Loving Through The Pain Episode 1

This is the MOST sacrificial love I’ve EVER seen a wife have for her husband regarding their sex life. Such a beautiful example of a wife caring so much about her husband’s needs!

Biblical Gender Roles

“To women who feel it is their right to refuse sex, I can only give my thought process. I can be quite the feminist when it comes to certain things, but I don’t think there’s any place for that in a marriage.” – This is a quote from a woman named Angel who recently started commenting on my blog.  I include her full story below that she emailed me and gave me permission to publish this.

I am hoping to make this a continuing series as I get testimonials from married couples who have continued to show physical and sexual love toward one another through various physical adversities they face.

The most amazing thing about her story is that she and her husband are not Christians.  But they instinctively knew what God put in their hearts(even if they did not know his word on the subject of marriage).

Their story reminds…

View original post 1,832 more words

Advertisements

19 thoughts on “Loving Through The Pain Episode 1

  1. What a powerful, inspiring story. Thank you for making the effort to pass it on to us. The lack of comments in response to this is a sad testimony to how far feminism and hypergamy have infested the church. This is couple is more Christian than the majority of self-proclaimed Christians I know. They don’t read about what they should do and pay those things lip service. They DO them. “Why do you call me LORD but do not obey me?” Thanks for being a light on the hill, GwaDFT. We need an army of you fighting the good fight.

  2. ” The lack of comments in response to this is a sad testimony to how far feminism and hypergamy have infested the church.”

    I was going to respond to this, but didn’t think it was necessary to put in my two cents after that fiver was thrown.
    FWIW, I already do this myself (I’ve had my share of “women’s issues”, physically, through the years from cysts to endometriosis…right now I have an imbedded IUD, sometimes it hurts, sometimes not but I don’t tend to reveal a lot of personal details like that).
    It actually made a different impression on me, kind of hitting home the fact that what we say here on the internet can actually matter. It often doesn’t seem to be the case, but there is an example of the impact biblical gender roles had on this woman, and she is probably having on others. I find that interesting (and, frankly, uplifting).

  3. “but didn’t think it was necessary to put in my two cents after that fiver was thrown.”

    Reading again, I should have stated this better, it sounds a little terse. I didn’t think I’d be adding anything by commenting, since the letter already hit the point home so thoughtfully.

  4. I was lead here from “biblical gender roles” and wanted to post the same reply to you here as I did there… in the event it doesn’t go through moderation.

    Dragonfly,

    Your gravatar says you love learning and are always looking for an interesting read. It also says that you believe in humanity’s goodness and that you work towards being a better person in life.

    Which leads me to suggest that you read a few books that have made me a better person: The King James Bible (cover to cover, word to word), The Moral Landscape, A Universe From Nothing, and The God Delusion. These 4 books literally made me a better person, and expanded my perception of the world beyond what I ever could’ve imagined. These 4 books will either strengthen your convictions or change your view of the world.

    Best,

  5. Thank you for the suggestions… I’ve never read the latter three, although I’ve heard a bit about The God Delusion and have watched many interviews with Richard Dawkins. I actually enjoy watching interviews with the Hitchens brothers back when Christopher was alive. But I’ve already entertained (more than I probably should) the ideas of morality without divinity.

    Your blog is interesting, it is just sad to me when I see someone who is so young embrace Atheism.

  6. I appreciate that, though, I haven’t kept up with my blog recently (the newest one is actually “iantimberlake.com” as opposed to “iantimberlake.wordpress.com”)… I should probably get back to writing. I used to write opinion for a newspaper and often times the ideas would come from my not-so-professional blog.

    In regards to atheism, I don’t “embrace it”. I don’t think anybody who really knows the meaning of “atheism” can say they “embrace it”. In fact, it’s actually the opposite of “embrace”. I don’t embrace Christianity, the same as I don’t embrace Islam, or Greek Mythology. A-Theism, is just, simply, not believing in a theistic god. It doesn’t mean I “hate” god, because there’s nothing to hate when you don’t believe. There is no doctrine and nothing really to embrace. I studied Aerospace Engineering and have a very logical and scientific way of thinking about things. I’d probably safely argue that I’ve studied religion more than most religious people have and I have not come across anything to convince me it’s either true or good (at least in the literal sense). Any argument I’ve ever had has always boiled down to “you just need faith”. And my response is always, “not without reason”. Many of the common response to my lack of “faith” are usually unfounded… like near death experiences, losing close family, etc. As I’ve experienced all of these.

    In regards to anti-theism. That’s the bit about me that thinks the world would be a more peaceful place without all the religious teachings of the world. The Bible is a truely gruesome book (though, incredible literature) and Mathew 5:17 quotes Jesus saying that everything in the Old Testament must be followed to the letter. The reason most people don’t follow most of the teachings of the Old Testament anymore (even though Mathew 5:17 says you should), is because morality is defined by people and the society we mold, and therefore we cast things aside that we deem to be immoral.

    I’m not trying to convince you otherwise. I just suggested those books because all 4 of them provide great context to the big questions in life each and every one of us must try and understand.

    My effort is much the same as your comment about it being “sad that I’m so young (25) and embracing atheism”. In that I find it “sad” that a website like “Biblical Gender Roles” is taken as a serious dialogue in modern day morality. That entire website puts you in your place, so to speak… and that, to me, is immoral.

  7. “Any argument I’ve ever had has always boiled down to “you just need faith”. And my response is always, “not without reason”. ”

    I completely agree with this. And I’m sorry to say you “embrace atheism” I think I understand what you mean by it being more the opposite rather than anything else. And not trying to offend you by saying you’re so young – I’m just really weird and think of almost all men like a son (lol I’m just crazy), but I really do. I might read some of those, I really did appreciate the suggestions, I’ve read things like that before but only found them to be profoundly depressing.

  8. “In regards to anti-theism. That’s the bit about me that thinks the world would be a more peaceful place without all the religious teachings of the world.”

    Well, there are many examples of this, so you’re not at all off base.

  9. “In that I find it “sad” that a website like “Biblical Gender Roles” is taken as a serious dialogue in modern day morality. That entire website puts you in your place, so to speak… and that, to me, is immoral.”

    This I’d be willing to talk more about… what makes you sad about that website? Or my involvement in it?

  10. “I’ve read things like that before but only found them to be profoundly depressing.”

    Then maybe don’t read them, haha. It might simply be a difference in personality. Neither right nor wrong. For me, reading books about the universe or morality is only eye-opening and in many cases very exciting. It continues to show that there is so much out there left to learn and discover… things that we never thought to be imaginable. Having all the answers is actually what depresses me the most.

    And no, I didn’t take offense to any of your comments. You wouldn’t believe the thick skin I grew when writing opinion for a newspaper. Offense can only really be taken, anyway… as opposed to given.

    I’m not aware of your involvement with “Biblical Gender Roles” other than reposting it. It’s everything. The banner photo shows a dad and his son checking the oil of a car and the mom teaching the daughters how to cook (probably the most subtle thing on the website). Then you have posts titled “7 ways to discipline your wife”, all of which are completely denigrating, some of which illegal. Sentence after sentence of this variation: “maybe you put off the purchase of that new dishwasher she’s been wanting”. Some of the lines are literally abusive in the court of law. Then of course there’s the recent post “How a husband can enjoy sex that is grudgingly given by his wife” where it says, “This is when a wife just comes out and says “NO!” or pushes your hands away. As I said in my post on “8 steps to confronting your wife’s sexual refusal” you as a husband should not tolerate refusal. If your wife says “NO” and slaps your hand away that is a disrespectful and unloving response by your wife to your sexual initiation and there is no sin in you trying to initiate sex with your wife.” That comment right there is literally saying Christian teachings condone the rape of your wife. I mean, I could go on because it’s literally every sentence (that’s not meant to be insulting to you). And it upsets me that men believe this is how entitled they feel they have the right to be (because it’s endorsed by their religion), and it upsets me even further that women allow it to happen (because it’s endorsed by their religion). The entire website is degrading, vastly immoral, and suppresses the freedoms of women.

    I am happily in love with someone I intend to marry. I will never treat her in the manner this website condones. She respects me, and I respect her as human beings. We don’t need to live with these supposed “rules” or even “suggestions” because both our lives are freer and better without… And it’s for this reason, among many other reasons, that make me an anti-theist. Because my own understanding of morality is superior to this “morality”.

  11. To add:

    I’ve posted a link on my Facebook to the “7 ways to discipline your wife” post. A pastor friend of mine (who is in his 50s), shared it and said this, “This could be the most f***** up article I have read in years. What do I thank God for? That I raised my daughter not to believe what I was taught growing up.
    The primary tenant of religion should not be the subjugation of women.

  12. “It continues to show that there is so much out there left to learn and discover… things that we never thought to be imaginable. Having all the answers is actually what depresses me the most.”

    Yes, but even Christians can have this view. I remember studying biology and the sciences and in wonder and amazement how much is still unknown.

    I kept coming back to a phrase in my head that went, “The more you know, the more you understand that you can never know everything.” It was so beautiful and so humbling to begin to understand how vast the field of science and linking it with God’s creation and infinity itself in mathematical equations, all of it led to coming to an admittance that one cannot know everything, and that in fact, the more you find out, the more this only solidifies that truth. 🙂

    As far as BGR’s website, we just see it completely opposite. He says on there multiple times that he’s not advocating for a husband forcing himself on his wife. He’s not advocating actual rape. But even non-Christians can read his writing that is based on biblical arguments and understand that loving spouses treat each other with consideration and take care of each other’s needs.

  13. But herein lies the problem.

    “It was so beautiful and so humbling to begin to understand how vast the field of science and linking it with God’s creation…”

    This “understanding” is predicated on a presupposed belief in not just a deity, but a theistic, religious doctrine. Where all of the learning (math/science/etc) comes from an atheistic process called the “scientific method” (which, to be clear, isn’t a belief, it’s a process)… and becomes molded into an idea that’s based on everything that the “scientific method” discredits: fallacy.

    As I said before: I feel I have a solid foothold in the sciences, having studied aerospace engineering (and working for NASA), and also being well learned in religion… they cannot be equated, even in the slightest. The scientific method has given us all that which you spoke about in your comment, but it has never once, pointed us in the direction of a supernatural understanding of the universe (if it did, I wouldn’t be an atheist)… so to imply that it can be linked… all I can is that that is simply false. If you ever do read “A Universe From Nothing”, I’ll be interested in hearing what you have to say about it.

    The biggest difference between the scientific method and religion is quite damning. In science, the highest honors are awarded to people who prove predecessors wrong; it is literally about doubting what we know about the universe and striving to question reality for the sake of better understanding… and religion uses what we presently know (from science) to fit to the presupposed idea of religion. An idea that happens to be 2000+ years old.

    The very fact that BGR needs a disclaimer to the content says a lot to what the content is about. Even if there is a footnote that says that, literally every single sentence on that website is about the husband’s dominance to the wife. If loving spouses treat each other with /equal/ consideration, then those “7 ways to discipline your wife” should also be “7 ways to discipline your husband”. My relationship with my partner would not be as close if I adhered to everything this website said… not even that… it would not be as close if I listed to even one sentence on this website. The very fact that it says “you as a husband should not tolerate refusal” when talking about desiring sex, shows that that website condones authoritarian control over your wife in a way that forces her to comply with your every wish. That is rape, regardless of any disclaimer on the website.

    If ANY of the content on this website is endorsed by a Christian understanding of the world (which it is because the title is “Biblical Gender Roles”), then I have a significantly greater moral capacity that the religious teachings of Christianity. In fact, anyone who does not condone the ownership of slaves has a greater moral capacity than the religious teachings of Christianity.

  14. “As I said before: I feel I have a solid foothold in the sciences, having studied aerospace engineering (and working for NASA), and also being well learned in religion… they cannot be equated, even in the slightest. ”

    I understand, I’m sure you have learned a lot and understand a lot – that kind of science is intense for sure, but why does it make you so sure there is no God?

    I’ve also worked in science and research, working with scientists from around the world, on and with some of the most dangerous viruses in our day – trying to create vaccines for impoverished people in third world countries, along with our own country. Understanding of God and understanding of science, for me, are intimately related and yes, even equated. I think the problem lies more with trying to divorce morality (right and wrong) and there being an ultimate source of goodness (God). Where do we have this knowledge of good and evil? Why aren’t we like the animals who are ignorant of it? Why do we have a concept of morality? And can it be subjective? Why do we have a conscience? Are there subjective or absolute truths? If so… why can one man’s morality differ from another? You can’t answer these questions without a firm grip on good and evil. And I’ll go as far as to say that you can’t have a firm grip on good and evil without admitting that evil is like a force, and so is goodness, and that they’re constantly, at all times, in opposition to each other’s wills.

    You say the scientific method has never once pointed anyone in the direction of the supernatural understanding of the universe… but I say it does, quite frequently even. There have been many times when in science, there was no scientific explanation, or the explanation itself caused people without faith, to suddenly feel like there was more that they’d never thought of before (concerning the spiritual, and even morality). If there is morality and ethics around a specific issue in science, then there is a clear good and evil, but then why do so many disagree on where to draw the line? Where do we even get these convictions that something is wrong – why do we internally cringe at evil?

    In science, the highest honors are awarded to people who prove predecessors wrong; it is literally about doubting what we know about the universe and striving to question reality for the sake of better understanding… and religion uses what we presently know (from science) to fit to the presupposed idea of religion. An idea that happens to be 2000+ years old.

    I’ve known scientists that had great faith. I’ve known some that were so amazed and taken back by the beauty and exquisite mechanisms of how perfect something is designed to work, or how incredibly beautiful the tiniest aspects of our universe are, that they had to conclude, that it only happened through someone’s design. Intelligent design. I’ve also known Atheistic scientists that had incredibly far out ideas of how the universe came together – just as far-out as God creating it in 7 days – and they believe in that. They have to, because their “evidence” is little to none, not to mention the ideas of some of the births of the earth sound insane (even to this Christian). It’s amazing to me, that some of the smartest people in the world can hold beliefs about crystals somehow forming the universe, and in the same breath, admit that there are elements of biology that undeniably show a design in how things work, and miracle that it all works together in perfection in most cases. Having an open view to admitting there may be a God, that maybe the universe really was designed in brilliant fashion, is to me being open-minded. It is the close-minded that say it could only have been one way that is provable through an elementary scientific method.

    I get it – that you think my believing in God means that I’m admitting that I go against science and reason because I’m admitting that I “know” or “understand” something. In my opinion, knowing or understanding God is a never-ending process. I don’t believe we could ever completely know or understand His ways, in fact, even in the Bible it says that His ways are higher than our ways, and His thoughts higher than our thoughts. So even in faith, there is no way to completely understand or know everything, and that’s ok. Faith is being sure of what we hope for, and certain of what we do not see, but it does not mean that we have faith without reason. I’m sure this sounds backwards to you with my statement of “the more we know, the more we understand that we can never know everything.” Scientists who believe in macro-evolution or crystals creating the earth are also practicing a form of faith though – being sure and certain of what they do not see. There may be “evidence,” but one can also find lots of evidence that Bible’s stories were true and actually happened. There is even evidence of the supernatural having had happened… if one looks for it or accepts that it’s actually there.

  15. Defining good and evil are important. But It would be a fallacy to assume that god is the only explanation for it. Just because science doesn’t have the answers, doesn’t mean god is the answer… the “god of the gaps” fallacy. Right and wrong are defined by society. For example: the Etoro people require boys ages 7 to 17 to drink the semen of the male elders, daily, to become a man. It is a tenet in anthropology to not interfere with these types of practices and not judge these societies… for they have determined their own moral structure. Who’s anyone to say they are wrong? A Christian only would because, without any doubt, the Bible is the moral authority. Just as Muslims would with the Quran. Which is why we have never-ending wars. We “internally cringe at evil” because we were raised in a society that has established, more or less, the difference between right and wrong. If you go to another society, things we “cringe” at might be totally kosher, so to speak. Are they in the “wrong” or are you? This is a serious question in the understanding of moral superiority and equality.

    “There have been many times when in science, there was no scientific explanation, or the explanation itself caused people without faith, to suddenly feel like there was more that they’d never thought of before.”

    This is, again, a misunderstanding of science. Science doesn’t “feel”. The entire point of the scientific method is to remove the subjectivity of human perception. Also, lack of explanation does not mean you insert one. As a result of both of these things, the scientific method does not “care” about good and evil… this would be another fallacy. Understanding this is paramount in understanding science.

    Some great scientists have had great religious convictions, I’m not saying otherwise. That doesn’t mean their work is divine and there is some sort of connection between the results of science and religion. This would be another fallacy.

    “I’ve known some that were so amazed and taken back by the beauty and exquisite mechanisms of how perfect something is designed to work, or how incredibly beautiful the tiniest aspects of our universe are, that they had to conclude, that it only happened through someone’s design.”

    Again, another fallacy. As above, science is intended to remove human subjectivity. Opinions don’t matter with science. Words like “amazed” and “beauty” and “exquisite” and “perfect” don’t lead in the slightest conclusion that something is divine. Nor do they have anything to do with science.

    In regards to crystals and all other pseudo-science… a part of the scientific method is peer-review, replicated experimentation. This means that some people can come out with crazy theories, but it’s only upheld if other scientists seek to prove it wrong, and can’t, and that it holds up to endless testing. The highest form of thought in science is “theory”. Theories do not upgrade to “laws”, a common misconception. Theories use laws (like F=ma) to substantiate the theory. Gravity is still “only” a theory. But it’s more or less considered fact now because it’s been 500 years and nobody has been able to refute it and all tests are consistent. No serious researcher believes in crystal “science”. Another famous “theory” is “string theory”… which actually isn’t a theory because it’s not testable… at least presently.

    Which brings me to the crux of the conversation. Because science requires the absolute removal of human subjectivity, requires repeatable experimentation by multiple people through time, and requires it to coincide with other theories that have become established… you can’t say that religion can be linked with science. It can’t yet be tested, it can’t yet be verified, and until then, I can’t take it seriously.

  16. “Right and wrong are defined by society. ”

    I’m sure you’d disagree with this is you thought about it just a little bit more. In some societies, it is perfectly acceptable to beat your children to death if you wish – if they’ve dishonored you enough. Or it’s acceptable to beat your wife, because they still view women as property – and that is “right” to them.

    What about the Afganis? They have a saying that boys are created to have sex with. They chain little boys to beds and rape them for sexual fun and pleasure – the soldiers (our men) over there hear their screams at night. But it’s “right” right? Because it’s their “culture” to terrorize and rape children.

    Sorry, if you honestly believe societies create right and wrong, I definitely disagree.

    Societies do not create morality. Morality is instinctive and exclusive to humanity, and it stands the test of Truth.

  17. Picture yourself as a male hunter-gather living long ago, roaming by yourself through the wilderness trying to survive. You happen upon another individual in your same predicament. You have 3 options: You both walk separate ways and never see each other again, you kill him and take all his possessions for his benefit (or at a minimum to prevent him from killing you for the same reason), or you two agree to work together using each others strengths for survival. Obviously the 3rd choice is the most logical… PLUS there’s the idea of the golden rule, which is known to predate the Old Testament in Egypt.

    Morality is malleable. Societies don’t generally allow for killing because most people object to that, thus shaping society’s moral structure. I mean, sacrificial killings of a society’s people go back many thousands of years. Is that moral? The Bible calls for human sacrifices… that’s actually the basis of Christianity at its root.

    A little bit of me is playing devil’s advocate for the sake of understanding, but I am making a point.

    The morality of a society is contingent on what the populous, as a whole, allows.

    If a group of people begins to frown upon and mock anyone who puts their hair into a ponytail, it will eventually become “immoral” to have your hair in a ponytail. If a society allows someone to be the judge on if someone else should die for witchcraft, something the Bible condones, then it’ll be normal to see people burned alive in the streets.

    I addressed slavery earlier and I don’t think it was touched upon. The Bible also quite obviously condones slavery. Is that moral?

    So just in the last couple posts: the Bible is very much for human sacrifice, burning witches, slavery, and apparently the subjugation of women. If I am above any of these things, my morality is superior to Christianity’s… and this is just 4 examples.

  18. That’s why I added The Moral Landscape to the list. It’ll either strengthen personal beliefs or give you a new perspective, or both.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s