the Amish – so I “left all I had” and came to Taiwan. I’ve never regretted it.

        Looking back on my life, I think if I had made myself more relevant to the Amish community, then I would have eventually found a home among the Amish. By more relevant, I mean, moving into the area, opening a business or finding local employment, attending church regularly, building rapport, and so on.

        I think it would not be so difficult to form a small community. All this needs is for a number of like-minded people to congregate in one geographical location. The demands of Life will pick things up from there. Immigrants do this all the time. How else could Minnesota come to have a Muslim congresswoman? Why couldn’t Christians do the same?

        Liked by 3 people

      • ramman3000 says:

        “I think it would not be so difficult to form a small community. [..] Why couldn’t Christians do the same?”

        In the late 1800s and early 1900s, a number of Mennonite families (including some of my ancestors) founded a settlement in Iowa. The community was made up of families from at least four geographically separate Mennonite communities. Ultimately the community failed because they could not come to agreement on religious practices, traditions, and customs. They were too stuck in running the community their own way. It failed after less than a full generation (though it was not a complete failure as the members were absorbed back into other communities)

        The difficulty in forming artificial communities is the lack of unity. The people making up a community must be both flexible and united. This is not so easy. I don’t know how to say this gently, but the kind of individualistic people I’ve run into on the manosphere don’t strike me as the types that could form any kind of religious community. Maybe a few, but the numbers would be small. Moreover, you need families and children in any thriving community, not single men.

        No, I think it would be better for young single men to make that hard decision to join an preexisting community, doing whatever is required of them with all their heart. This, also, is not easy, but probably easier.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Sharkly says:

        I wonder who, besides me, has actually suggested joining an Anabaptist sect?

        LOL! You’re better off stating a new community from scratch, and possibly getting some devout and disaffected Anabaptists to join in with your Religious Redpill Republic. I am half Mennonite, with a good local Mennonite last name, and live in a heavily Mennonite community with many Mennonite churches, and there isn’t a single one of them that I’m aware of that hasn’t gone the way of the world. My father’s natal church started allowing clapping in the service just 25 years ago, and today they are all either cheering my wife on with her divorce, or too afraid to confront her, or trying to stay ignorant of the matter. It just amazes me how quick the local churches suddenly detonated into worthlessness. My parents generation threw any rare divorcing person(all of whom were not raised Mennonite) out of the church permanently and wouldn’t hardly speak to them or acknowledge their existence afterwards. And now after my wife files for divorce from me, a formerly Mennonite church has actually made her a leader for their children’s ministry, mid-divorce. It is like they feel they need to make up for their past “sin” of not fellating all divorcees. They are worse than amoral, they actually have guilt over the churches former godly stances, and go out of their way now to demonstrate how welcoming of the most wicked they are. Everything has changed. Whereas they once debated over having a US flag inside the church, and were staunchly pacifist, now it seems like they can’t go a Sunday without having a time dedicated to honoring our military. Seriously! It’s like everything just completely reversed in the last 25 years, and they are all now ashamed of all their Mennonite heritage that their grandparents were so proud of and sacrificed to maintain and pass on. Quite frankly I’m only half Mennonite genetically, but I’m far more Mennonite by way of devotion to fearing God, than all the other Mennonites I know. They’re all out to prove how NOT Mennonite they are. They really want to fill their churches up with absolutely any worldly reprobate they can get to come, it is apparently all about butts-in-pews and dollars-in-the-offering now. Rock bands and laser lights, repetitive “Jesus is my boyfriend” praise music, skin tight hooker clothing, and nobody better seem Mennonite or look Mennonite. I think they might all call the police on their smartphones if some woman got past the ushers and entered their church with a bonnet on! LOL

        Liked by 2 people

    • Ed Hurst says:

      Not so O/T; it’s a feature of the kind of community about which we theorize here that we should have a legacy of wisdom to answer the questions this father faces. Frankly, I would be eager to help someone like that, because I believe I have useful answers. But it most certainly requires sharing them face-to-face. So I guess we need to theorize about the process of building itself, not the resulting shape of such a community.

      Liked by 1 person

  8. lastmod says:

    “Complete social overhaul” and decentralization would do the trick. Simple enough, right? Make pornography illegal, make prostitution illegal, more financial incentives to get married and have lots of children, disincentive divorce, social media, thot, cad behavior, etc”

    The assumptions out of my head? Pretty simple. Just do what you have suggested. It would do the trick.

    That’s a pipe dream out of your head. This problem has been brewing for a long time, and according to many of you….it began in dark medieval europe when “courtly love” ruined everything, but not really until 1970 or so…….

    Besides…….who here will heard goats for a living?

    As for some masucline sociey like Taiwan, they have a female prime minister. Obviously something went wrong. Was it courtly love? Or was it because of feminism? Why isn’t this woman kneeling at her husbands feet and calling him “lord”

    Like

    • Jack says:

      Jason, you have not offered any evidence that the stated suppositions are invalid. Socialism was once a “pipe dream”. Exercising the imagination is not a fallacy. The president of Taiwan has nothing to do with either the subject or my experience. Certainly you must be trolling.

      Like

      • feeriker says:

        Socialism was once a “pipe dream”.

        Socialism still is a pipe dream. Sure, lots of countries are still making (impoverished) fools of themselves trying to convince themselves and the rest of the world that they’ve been the ones to finally make that pipe dream come true, but the evidence before everyone’s eyes tells a different story (my wife’s native Venezuela serving as Exhibit A).

        Liked by 2 people

  9. lastmod says:

    You brought her up. Not me 🙂

    Like

  10. ramman3000 says:

    Ed says: “it’s a feature of the kind of community about which we theorize here that we should have a legacy of wisdom to answer the questions this father faces. [..] So I guess we need to theorize about the process of building itself, not the resulting shape of such a community.”

    I agree with Ed on this. Focusing on the shape of the community would be unsuccessful. Consider:

    Could I, as an Anabaptist with a theology that says that physical violence done by Christians is wrong, be in community with Scott, who was in the military? Could I be in a community with Adam, who uses language that is forbidden? Could I be in community with those of you who have divorced and remarried?

    My wife’s grandfather was a man I deeply respected who was also a doctor in the military. My grandfather served in WWII. I know many people who use language that I disapprove of. I even went to an Anabaptist church that had a pastor that was divorced and remarried (though he was only hired after a deep dive into the personal details of that divorce).

    How can this be? I can and must live aside my brothers who think differently than me, including those who have sinned but are redeemed children of God. Consider what Jack says:

    “Looking back on my life, I think if I had made myself more relevant to the Amish community, then I would have eventually found a home among the Amish. By more relevant, I mean, moving into the area, opening a business or finding local employment, attending church regularly, building rapport, and so on.”

    Jack, like the rest of us, could not have joined the Amish because his lifestyle is incompatible. But he could have lived near them, made himself a part of their community. The Amish in Lancaster County—about 7% of the population—account for a disproportionately high level of cultural/community influence. They are demonstrably salt and light.

    Liked by 2 people

  11. Pingback: A New Patch on Old Cloth | Σ Frame

  12. Pingback: The need for Marriage Education | Σ Frame

  13. Pingback: Only God can grant a successful marriage | Σ Frame

  14. Pingback: Sanctification and Sexual Compatibility | Σ Frame

  15. Pingback: Seeking Input on Marriage Licenses | Σ Frame

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s