Lego Movie 2 – Teaching Boys to be a Beta Emmet & Not a Rex-Dangervest

Related image

So during our summer vacations we usually make time to go to the movies each week during the, “Kids’ Free Movie,” day.  This past week was the first free movie of the season, and my husband took all of us to go see the Lego 2 movie that was showing (they typically show already released movies since they’re free).  It was like an all-boy day, as we had our two sons and one of our oldest’s good friends (baby girl got to hangout with Grandma 😉 ). ❤  I love being able to take their friends to fun things, get tons of candy at the Dollar Store, and splurge on Icee’s when we get there!  As we were driving my husband and I listened to the cute things boys talk about to each other… it’s just so sweet to me, their boy stuff.

The Lego Movie 2 was mostly centered on a analogous plot of the difficulty in managing playing with a younger sister, while trying to prevent the ever-looming, catastrophic event of Armamageddon (Are Mama Gets In(volved)!.  The general plot is funny, the jokes, sarcasm, and real life/other movie references are always interesting, and almost every kid (and parent) can relate perfectly to the delicate balance of siblings playing together nicely, or else their mama really does have to get in.  When mama gets in, “Armamageddon,” all the lego worlds they’ve created are banished into the, “Bin of Stor-Age!”  A lot of it is simply hilarious, and the music is so kid-perfect there were kids dancing in the theater (ours, too).

It’s a popular movie, apparently grossing over $191 million worldwide.

Yet the Lego Movie 2 is also pretty painful to watch, especially when you think about what it’s trying to teach boys about their worth, what women want, and what women respond to.

Image result for emmet brickowski

Emmet, the un-hero

The first Lego Movie already introduced us to the main male character, and supposed hero, Emmit Brickowski.  He’s the typical depiction of a beta male, who tries too hard to please everyone, builds his life around everyone else’s happiness, and truly believes his life is, “AWESOME,” even though his emotions and results of his actions prove to him everyday, that it isn’t.

He is the butt of every joke, no one believes in him, and even though he kind of gets the girl in the end, it’s clear she’s not really attracted to him much less truly in love with him.  He’s the reason why both movies are painful to watch, and yet, in the second movie, it’s taken too far.

In Lego Movie 2,

it’s clear the writers try to present his pitiful character as being the kind of man all boys should try to be,

the kind of man women truly want.

I’m not trying to review that first movie, it annoyed me enough back then, but at least I could see it showed some glimmer of truth in that men like this aren’t respected and aren’t something boys should try to model themselves after.

Why on earth would they want to, with how horrible Emmet is treated (in both movies)??  What boy wants to grow up being constantly disrespected by all the women in his life and not valuable to his friends (or boss, or anyone)?  In short, what male child would see this movie, and think it was a good, Life Plan, to end up miserable?  It was a good teaching tool to our oldest, a cartoon-life example to use to show him how women (and most other people) treat men who act like Emmet.  This second movie, however, with it’s outright teaching boys that this is what women want, was too much.  Coming from the point of view of a mom with two sons (who have friends we also care about), yes, it was painful to watch this movie, “teach,” these boys we brought that women want weak, immature, naive men for romantic partners.  That is, undeniably, the opposite of what women actually want.  So let’s be honest here, the Lego Movie 2 lies to children, and most devastatingly, to boys.

Red Pill Matrix References in Lego Movie 2

After the movie, my husband and I couldn’t help but compare notes to how many blue pill and red pill truisms we found and referred to.  At one point, the only red pill aware character (who is of course, also made to be the male villain who tries to “ruin everything) even makes a reference to Emmet wanting to, “go back to the Matrix.”  He was referencing the red pill lingo of when men prefer to go back to being, “blue pill,” where they don’t see that the entire society is trying to get them to build their lives around what women want, as opposed to what’s truly beneficial or good for men.  Blue pill is a reference to being plugged in to the Matrix, whereas Red Pill references having your eyes opening, unplugging, and understanding the real nature of the world.

Image result for chris pratt emmet

The red pill aware character who made this Matrix reference, is called Rex Dangervest, and is a knock-off of the real hero in Jurassic World, and voiced by the same actor, Christ Pratt.

Image result for rex dangervest with raptors

In Lego 2, Rex and his army of velociraptors are the bad guys, the guys trying to teach Emmet to stand up for himself, be tougher, be more… *gasp* masculine.

Let’s all take 5 minutes to remember right now how Emmet was treated when he wasn’t masculine.

Yea…

right…

his life was miserable.

Image result for chris pratt jurassic world

In reality, Chris Pratt’s character in Jurassic World, the same man villain-Rex is modeled after, was the tough, but kind and gentle, hero who saved everyone he possibly could, even going so far as to sacrifice himself for the benefit of others. He’s also the velociraptors’ “alpha male,” leader, and is therefore able to somewhat control these dangerous dinosaurs and their killer instincts.

 

The fact that the Lego 2 movie rewrites this classic, good, alpha-male hero, into a villain to represent, “toxic masculinity,” should tell you everything you need to know about the mindset of the creators.  

The message to boys is, “Don’t be like Rex, don’t be tough and capable.  Don’t show, ‘toxic masculinity.’  Be like Loser-Emmet instead!”  However, Chris Pratt’s character was the hero who the two boys in the movie admired, respected, and chose to be with over their female relative who couldn’t save them!  We can trust that Emmet’s beta-male character, all sweet and naive and emotional, would not have been able to save as many lives as Pratt’s character if Emmet was likewise transferred into Jurassic World.

But why did Lego 2 pick Chris Pratt’s male hero to make a mockery and villain of?  Aside from having ample opportunities to make hilarious references to the raptors and his communication style, I think it may go a bit deeper than that.  The main female character in Jurassic World was the typical strong, I-don’t-need-a-man, type who seemed successful at her job of running the dinosaur park.  But over the course of the movie, we watch our heroine leader make a series of devastatingly wrong leadership decisions that end in many people dying for her lack of perception of how dangerous the situation was all along.  Pratt’s heroic male character is the only one pragmatic enough to see the situation for what it was (much like Rex in Lego 2), and has to constantly fix her mistakes, usually too late to save the many men who die because of her decisions.  His and her characters have a strong sexual chemistry, of course, that is made even more obvious by how annoyed she is at his personality.  In the end, she realizes how much she needed him to save everyone and she succumbs to their romance for, as they joke, “survival.”  The subliminal message of the Jurassic World movie was,

“Toxic Masculinity may be annoying to women,

but boy it sure does save their asses (and their children)

when everything goes south!”

I loved this character, and our kids did, too.  He looks and acts very much like my own brother (who is a Chris Pratt doppelganger!!), so for our kids, it was like watching their Uncle on the screen… well, if their Uncle was a raptor trainer in a dinosaur world.  How cool is that?!?!

In Lego Movie 2, not only do we find Rex is a villain, the movie makes a plot twist by revealing he’s actually Emmet – the man he turns into after being hardened by women’s, and in general, people’s true nature.  After spending years under the dryer, forgotten completely, he refashioned himself into a man who could take care of himself and didn’t need saving from the female hero any longer.  He transformed into a real man who could not only save himself, but as Chris Pratt showed in his Jurassic World character, a man who could also save the masses in a crisis.

The movie, instead of admitting that yes, men are most beneficial to society when they are capable and masculine, takes it too far with Rex’s character, revealing him as the villain who tries to destroy love and everything good found in two worlds (the masculine represented by the brother’s lego world and the feminine represented by the sister’s “Systar System” of girlie legos) working together.  

Red pill Rex Wouldn’t Exist without a Hardening of Blue pill Emmet’s character

The honesty in this movie is interesting at times when contrasted to the overall goal of hiding the truth.  The writers admit to the audience that our tough and desirable Rex (knock off of Chris Pratt’s Jurassic World hero) would not even exist if Lucy hadn’t hurt Emmet (along with all his other friends) as bad as they initially did by leaving him under the dryer for years alone, and never coming back for him.  When Lucy does come back for him, he remains in his blue pill state and rejects everything good and masculine Rex was trying to teach him (that Lucy said she wanted).  As a result, Rex starts to vanish ala Back to the Future style, because now that Lucy came back for him, his alter-ego never gets to exist.  It’s almost as if Feminist Females like Lucy realize, “Oh no!  Look at the red pill response we’ve created!” and want to bring their betas back (and old article of Rollo’s).

And you know what? It’s true that most men would never become red pill aware (Rex-Dangerous) if they weren’t brutally forced to face the truth of female nature, either due to divorce or the series of heartbreaks we watch Emmet go through.  Most men are not naturally that self-aware due to the Matrix-like programming they go through in childhood and adolescence.  Some men are, but I think most just aren’t.

We have to painfully watch Emmet go through the slow realizations that Lucy not only doesn’t share his dream, she doesn’t even appreciate what he’s offering.  Lucy looks down on his, “naive,” dream of owning a cute little house together and starting a life as a couple.  Let’s not even mention that even when they weren’t in a war he wasn’t able to get her to settle down.  Is he naive for trying to start a life together in the midst of war?  At first glance, yes, but then we see Lucy’s pessimistic and destructive attitude is the entire reason the war started in the first place, and it all starts to become more clear.

Image result for emmet fighting rex

A Cringe-worthy Romance… Bleh!

The movie shows a clip from the past where Emmet’s ability to make peace with the Sister Aliens could have avoided the war in its entirety, if Lucy and the others only listened to him.  But as the movie keeps on teaching us, no one respects or listens to men like Emmet.  This isn’t unfortunately just female nature, it’s human nature in a nutshell.  His miserable life is unavoidable because of the way he behaves and allows himself to be treated.  He dreams of Lucy being in love with him, wanting to marry him and settle down, but the audience can painfully feel zero attraction or chemistry between them.  And yet Emmet still tries to bring her in on his dreams of building a picture-perfect life together, which realistically, would be anything but perfect!  It is the classic, “blue pill,” form of male-reasoning and living in denial that leads to so many men being unhappily married to women who treat them like Lucy does, and never understanding what’s wrong or what she really wants from him.

The physical struggle between Emmet and Rex was also interesting to watch and listen to, as they literally fought to the, “Lego death,” close to the end of the movie.  It seemed to represent the internal struggle most men have with admitting the truth to themselves (with their blue pill self fighting against it, because the truth is painful).  Emmet (blue pill male) doesn’t want to have to become Rex (red pill male), even though it would drastically make a lot of the problems in his life disappear (the main one being holding on to a woman like Lucy, who doesn’t appreciate or admire him, and doesn’t feel any chemistry for him).

Emmet can’t become Rex, the more masculine version of himself, though, because the writers made sure Rex had all the exaggerated villain-esque and anti-social characteristics of male, “toxicity.”  Instead of giving boys a good, balanced, masculine role model like Chris Pratt’s initial character in Jurassic World, they give us (as the supposed hero) plain old Emmet the way he always was… all positive or masculine changes discarded.  The result of only seeing these two extremes presented as viable options for Emmet to become, fell flat, and didn’t provide a positive ending for our tragic, “hero.”

In the end, Lucy does say she preferred him the way he was before, “naive, sweet, and innocent.”  She wasn’t happy when he grew up and became tougher like she said she wanted initially.  And it’s true, it didn’t make her happy to see he didn’t need her anymore to control and dictate his life.  Women like this routinely pick men they can control, because they don’t want to look up to, respect, or God-forbid submit to a male figure (for all kinds of possible psychological reasons behind it).  But without the chemistry and actual love between them, Lucy’s admission of love comes across as preferring Emmet to be “beta,” or blue pill because back then he was more controllable.  When he was the old Emmet, and not tough and grown up and capable, he followed Lucy’s lead, even though it would regularly lead to bad decisions like war occurring when it didn’t have to.  Her exaggerated hostility toward everyone and anything is actually a kind of good example of toxic femininity that I don’t think the Lego 2 creators bargained for us realizing.  Feminist movie, meet Irony. 😉

Lucy’s Create Their Own Unhappiness

Image result for lucy brooding

I had a friend who reminds me of Lucy, and who for years dated a man she would regularly complain about and stress herself out about, almost as though it was a new hobby she was taking up, which obviously, wasn’t healthy for her.  Her boyfriend wasn’t sexually attractive in her mind, she wanted him to lose weight (for his own health benefits so she said).  He was messy, and she expressed to me that she didn’t think she could live with him being that way after marriage.  He played with Legos, and she viewed it as him being, “immature.”  It just went on and on what an imperfect match they were.  Against all my advice to leave him alone, and find a man she already accepted and loved the way he was, she married him anyway, and we lost contact because I didn’t want to see how the drama would play out in marriage.

Women like Lucy are already unhappy.  For whatever underlying psychological reasons, they don’t want to come under the leadership of a masculine male, so they pick and hold on to men like Emmet, even though it tends to make them miserable.  And in truth, men like Emmet often don’t want to lead in the relationship, it’s much more comfortable for them to let the wife lead, or just be a passive, “partner.” 

Women crave a man who will lead her, and lead her well.  And in a balanced marriage, masculinity and femininity work together.  But like Lucy finds out, women like this are in a Catch 22 – wanting their men to, “man-up,” but then despising them when they do.  Psychologically, I believe women like this pick men like Emmet, for a reason – and that’s important to remember when they’re complaining about him.

Well, Lucy, you picked him!

All in all, at least we’re able to use the movie as another teaching tool or manifestation of the way our culture wants to view men.  Even handsome heroes that save children (in movies) aren’t immune to having their (good) virtues twisted to become, “toxic masculinity.”

We should be thanking God for those male virtues, not shaming boys into rejecting them.

Advertisements

End of the Year Homeschooling & Best Summer Science Experiments

 

Our school year officially ended right before Memorial Day weekend, culminating in a week-long celebration of just doing whatever we could think of to have fun and let our son know how proud we were of his accomplishments throughout the year!  And there was so much more he was able to learn at home than he would have learned in school! 😀  It was an overall success and I can’t believe how much fun it all was ❤ .  He was already doing well in school, making all A’s, but hating the structure and the boring busy work, along with the teachers’ negative attitudes.  I’m so glad he doesn’t have to depend on only 20 minutes of recess anymore to get his freedom of play!  And seeing him go on to become even more proficient at math, reading and writing was encouraging to me as his teacher.  He can now, hands down, write a compare and contrast 1-page paper, or a critical thinking paper where he analyzes the truth about a situation, and on top of that (!!) he’s learned how to do all the prep work himself by creating brainstorming pages and learning how to organize his thoughts!  My heart is just swollen with so much pride for him, and he’s only about to be 9.  I can see how homeschooled kids have the opportunity to benefit so much more than public school kids from one-on-one daily tutoring styled teaching.

You just can’t beat 1. Going at a child’s own pace, whether it be faster or slower so they really grasp a complicated topic, and 2. One on one attention with a teacher/tutor.  Consequently, you also can’t accomplish those two deeds with a classroom of 20+ children.  It has been eye-opening realizing that having our son in public school, was actually holding him back from his full potential being realized.

I also loved being able to dig down deeper into the historical facts about the places and people we learned about in the coursework.  Instead of a progressive and anti-Christian/anti-family/anti-male academic environment, he was able to learn so many Christian facts about the European people who construct our history.  And instead of being taught the liberal propaganda of the Native Americans being all good-natured, kind and oppressed people groups, we were able to dig into the realistic advantages and disadvantages of being conquered, and the effects of refusal to assimilate now on some of the residual tribes’ economy and way of life in contrast to other groups who excelled in comparison.  When researching all the early explorers and conquistadors, we were blown away with how Satanic the Aztecs were, and in reading letters and diary entries, were able to, “see,” from firsthand accounts just how diabolical they were in the eyes of Cortes’ frightened, deeply Catholic soldiers.  Walls built entirely of human skulls, the altars constantly burning from human sacrifice, hearts rotting as they were left in offering to the demonic gods they worshiped openly and joyfully.  The entire city smelled of rotten flesh and death, and Cortes’ normally brave men were terrified of all of it.  History books try to paint it as a paradise of sorts, being naturally beautiful due to the island set-up, but according to his men, it was like a paradise in hell.  Do public schools teach all this now?  I’d bet money they don’t!

I didn’t know Cortes was such a strong Catholic that he desperately wanted to place crosses around the city, and over the idols they worshiped.  He repeatedly tried to convince the Aztec chief they were worshiping demons, which they clearly were, and I don’t remember learning the many times he gave them the opportunity to forgo war and be peacefully overtaken.  His men even allowed the Aztecs to still carry on with their festivals, provided they would not engage in human sacrifice, (which didn’t work out, as they refused to forgo human sacrifice and preferred to revolt/have war).  In harsh contrast to the education I had on this man, he came across as humble, kind, deeply religious and overly gracious in his desire to persuade them to avoid war and violence.  It’s ridiculous how much progressive propaganda has taken over the school system with distorted facts parents have to correct at home.  How much better it is to just teach the truth from the get-go!   

*

Our curriculum also encouraged us to do a Family Tree project that ended up becoming so complicated we’re extending it into the summer and next year!  Even just today while researching some more on the history of our relatives’ house and the town they settled in, I found out that a different ancestor on my dad’s side (a Texas Ranger Captain), personally collaborated with the town’s founder to scope out the territory that would eventually become my mom’s great-grandparents’ hometown.  How amazing for our son to find out these two families were already in a strange way, connected.

We also learned that their house was written about by the man who designed Central Park, American landscape artist, Frederick Law Olmsted.  The house was already unique (built by Napoleon’s guard and a place where Robert E. Lee once stayed), but to read Olmsted’s description of it in his book, A Journey Through Texas, where he described it in first person, was just amazing.  He calls the town and the people who settled there, in comparison with the rest of Texas, “as far from Texan as possible,” as they were Alsatian, which is a French-German population of people who came from Alsace, a french province that has been passed from France to Germany in ownership I believe five times.

IMG_0619

Here is his excerpt on my great-great Grandparents’ house:

IMG_0622

Perhaps the most remarkable thing is the hotel, by M. Tarde, a two-story house, with double galleries, and the best inn we saw in the state.  How delighted and astonished many a traveler must have been, on arriving from the plains at this first village, to find not only his dreams of white bread, sweetmeats and potatoes realized, but napkins, silver forks, and radishes, French servants, French neatness, French furniture, delicious French beds, and the Courrier des Etats Unis; and more, the lively and entertaining bourgeoise.

I think the best part of this first year in our homeschooling adventure is wealth of Christian knowledge we were able to interject into what he was learning at the time.  Even with our family tree project, he’s finding out how important the Christian faith was in building communities that had strong morals and structure.  Or in crafting strong families with strong roots who were able to be sustained in hard or impossible times.  Even scholastically, our son was able to practice and learn most of his writing techniques in the second half of the year, while using the timeless classic Pilgrim’s Progress!!!!  So much of what he wrote about are concepts that most adults these days don’t even understand about theology and the spiritual journey!  His faith and love for God deepened so much!!  What a success it all was!!! ❤  You can’t get a Christian education within the public school system, and I’m coming to believe that it is our job as parents to give our kids a Christian education.

So even though we did science experiments all throughout the year, he still wants to do more science over the summer.  Hence the video at the top 😀

 

Related Links

Christian Kids Need a Christian Education

Public Education: Trapped by the Progressive Agenda

New Perspective on Mother’s Day – Christian Families 100+ Years from Now

Things I Want My Daughter to Know: You Will Have Deep Roots to Withstand Persecution

 

 

 

Sofia Tolstoy’s Destruction of Her Marital Happiness (A First Look)

I noticed a few weeks ago I received more interest in a post I did last year, detailing how a wife could possibly ruin her husband’s love for her.  The post mentioned the marriage of Leo Tolstoi and Sofia, and how through decades, her attitude turned him into a man who could not even tolerate her presence when he was old.

I’ve only read accounts based on his own troubles with her – mostly the variety of ways she would seek to control him, berate him, endlessly try to kill herself or threaten suicide.  However, I recently came across her literal thoughts and words in her diaries, and have had some time to get an insight into how this woman thought and dealt with the life God gave her.

I have to say, reading some of her diary entries only confirm what an extremely psychologically messed up woman she was from day one.  I know that sounds so harsh, but it is remarkable how she viewed her life through a lens of martyrdom and suffering.  After reading several pages (and I will read more to be sure) of her personal and constant complaining, I’m amazed Leo Tolstoy was able to create any masterpieces of literature at all with a wife who intellectually numbed and destroyed his senses.  And the temperament of an artist’s wife (especially a writer) is crucial to his ability to work!

To her credit, she was a hard worker and helped him immensely in copying and writing out his vast manuscripts.  She did, very painfully and resentfully, dedicate her entire life to his work.  But it was at such a high cost he had to pay, with even her own son admitting she never was able to just be happy, to endure her constant complaining and resentful attitude.  That her husband didn’t fully appreciate it, even though she did so much for him, was because her attitude and resentfulness cancelled her, “selfless acts,” out.

In other words, what she viewed as, “selfless acts of dedicating her entire life to him,” which she spoke endlessly about in her diary, were in reality, feeding her neurotic sense of self-righteousness and playing the ever-constant victim.

Her husband could do nothing right in her eyes, except write, and every little thing he did by his own accord, she says she, “rebuked,” him for, and made herself sick (literally ill) constantly worrying about him when he’d go out to do even the most normal of male activities such as hunting.

Here are some first thoughts on the few things I’ve read.  I’m sure I’ll have more to work with later on, but her terrible example is something I’ll teach my own daughter what to avoid in becoming.

It could be said that Sofia, for all her self-righteous assuring us she was serving him selflessly, never allowed herself to be happy… because if she allowed herself that joy, she would have failed in being the perpetual victim she wanted to see herself as.

***

Some first notes…

  1. She frequently speaks in her diaries in classic, “victim mentality,” reference.  It is always bad things happening to her, and many times Sofia seeking out opportunities to feel wounded and offended by her husband’s normal behavior.
  2. She denies him sex throughout their marriage, only having enough to produce children, but then resents him for not having sex while she was pregnant.  She describes wanting more of a “spiritual marriage,” which in those days, often meant to be abstinent in marriage.  She mentions frequently that he has too much passion for her, but that she only desires a, “pure,” and, “spiritual union.”  As an aside note to historical references, there were often marriages like this where the woman would truly want to remain a virgin, or mostly sexless, to create this spiritual union, leaving the husband to have to find whores to have sex with.  Those marriages were almost always very unhappy marriages, even in those days, men still needed sex from their wives.
  3. She frames everything he does as being done to “hurt,” her… and then she goes on and on, “rebuking,” him for his (in her mind) bad decisions.  This from her diary is a direct example where she wouldn’t even let him decide when to go hunting without her permission… and her attitude when he came back is what destroys a man’s love and affection (the chastising and, “rebuking,” she felt she had a right to do to him).
  4. Before their marriage, Tolstoy had a romantic notion that his new wife should know everything he ever did that was horrible and wrong.  Instead of hiding his sins, he wanted to, “bear all,” to her, confess everything, and know that she would still love him and accept him as he was – faults and past sins in total.  He felt very ashamed of everything he’d done before finding a, “pure,” and proper wife, and her reading this and still accepting him, in a large way, would help him heal from his past promiscuity.  I actually understand this very well, because my own husband did something very similar.  We both told each other everything (his past being much more sordid and sinful than mine sexually), and I understand from my husband’s heart how much he needed to know that I *knew* how bad he had been, and yet would *still* choose to love him and receive him.  Yes, I was sheltered and virginal like Sofia, but it still didn’t harm me to know his past sexual sins.  If anything, it made me even more sympathetic to him because I could feel the shame he felt for having failed in that area.  Men seem to understand that this kind of acceptance in marriage is a kind of redemption God uses to help ease the pain of past sins.  It does for women, too, if they first acknowledge how sinful they were and are humbled enough to know their husband is doing them a great act of love in accepting them even though they come to him soiled and impure.
  5. Unfortunately for Tolstoy, his wife was horrifically repulsed by his past, and used it for the rest of their marriage to throw in his face and punish him for.  She did not, at all, accept him as the man he was, and she ensured her own unhappiness by perpetually reminding herself in her diaries of how horrible his past was… how she could NEVER get over his former relationships.
  6. I do believe that even with this single, but monumental, rejection of him when he was so honest and open with her, that she may have ruined a lot of his love in those first years when she kept throwing it in his face.  I think when he realized she could not, and would not, ever make peace with his past or love him beyond his past (without holding it against him constantly), that he fell into a depressive state that caused him to bristle at even her voice or presence (which is talked about both in his and her diaries).  How different their marriage might have been if Sofia had been wise enough to realize the power she had when he was so romantically open with her about his past, in helping him heal and redeem his value before God and society.
  7. I’ve heard callers complain about things like this to Dr. Laura, where one spouse – it’s almost always the woman – can’t get over a husband’s past or long-gone sexual relationship, and her response is always that they are simply looking for (literally digging around in their spouse’s past) something to beat the other spouse with.  This is a classic way a wife with a real psychological disorder seeks to continually, “punish,” her husband over his past sins.
  8. Continually using his past, especially his past relationship where he fathered a son who still lived on their land, to berate him for, was abusive.  Sofia, again for all her endless self-proclamations of serving him selflessly and lovingly, was an abusive and toxic wife.  Again, I am amazed he was able to create the masterpieces he did with the ever-present berating, punishing and abusive things she’d say to him.  I should say here that I’m aware that our modern society views his treatment of her as, “abusive,” because she had to, in some authors’ words, endure his “slights and insults.”  I wonder if he felt he almost had to be that way, in order to survive the war-like atmosphere she made sure she created at times (it’s notable that not all of their life was lived this way… they had short periods of happiness, again making me wonder from a psychological-standpoint, if she wasn’t bi-polar).
  9. Consider families where the wife really did sleep around for years before a husband married her, even producing offspring with a man she never even married.  What if the husband acts like Sofia decided to do, and holds a huge grudge against his wife for those things done in her past, and never lets himself, “get over,” her past sexual experiences with other men, continually bringing them in to their current arguments and never allowing his wife to fully, “pay,” for the sins she’d committed?  We’d then be able to see it clearly as the husband’s own psychological disturbance, and not attribute any further fault to his wife.  With Leo Tolstoy, many people, including Nobel Laureates, side with Sofia in this being an excusable and logical offense she held against him for the length of their entire marriage, when obviously, it’s anything but excusable and logical.
  10. She, several times in her diary, expresses murderous intent toward his former lovers and the one son he had who still lived on their land!  She obsesses over his sexual past to the extent of wanting to commit murder several times.  Again, as much as I feel sorry for her, I am amazed at the extent of her insanity and what Tolstoy had to put up with for a lifetime of marriage.  A healthy woman would have accepted him as he was, but Sofia still used his son’s mother against him in arguments even into their old age!  I feel so sorry for him, and amazed he was still able to create the works he did.
  11. Side note – the more I read her words and the conclusions she comes to, the more I believe she probably had a severe psychological disorder.  Her family described her as not having an easy time being happy in general… even as a child, it is noted she was never able to really be happy.  I believe people are able to *choose* happiness, and I don’t excuse Sofia for literally ruining her life over the most mundane reasons to be unhappy.  Her entire diary seems to be one of constant finding fault, constant taking offense (oftentimes where it’s unclear if she even understands it was intended!).  She is a very sad and pathetic woman, what an eye-opening experience reading her mind’s workings.
  12. So back to this issue of holding a spouse’s past against them.  My own husband has a past sexual history before he met me, and it’s something I’ve never held against him because when he married me, he committed to me wholly, just like Tolstoy did to Sofia.  It would be incredibly foolish and perverted to continue to, “punish,” him for things he did in his past before he even knew me, or had taken vows to me.  Like Tolstoy, my husband wasn’t even a real Christian back then, so to hold his sins against him would be wrong.  Sofia’s immaturity and psychologically disturbed thinking gives me an even more sympathetic perspective to how Leo managed to live with her successfully all those years at all.  The fact that he was able to produce such magnificent and powerful novels, even while being relentlessly torn down by such a mentally disturbed woman, shows remarkable strength and resilience.  It’s sad that I although I do feel sorry for her, I also feel even more correct in my first assessment that she was one of the women who make sure they are chronically unhappy no matter what the circumstances may be.  She constantly pities herself, and hates her life.  She resents the life she could have had if she were a single woman.
  13. She absolutely hated him spending time with the peasants, teaching them and mentoring them. She hated having them around their house, taking care of them, and despised her husband for loving this service he desired to provide to the poor.  My own great great grandparents also had peasants and homeless people living around on their estate property (which was not large… so they literally had homeless people living in their backyard)!  Their adult children talked about this a lot in the document they left, which is the only reason why we know about it.  My great-great grandfather was a doctor, one of the only ones in that entire area, so it made sense these people would flock to this strong Christian family, who were both husband and wife, very loving and kind people who would physically and spiritually care for them for free.  They were probably like a beacon of hope to destitute people, and this is what Jesus said we should be like.  I know they viewed this service as a beautiful charity, and I’m amazed in contrast, at Sofia’s selfishness and greed and disdain toward the poor.  For all her admonitions and self-proclamations of thinking she was super religious and selfless, we see she was anything but!  But that is how self-righteous people operate.  They see themselves as put-upon, as an ever-perpetual victim, but in reality, their lives are much more complex with their causing their own problems.  She hated the poor, hated serving them, and hated her own husband for loving them and having them on their property.  I am so grateful my great-great grandmother did not feel this way, how awful it would have been for their marriage if she’d behaved like Sofia Tolstoy.
  14. Sofia would frequently use threats or actual attempts of suicide in order to manipulate him further in order to control her husband.  This is classic psychological disorder-type actions.  I believe she was probably bi-polar, or Cluster B-type, but it would take a very skilled psychologist to go through everything she did (and especially the disturbed way she thought) to untangle what she had.  But it’s clear she was not mentally healthy, and probably wasn’t from a young age.
  15. Tolstoy went on to become a fervent and very strange, type of Christian (note that he wasn’t when we was whoring around in his young years).  In his later years, he came to the strong convictions that it was morally wrong and horrible for young men to do what he had done, to sleep around so much before marriage, and praised and promoted abstinence before marriage for both sexes.  I do admit he took his views a little too far in his old age, but after decades of living with a wife who tortured him mentally and emotionally, I think his views that people shouldn’t get married at all (or have sex – he became asexual in ideology) probably are the reason for his extreme views.

I’m sure I’ll write more when I have time.  It’s interesting to read someone else’s diary… very eye-opening to see how someone else’s mind works.

I myself, am an avid diary-writer ever since I was 6 years old.  My husband has read all my diaries LOL, so reading about Sofia and Leo reading each other’s diaries, and such, leads me to compare and contrast the differences between their relationship and ours.  It’s so sad that she chooses to constantly write herself as the victim to her own life’s story… never taking ownership of her glaringly obvious faults, and everything always being other people’s fault… her always the perfect, selfless martyr who resentfully dedicates her life to others in a way that makes them feel they’re taking advantage of her.  It just doesn’t have to be that way.

We’ve been through many trials in our marriage of different kinds, but we’ve remained remarkably happy and are closer together in every way through having gone through those trials.  It’s strange how some of the very same things that caused so much hostility in the Tolstoy marriage, have only caused us to grow closer together and more strongly bonded.  I do believe a lot of that has to do with how I chose to respond to our trials in ways that encouraged my husband, and didn’t tear him down or berate him for, “failing.”

Major outside stresses that could have broken us, didn’t, and when I read the old diaries, they’re filled with this stuff (getting kicked out for wanting to marry him, living in poverty for a few years, having a baby before we were financially ready, doing too much at one time like school, work, and child-rearing, extreme in-law problems, losing jobs early on that made it more financially stressful, miscarriage, parental health decline, caring for dying grand-parents, etc.)… the diaries hit on all those events, but at the same time they’re also filled with so much joy, optimism, and hope and ways/ideas to be better in the future.  They read in stark contrast to the way Sofia wrote and thought about life.  It’s been a very important spiritual lesson to see the way she saw things, how she couldn’t get past them, and then how those, “hang-ups,” caused her to destroy her own happiness or future chance at happiness.

When I went to a counselor a few years ago because my husband wanted me to after my dad had his stroke, he was amazed how good our marriage was even with going through as many difficulties we’d already been through.  He had some kind of checklist for “major,” trials a couple may have experienced in marriage, and our marriage checked almost every one!  By all accounts, we should have been in a horrible marriage where I resented and hated him for, “failing,” me as a husband.  The counselor was very proud of how in love we still were, how strong our marriage was, and how even after everything we’d been through, we still had a joyful and cheerful outlook on life and the future.

It really makes me wonder how different Sofia’s marriage may have been, if she’d just been aware enough to understand how much she contributed to her own unhappiness?  Do people like this ever know how off they are in their reasoning, or are they truly mentally disturbed?

 

 

 

Quick Link reference for those who don’t have a copy of her diary:

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2009/jun/02/sofia-tolstoy-diaries

Because He’s Not a Hero… From Anonymous Sgt. A. Merica

Every day, America sits on the brink.

We teeter between good and evil.

The Thin Blue Line isn’t a fictional concept.

It’s real – and it’s what separates society from anarchy.

It’s why you can go to work.  Why your children can go to school.  Why you can sleep in peace at night.

Protecting the people… are the Sheepdog.

They are our police.  They are your protectors.  They are the guardians of the castle and the people behind it.

But I am not your Sheepdog.

I do not guard the castle from direct attack.  I do not seek to defend those whom it protects.

No, I am the wolf.

I am the one you don’t want to know about.

While the Sheepdog protect… I destroy.

But I am YOUR wolf.

I hunt my prey – and my prey fears me.

Those I hunt are those who would do you harm.  Those who seek to destroy the castle and everyone behind it’s walls.

I am the one who stalks them.

As they prepare to come for you… I pounce.

I am not kind.  I am not merciful.

I take the fight out of them.

Then I take them out of the fight.

Their throat is my prize.

Their end is my glory.

I destroy evil… so it cannot destroy you.

I am not your Sheepdog.  I am your wolf.

And you will never know my name.


For more than 25 years, I’ve served our country.  I started in the military and moved my way up quickly.  That’s what happens when you are single and hellbent on destroying evil.  I had no interest in starting a family.

After just a few years in the military, I rose quickly and became part of a special operations group working in some of the most dangerous places in the world.

Here in America, we are spoiled.  We take our fluffy pillows and lattes for granted.  We close our eyes and sleep well because very good men are doing sometimes very bad things to very bad men to keep us safe.

But over the years, I watched the rules of engagement change.  When serving our country, and then serving here in law enforcement, I watched as the hands of my brothers, sisters and I were tied.

September 11th happened because of failures here in America – not just because of evil.  We lost countless lives because we drew a divide between our agencies.  Politics and feelings got in the way of stopping evil.  Red tape and a hierarchy of information ensured that destruction came to America.

It will come again.  Political correctness has run amok.  Evil has infiltrated our communities in the name of everyone being “offended”.  We are in trouble.

Luckily, there are still patriots like me who believe in destroying that evil.  We will do what it takes to hold the thin blue line, even when it means we have to operate in the shadows.

I had no interest in having a family, but somewhere along the line that changed.  I’m now a father of four.  My wife and my children don’t know what I do for work.  My friends have no idea.  I’m part of an elite group of that tracks down and eliminates that evil.

I do it for my children.  I do it for my God.  I do it for my country.  I do it for you.

I am the wolf.  And tonight, like every night, I will hunt.

***

 

Hearing from men like this is so interesting.  Reminded me of this scene… “Because he’s not a hero… ” they really are so much more than that.

 

Thank you Anonymous.

Thank you for protecting us.  How many would you (and all other police officers) die for, who don’t deserve your life sacrificed for theirs?

Books for Young Minds

IMG_9965

One of the gifts we thought to give our oldest (8) this year for Christmas, was the gift of some really good classic books.  We both have an intense love of books and reading, one of our favorite pastimes before we had children was to take turns reading to each other at night after the work day from our favorite books.

We want our children to hopefully share this love of books, and we think the best way to help them achieve that, is to read to them, and to read to them often.

Starting our homeschooling journey recently, I’d been trying to figure out what kinds of books to read that were fitting for him.  The coursework I’d chosen was great in all other categories, except the literature suggestions unfortunately.  I mean… this boy has been reading Harry Potter since age 5 in kindergarten.  He went through all the books of Narnia with my husband two years ago – so suggestions like Winnie the Pooh or Pippi Longstocking, although we read through them and laughed… they’re more in line with what I’m reading to our 4 year old.  I could tell he really needed more.

IMG_9967

The first one he was super excited to dive into was The Pilgrim’s Progress.  I told him about this book as it was one I remember reading when I was about his age at the Christian school I went to.  This book was so good, and so helpful in one’s Christian journey, that even 20-something years later, I still think about it and remember parts that reflect what I’m going through in my journey as a Christian.  Even now as we’ve started reading it together (he was so excited he couldn’t wait for the break to be over 😀 ), I’m given the chance to find new treasures and meanings in it that I of course missed at such a young age.  I told him this, too, that this would be a book he’d probably love to reread over the course of his life, just to understand the journey better as he gains more life experience.  I still think it’s good for children this young to read it.  I remember reading it and of course realizing I didn’t have those kinds of life experiences yet, but still understanding the wisdom it imparted and instruction on how to navigate different things like despair and discouragement, the hills of difficulty, etc.  And I can see that even though he’s only 8, he already comprehends those things, too.

Plus it is wonderful to read it with him, stop and then explain things about life and faith.  The characters in Pilgrim’s Progess are just so necessary for children to understand!  People who are “Obstinate,” or “Pliable,” or the “Wordly Wiseman,” or the man named, “Legality.”  Each one proposes an amazing discussion we then have about who these people are, why they are the way they are, and how they derail one’s life or miss what Christianity is about.

Rereading this book also prompted us to look into the life of the author, John Bunyan, who was such an admirable man in his own right.  Learning together about his own life journey, and that he wrote this book while in prison (!) was a huge lesson in and of itself for us to talk about.  We even read through Bunyan’s “Apology,” for his book, or rather struggled through it LOL…  Because of his use of old English and speaking in riddles, every line I had to stop and explain what he was talking about.  It provided new ideas our son has never thought about deeply enough, but also great humor as every sentence rhymed and sounded so strange!  Overall it was a great lesson in not only the history behind him being imprisoned for just preaching and living out his faith, but also his steadfastness in the face of persecution (writing a book he knew would probably not be accepted – hence the lonnng apology and defense of it).  It was also interesting to learn that some of Bunyan’s harshest critics and naysayers, were of course the fellow Christians themselves.  It’s always been that way, from the Prophets of old, to the Wesley’s, to Spurgeon, etc. and that itself is another great lesson.

*

The other books we got him are as in the first picture, Gulliver’s Travels, The Swiss Family Robinson, and Treasure Island.  He already knows of The Swiss Family Robinson, as it’s one of the my husband’s favorite stories, and it has A LOT of strong Christian lessons in it, more than what the popular movies would make it seem like.  We love it because it portrays the almost insurmountable trials of a very traditional Christian family, and shows them constantly looking to their faith and the Bible, and guidance from God to understand how to overcome their barrage of struggles.  Just a wonderful book for growing and influencing a young person’s faith, in our opinion.

And of course Gulliver’s Travels and Treasure Island are more just for pure boyish fun!  Not that girls can’t enjoy these books, too, although I admit I was never interested in reading these two.  Apparently, when men read these as boys they tend to stay with them long into adulthood, which to me is a mark of a very good book worth reading!

 

More books I can’t wait to read with him:

The Adventures of Tom Sawyer

Adventures of Huckleberry Finn

Oliver Twist

 

If any readers have suggestions for what else would be good for children his age, please let know!  I don’t think you can ever have too many good books 😀

Stephanie

Merry Christmas Readers!

IMG_9444.JPG

Phew!!!!  I’m typing this as I’m making 2 tarts at the moment.  One traditional chocolate (very simplistic, with just a few ingredients that create the most decadent, yet simple taste), and a white chocolate swirled with butterscotch sauce for my husband.

IMG_9445 (2)

I guess it’s a let’s write between stirring the chocolate kind of night.  I am tired. 🙂  December flew by for us, and to be honest, it was a little too fast and crazy for our normal style.  Lots of things we went to, formal Christmas stuff, family outings, a few birthday parties, two that celebrated our Christmas baby.  And lots and lots of baking.

IMG_9513.JPG

When we needed to go to a Christmas formal, I thought it’d be fun to set up the kids and my mom (who was going to watch them that night) with a table ready for decorating Christmas cookies if they wanted to.

So the night before the formal, while doing some home-primping girly things, I was also cutting out and baking sugar cookies.  It was so much fun to do this and set up all the sprinkles (we have quite a collection!) and frostings for them to do the next day.

IMG_9690.JPG

I have such fond memories of doing these kinds of things with my mom, and how wonderful that she gets to repeat it with my children.  And with the exact same cookie cutters she always used with us!

IMG_9692

We also set the kids up like this another time when we went out to do some Christmas shopping together.  If any readers have any other ideas for what kids can do when you’re out at parties or dances and such, I’d love to hear them.  Hopefully next year’s December will calm down some, and we intend to make more so, for good measure.

IMG_9628

Seeing reindeer was one of the highlights!  And camels, although we didn’t get a picture of the camels 😀

IMG_9631

Fascinated faces… lol

Lots of fun things…

IMG_9591.JPG

IMG_9893.JPG

And mesmerizing sights…

IMG_9648

IMG_9602.JPG

I think we all drank our weight in hot chocolate 😉

IMG_9612.JPG

 

Our mornings have often been spent cuddling together, and squished, as all our children just have to all sit on the same couch at the same time with me LOL 🙂 it’s just one of those things where you have to take a moment.  We may go to fancy things sometimes… but on the whole, this is our reality.  And we are very, very full.

IMG_9947.JPG

 

And don’t worry, if you feel overwhelmed or stressed out this season, always remember… you’re not alone 😉

Somewhere, there is a baby being forced to see Santa…

IMG_9922.JPG

Merry Christmas!!!!

Stephanie

Spiritual Darkness & Sacrificing Our Children Part III

Image result for trans reading to children

At the Michelle Obama Library – Thanks Obama!

Give us access to your children

or We’ll Accuse You of Being Homophobic!

 

 

Or un-loving.  

Or judgmental.

Or unChristian.

Image result for trans reading to children

You know… just pick your choice of which they’ll try to shame you of for holding to Christian morals and values, especially if you’re “trying to protect children.”

How dare you try to protect children from the gay/trans/abcd-of-the-week agenda!  Slutty outfits worn by men pretending to be women are what our babies and children should be exposed to early in life, so that they’re not “judgmental,” like you Christians. /s

Image result for trans reading to children

Remember… this is all about desensitization to perversion and satanic influences (as the first photo is a self-ascribed, “satanic goddess,” and “demon,”).

It’s painful to see these little faces being exposed to this kind of societal degradation, and literally preyed upon during story time, while their parents believe it’s “good” for them.  And you know these parents probably believe it is “good,” for their children.

Woe to those who call evil good
    and good evil,
who put darkness for light
    and light for darkness,
who put bitter for sweet
    and sweet for bitter.”

Isaiah 5:20

It’s interesting the link between feeling “good,” or even “virtuous,” in being seen as “non-judgmental,” toward certain sins.  “No, I’m not like that Pharisee,” or “no, I would never judge a pedophile… I judge the Christians who judge pedophiles!”  It’s a strange kind of self-righteousness or pride that blinds Christians (or secular people) to what they’re instead accepting.

When there is no line drawn, when “good,” is really evil, are they still too prideful to see it?

Related image

Children are not considered “sacred,” anymore, which is also a major reason why we are seeing parents who willingly take their children to events like these.  To me this is probably more devastating, than merely Christians refusing to judge good as good, and evil as evil.  When Children lose their sacred status in a society, they become the prey of everything evil 😥 .

It’s important to remember that nearly every biblical civilization that became evil enough to warrant massive destruction (self-induced or one could argue by the wrath of God), had to deal in the end with evil pursuing children because ultimately, that is as “far as they can go.”

Babies… toddlers… children in general, have an innocence about them that is designed by God to be protected by loving and wise parents.  They are Christians’ most valuable asset as they insure the future of the Church, and must be protected.

So therefore, evil pursues children.

Through forcing them to see what their little eyes shouldn’t see, and wouldn’t have seen several decades ago, due to morals and standards in society protecting them.

Through having them interact with adults with psychological perversions or satanic preferences and “play-acting,” all the while believing this is of course, “good,” for the children.

Desensitization.  It’s a subtle process of defilement that first happens to the mind, but can also affect the body, however it’s first battle is over the mind in what should be accepted (or judged), or normalized.

When you look at these pictures carefully, this is evidence of a battle for our children’s minds.  It is evidence of evil pursuing children so that they become slowly defiled in their thinking.

Related image

Why else would they be insisting trans-men have access to your children and babies for story-time read alouds?

Let us be bold in showing this for what it is (or are our sense that desensitized already?), and uncover the real motivations in the aggressive targeting babies, toddlers and young children by the gay/trans/abcd-of-the-week movement.

 

Related Reading –

 

Spiritual Darkness & Sacrificing Our Children Part II

A reader sent me an email about a recent post Dalrock wrote on various people in the Christian world of influence, seemingly making the case for homosexual apologetics (for lack of a better word).  Especially, and diabolically, with a focus on sacrificing the safety of Christian children.

I wrote back in August of this year about this same topic:

I remember back when this was the motto *many* Christians were encouraging each other in order to accept homosexuals and in effort to make that particular sin not seem “so bad.”  Instead of promoting a healthy culture of giving each other grace, however, this attitude that homosexuals weren’t to be judged because we’re sinners, too, quickly devolved into accepting their behavior in the church as “just another type of sin we all commit.”  And then accepting ministry members who were openly gay, and then worship leaders, and eventually homosexual Pastors and Priests who were openly gay.  I remember seeing it all happen and thinking it very surreal that any Christian would fall for this kind of satanic deception that we were never supposed to judge homosexual behavior and separate ourselves from it.

Now it’s been happening again with pedophilia, the ironic part is that, like in this woman’s post, the exact same wording is being used as it was back in the 80’s and 90’s, in order to make Christians feel like they’re “self-righteous” if they judge these sins for what they are.  This is the systematic way Satan was able to infiltrate the church with accepting homosexuality, by telling Christians it was “just another sin,” that they “were no better” and “shouldn’t judge it or them because of their own sins.”  It is Satan using Christian forgiveness, humility and grace and twisting it to render the church unable to defend itself against diabolical evils seeking to infiltrate it.  In other words, it’s meant to “normalize” or “desensitize” Christians into accepting homosexuality, and now, like we’ve seen, pedophilia as well. 

From here

It was disturbing to see someone chastising Christians in this way, but especially when coming from a fellow believer.  It was as though she was calling us to a “higher standard” (in an iron sharpens iron kind of way), telling us that you fellow Christians shouldn’t judge pedophiles.

Here are her actual quotes:

So we put ourselves firmly in the seat of Judge, and we mete out what we would consider Justice. I have to laugh at the incongruity here, given one of the maxims of our day is “don’t judge”…

Don’t judge” – unless the person you’re judging is a paedophile.

Don’t judge” – unless it’s someone who is clearly way worse than you.

Don’t judge” – unless it’s publicly acceptable to do so.

 

Do you think you’re better than a paedophile?

That’s not a trick question.

Are you a better person than a paedophile?

What I was stuck on was that she “laughs” at the incongruity of normal people daring to judge a child molester when calling for justice to be done.  Why would a Christian laugh at a situation dealing with something so clearly evil, and something we are supposed to view with soberness (and are called to judge and expose(Eph 5)?

In the comments, when responding to a victim of child molestation, who obviously was very offended by her suggestions in her post that he was “no better,” than his molester, she defended herself and took this analogy even further to include other evil acts some humans engage in: killing a police officer – which earns people the death penalty in some states.  “Don’t judge them,” she said.  “You’re no better as a person, than a cop killer.”

Her entire blog has since then been deleted, but her post in particular can be found here from the Way Back Machine.

***

What is this we’re seeing (and have been seeing/feeling for a long time now)?

It’s a classic case of Shaming and Chastisement.

The longterm goal for homosexuality was trying to get Christians to tacitly accept those sins as “normal” sins within the church body… normal sins that belong to people who are true Christ followers, people who should be accepted with open arms into the Christian community – and as Dalrock pointed out, given access to our children.

If you can breakdown a Christian’s understanding of different kinds of sins and what they do to the Body of the Church, then you can get them to eventually accept anything.

In both instances, we saw/are seeing the acceptance happen very slowly by introducing ideas that “those sins aren’t worse than your own,” and “you have no right to judge homosexuals/pedophiles because you’re a sinner, too.”  This coupled with a heavy helping of, “Christian love means accepting homosexuals/pedophiles,” shames and fools Christians into actually believing these falsehoods.

In other words, what we’re seeing is the longterm goal of shaming Christians into “not judging pedophiles,” coming from not viewing certain sins as “worse,” or “more evil,” than others.  However the effect longterm is to desensitize Christians to (incredibly) the idea of child molestation, as far fetched as it sounds.  Believe me, it sounded far fetched back in the 80’s and 90’s when the exact same language was used in regard to homosexuality.  But when you’re telling someone, shaming them even, for feeling repulsed by the sins of homosexulaity, or laughing at them for being angry at the sins of raping children as this blogger was doing, getting them to accept in their hearts that, “maybe it isn’t as bad as I thought it was,” is definitely the end goal.

Getting them to no longer feel repulsed by these sins, or getting them to feel ashamed of their natural anger at child molesters, is how it starts, though.

***

Why does it work?

In general, shame works to achieve it’s end, but only to a point.  Like a scale that is tipped by one grain of rice too many, people eventually “wake up” to lies they’ve been sold, especially in regard to feeling shame where shame is not supposed to be felt.  Usually that happens long after the “point of no return,” however, because once sins like these are accepted, it takes drastic efforts to re-draw the boundary lines.

But in a broader explanation, these tactics work because the Christians using them are exploiting the Christian concepts of, “love,” and, “grace,” and, “forgiveness.”  It works in a particularly insidious way due to twisting (or torturing) of the Scriptures to claim that we are “no better” morally than these people, therefore we shouldn’t “judge” them or their sins, because that would be unChristian.

What is terrifying (but shouldn’t be because it is Satan’s goal), is that it is directed toward sacrificing our children on this altar – be it to homosexuals, or in dismissing pedophilia as an evil worth judging.

From Dalrock (emphasis mine in bold red):

Where Allberry commands that families lower the drawbridge so gay men like him can put our children to bed at night, Butterfield commands us to give gays the keys to our front doors.  From Butterfield’s ERLC article Why the gospel comes with a house key:

Take, for example, our Christian brothers and sisters who struggle with unchosen homosexual desires and longings, sensibilities and affections, temptations and capacities. Our brothers and sisters need the church to function as the Lord has called it to—as a family. Because Christian conversion always comes in exchange for the life you once loved, not in addition to it, people have much to lose in coming to Christ—and some people have more to lose than others. Some people have one cross, and others have ten to carry. People who live daily with unchosen homosexual desires also live with a host of unanswered questions and unfulfilled life dreams. What is your responsibility to those brothers and sisters who are in this position in life?

Our Christian responsibility includes a house key

One answer is this: the gospel comes with a house key.  Mark 10:28–31 reads:

Peter began to say to [Jesus], “See, we have left everything and followed you.”

Jesus said, “Truly, I say to you, there is no one who has left house or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or lands, for my sake and for the gospel, who will not receive a hundredfold now in this time, houses and brothers and sisters and mothers and children and lands, with persecutions, and in the age to come eternal life.”

Please note what Jesus says about how to love anyone who responds to the gospel in faith and obedience and who must lose everything in order to gain the kingdom’s promises. Jesus says that he expects we will lose partners and children and houses in the process of conversion, that conversion calls everyone to lose everything. God’s people need to wake up to something. If you want to share the gospel with the LGBTQ community or anyone who will lose family and homes, the gospel must come with a house key. This hundredfold blessing promised here in these verses is not going to fall from the sky. It is going to come from the church. It is going to come from the people of God acting like the family of God. God intends this blessing to come from you.

If you watch the Allberry video embedded in my previous post, you will see that this is the same exact argument Allberry gives for Christian families to provide gay Christians with access to their children.  I encourage you to read the Butterfield quote above and then watch the beginning of the Allberry video to see what I mean.

Lest you think this isn’t a major theme of Butterfield, at the bottom of her ERLC post it says that the content is taken from her new book The Gospel Comes with a House Key: Practicing Radically Ordinary Hospitality in Our Post-Christian World

Butterfield writes on the same subject at Piper’s Desiring God in an article titled The Best Weapon Is an Open DoorNotice how she echoes Allberry in chastising Christian parents for seeing our homes as a fortress to protect our children, using the very same language:

If you believe that these are dangerous times, then you are right...

How tempting it is to withdraw. How easy it is to let fear rule our hearts as we shelter ourselves and our children from evil…

…Christians must be intentional about seeking the stranger. We must think of our homes as hospitals, embassies, and incubators, not castles, fortresses, or museums…

Here is what this looks like. Singles from the church and neighborhood come over after work and help get dinner going. We have fun doing this. Sometimes there is laundry on my table that needs to be folded and put away (or stuffed back in the dryer). Sometimes there is a child still struggling with a math lesson. And we all behave better when it is not just us dealing with the messiness of unfolded laundry and unfinished math sheets.

Other neighbors start to show up. People with secret lives — people with secret drug addictions or dangerous relationships — cannot make plans easily. Christians need to be sensitive to this. They don’t know if they will be sober or safe three Tuesdays from yesterday. But if the invitation is open and regular, they can make it to your table on the fly. All people — believers and unbelievers — need to see transparent, Christian lives lived out in the real-time of tears and mess.”

Eventually I believe we will see this extend to pedophiles, because they are quickly becoming the new “taboo,” that homosexuality was in regard to shaming Christians into not judging them.  I could be wrong, but I never thought I’d read what I read back in 2017 from that one Christian blogger.

The enemy within

So… we’re living in an age where Christians are expected by other Christians, to “tolerate,” even the most vile sins of others because we are “no better,” and therefore should not be allowed to have standards for our congregation or civilization we are living in.

But how do you keep a church clean and healthy when pastors, priests, and religious leadership in general has given way to what the culture demands they accept?  And how do we cope with leadership who now demands we accept and not judge this immorality?

I believe this battle would have been a lot easier to have won, if church leadership across the board would have held firm in their stance a decade or two ago.  The fact that us Christians are grappling with the theology of those who should be leading us, shows again how far down the modern church has plunged.

Our enemy is within our own fortress, it is behind our own lines in the battle against the world.  But it got there through shaming, and systematically breaking down Christians’ reactions to certain evils that should never have been accepted.

What happens when Christians don’t do what Scriptures command, which is to separate themselves from sins like these, is that corruption leads to dead churches, and more defilement of the members.

 

They’re going to win

What’s interesting to me is that the pedophilia post got little to no push-back.  In general, the Christians who saw it either agreed publicly with it in the comments section, or stayed silent.  A few Christian women I’m familiar with in the blogosphere agreed with it though, and that is saying something.

And how interesting that both the pedophile acceptance telling us not to judge them, and the various links listed above, both deal with (at least indirectly) the potentiality of defiling Christian children.

It’s a critical point that if they make gains in these diabolical plans, gaining access and ability to defile our children, then they’ve succeeded in defiling the future generation of Christians and Christianity in general.

 

Related Posts –

Sigma Frame’s Series on Biblical terms: Unclean, Defile, Consecrate, Sanctify

Email Questions… Virginity is a pile of horse manure?

Image result for virginity in marriage

It’s been a long time since I’ve sat down and really sifted through various emails from readers and fellow bloggers to answer some questions publicly, so sorry for the delay!  We’ve just been b-u-s-y, and that’s been good!  Lot’s of things going on that just take a lot of mental energy, and little time for finishing up posts in draft (or the topic has gotten stale… so some things that seemed a good idea get skipped).

One of the hardest questions I’ve received (for me to answer anyway) was about Lori Alexander’s post regarding men preferring to marry women who hadn’t had sex, had no tattoos, and no debt (especially college debt).

I liked her post, it echoed a few of mine where I touched on the same subjects of virginity and tattoos.  I did think about posting my thoughts agreeing with her, however coming on the heels of her extremely popular post, it just didn’t seem right at the time – coming from someone who met all those things myself when we married.  It would have been hard to write something like that without sounding like it was coming from a place of superiority, in other words.

Concerning Lori’s post, yes, I believe many men probably do prefer the ideal maybe theoretically, but the issue seems so complicated with how so many men choose to marry the exact opposite these days, it’s confusing to me.  What they are thinking, I’m not sure, but I do know that it’s still the norm for men to not necessarily value women who meet those 3 criteria, and seem to be very happy to marry outside them.  It’s very possible to me that marrying a woman who is a virgin, tattoo-less, and debt-free just isn’t important to them at all, because the opposite is so acceptable in our culture.

Many men hold those personal preferences and feelings deep inside, though, so perhaps her post is correct in that most men really do desire a woman with those traits, but due to our hedonistic culture that promotes having no morals and values, they settle for what they can get.  With us in our marriage, my husband has told me more than a few times in these 12 years that he knew I was different, and cherished me because I was innocent in those things.

I did read several articles bouncing off of Lori’s initial post, where different Christian female authors completely degraded the value of being a virgin.

To me that was beyond awful, and it made me think of my daughter and how these are the women writing the books that will be in Christian circles for years to come.  So the next generation of daughters will be growing up with Christian female leadership literally teaching them their virginity on their wedding night is nothing but a pile of horse manure.  This fact was so devastating to realize and to try to come to terms with, that our religious or Christian culture has fallen so far away from biblical truth, that this is what our leadership is espousing.  A lot of my staying silent was just trying to take in all that, and accept that this is where maybe the majority of Christians seem to stand.

From Christian author and blogger, Sheila Gregorie

“is it a good idea to wait until you’re married to have sex? Yes, it is. It’s certainly what God wants, but I believe He wants that for our good, not because He’s just making a rule.

That being said, 

virginity is not the be all and end all.

And, in fact, ultimately virginity means nothing.

It’s just a pile of horse manure.”

What a condemning (and self-damning) comment.

So as I was reading the responses and attitudes of the Christians I’m at least aware of, it took me aback to see how just pointing out those truths enrages women to the point of disgracing themselves in making anti-biblical public statements as Sheila and others have done.

So…  I think I stayed silent because I knew I had met all the criteria of being a virgin, tattoo-less, and debt-free, and it just felt so strange seeing all the different responses (both the positive and negative) and comparing them with what we experienced in our marriage.

Yes, me being debt-free when I married was a definite plus for my husband.  Having no tattoos was a visible symbol to him of my being so young when we married, and sheltered in a sense from corruption.  It also revealed to him my growing up with lovingly protective and honorable parents who prevented me from getting one, even after I was an adult.

But by far, my being a virgin for my husband was probably the single most crucial thing to our married life and how it impacted us for the good.  There’s even been recent studies showing how important a wife’s virginity (or low partner count) is for the health and happiness of her future marriage!  This is not to say that non-virgins can’t receive grace and forgiveness from Christ or go on to have good marriages and sex lives with their husbands.  But it is just undeniable how much better it was that I didn’t have a sexual history of encounters that loomed over us as we became one flesh and started a vibrant, unencumbered sex life.  I knew this right away when we started having sex, and knew that it was good that I didn’t have prior experiences affecting me differently.  Coming to the marriage bed with a clean slate paved the way for only good, positive and loving experiences, in other words.  And it felt so freeing.  It was intense sex without any guilt.

Out of the 3 preferences Lori listed, it seemed strange to me that the most important one was the most reviled in even our *Christian* culture!

Virginity used to be something so treasured and valued.  It was a beautiful gift a woman gave to her husband, and not only a gift, but as Sigma Frame recently pointed out (that I was not aware of in this manner), was an actual blood covenant that God designed to bind two people together in a deeply supernatural way.  No wonder how it’s proven over and over again in studies that women who marry as virgins tend to have happier marriages, or be much less likely to cheat on their husbands.  In my opinion, it’s becasue the bond is sooooo strong, and that coupled with the love, attraction, and sense of building a life together helps you survive later hard times, but that’s just my opinion.

In biblical times, virginity on the wedding night, as Lori’s post encouraged, was so treasured that the couple would purposefully consummate their marriage on white sheets so that they could take them out to show the family the next day.

A young bride’s purity and innocence sexually was celebrated and something that gave her honor – honor in her marriage privately, but also honor in their community publicly because she kept something sacred for her husband and for God.

Ironically, we live in a society that actively shames virgins (especially males), and instead of our Christian brothers and sisters coming to the defense of virginity and purity, we see their real thoughts on the issue.  That “ultimately virginity means nothing… it’s just a pile of horse manure.”  What a long way we’ve come from what was biblically lived out, honored, and celebrated.

Hopefully this kind of answers the reader’s question.  I’m not sure why I stayed silent except that I felt to say something when I actively met all 3 criteria would be viewed as looking down on the women who didn’t.  At the same time, the values should be defended and upheld when anyone (but especially Christian leaders) call our values “horse manure,” which is why I’m saying something now.

The next most interesting question was “What do you think of women being in ministries?

I’ll answer that another time since this post has gotten fairly long, but it is a very good and relevant question for our times.

Thank you for reading!  I’m curious to know what readers or other bloggers think about this issue… do men actually value women with those three traits as better options for a wife?  How does one explain the prevalence of married couples who didn’t meet (especially) the virginity preference?

 

 

Jordan Peterson Urges Christians to Wake Up! Take More Political Action for Religious Freedom

First watch this short clip to get to the gist of it –

There are longer videos including more of the discussion here, and a complete interview (40 minutes long) here.

trinity western uni.jpg

Trinity Western University under attack for it’s Christian Creed

Apparently, this interview with Peterson was on the heels of the Canadian Supreme Court ruling last week that a Christian law school can be denied accreditation due to it’s Christian stance on homosexuality and biblical marriage.

The ruling was reportedly 7-2 by their Supreme Court, not even a “close call” for retaining religious freedom.  If this is happening in Canada, I wonder how close we in the US are?

From here –

Jordan Peterson, the Canadian psychologist, author, and free-speech advocate, has warned Canadian Christians that they must make a “great leap forward” because religious freedom in the country is set to get “a lot worse.”

Speaking online with Canadian author and activist Faytene Grassechi in a video posted on YouTube Wednesday, Peterson told Christians they must stand up for themselves, “because your religious rights are very low on the rights totem pole at the moment.”

He added that it’s “going to get worse, a lot worse, before it gets better. So if you think your religious freedom is worth having, you better be ready to defend it, and you better be ready to do that in an articulated way, because you’re not a priority.”

Peterson made his comments in light of the Canadian Supreme Court ruling last week that decided an evangelical Christian law school can be denied accreditation, due to its opposition to homosexuality and biblical position on marriage.  [Emphasis mine]

From a different article here

As part of its Christian identity, TWU has a “community covenant” for its students and faculty that, among other obligations, states that community members will “voluntarily abstain” from “sexual intimacy that violates the sacredness of marriage between a man and a woman.”

“The university’s mission, core values, curriculum and community life are formed by a firm commitment to the person and work of Jesus Christ as declared in the Bible,” read the covenant.

“The community covenant is a solemn pledge in which members place themselves under obligations on the part of the institution to its members, the members to the institution, and the members to one another.”

Other actions that the covenant calls for is for its community to abstain from include “gossip, slander, vulgar/obscene language,” … “stealing, misusing or destroying property belonging to others,” … “drunkenness, underage consumption of alcohol, and the use or possession of illegal drugs.”

It’s been really interesting to me to see various people denounce Peterson as being a non Christian, supposedly even a shill for the leftist agenda working against us.

Clearly, Dr. Peterson is more awake than many evangelicals who attend church each Sunday.  And here he is, giving Canadian Christians (and us indirectly) a dire warning that we need to wake up, get off our butts, and do something to defend our Christian faith.

I’m wondering what any readers think about this?  What do you think about him saying Canadian Christians need make a “great leap forward?”

What do you imagine he’s implying here?

 

Linked Article – Jordan Peters Warns Canadian Christians Their Religious Freedom Rights are Eroding

Linked Article – Canada Supreme Court Says Chrisitan Law School Can Be Denied Accreditation Opposing Homosexuality

Stephanie