Saturday, January 25, 2020

Undermining Christian Headship By Calling it Abuse

There is constant attack on Scripture to change what it means in light of new moral words that have been created in society (ie. Racism, Abuse, Patriarchy, Homophobia, Gender roles, etc.). I demonstrated the growing usage of many of these fake words ( created with the purpose of rhetorically shaming those with power into silence and compliance.

The term "racist" has to be one of the more powerful ones still used today. Another word that has received popularity is "abuser." You see this in terms of "physical abuse," "spiritual abuse," "emotional abuse" etc. In regards of Mark Driscoll, the term abuse was quite common leading to his downfall.

What is inherent within the term "abuse" as used today is a power imbalance, or hierarchy that exists. "Abuse" involves the one with the power and control in a relationship to have over the other person with less power and control to do an action that the one with less power does not want to do.

In the case of the Duluth Model, it is always the man that uses power and control to coerce a woman to do something that she would not normally do if the man did not have that power and control over her.

To say it a different way, "Abuse" is whenever someone in authority demands someone they have authority over to do something she doesn't want to do.

A woman can initially believe that she was in agreement, and then later rewrite her initial agreement as being "manipulated" and that she never actually was in agreement. She was, in fact, battered. Being "battered" encourages her to rewrite history to emphasize her victim status. She will find many allies to support her victimhood.

The term "abuse" has even been used to describe Christ's Crucifixion as "cosmic child abuse."


The term "rebellious" would be a counter to a wife claiming she is being "abused."

Christians know very well our rebellion against God in our sin. We rebel against THE Divine Authority, Jesus Christ.

Rebelliousness implies that there is a legitimate hierarchy that exists. One has authority over another. To claim you have been abused means you are stating that the authority is illegitimate. You can see this in many other hierarchical relationships which seem mundane:
  • Employees will say that their bosses are abusive and controlling over their lives, preventing them from doing what they want to do when they want to do it. Bosses will say their employees are rebellious.
  • Children will say that their parents are abusive and controlling over their lives, preventing them from doing what they want to do when they want to do it. Parents will say their children are rebellious.
  • Players will say that their coaches are abusive and controlling over their lives, preventing them from doing what they want to do when they want to do it. Coaches will say their players are rebellious.
  • Subjects will say that their King is abusive and controlling over their lives, preventing them from doing what they want to do when they want to do it. The King will say his subjects are rebellious.

The underlying question for the "battered" is this: Am I willing to submit to the Authority placed over me?

If they believe the authority is legitimate, then they will tell themselves they need to stop being so rebellious and be more compliant. If they believe the authority is illegitimate, they will believe they are being abused and they need to rise up in rebellion to overthrow the authority.
Whateva', I'll do what I want.

In many hierarchical relationships, the individual who no longer wants to submit to the authority of the other can simply break off the relationship. Of course, there are many which cannot be so easily ruptured, such as Government and Marriage.


Christian Marriage is not unconditional love. It has numerous expectations. Marriage is a contract. It is supposed to be for life. There is really no other hierarchical relationship that reflects this. Unfortunately, most people don't write down all the expectations they have in marriage and find that their assumptions were incorrect.

The reason why investigating the marriage of the parents of your wife is so important, is because that is the baseline of how she will see what is acceptable and not acceptable in your marriage. It will also be the baseline for when your mother-in-law gives advice to your wife on how to "manage" you.

If her father is weak, and her mother rules the household, then that is what your wife is expecting the marriage to be like. The wife will be shocked to actually experience a man who will not allow the wife to rule the household. Your mother-in-law will probably encourage your wife to rebel, just like she does to her own husband.

Even though the wife may understand in her head the teachings of the Bible about submission, she may not actually be aware of what it actually looks like in practice. It's one thing to read about something, it's another to have it emotionally affect your entire body.

Here is a sample marital vow:
I [Bride], take you, [Husband], to be my husband. With the greatest joy I come into my new life with you. I know that I face new responsibilities that I cannot fulfill in my own strength. But by God's grace and power working within me, I desire to be trustworthy as your wife, to serve and love you for better, for worse, in sickness and in health, in joys and in sorrows, to obey you, to allow God to use you to build His qualities in me, as long as God give us life on this earth. I praise God continually for you [husband], and for your love and friendship.
There are more Bible verses that go into submission. These verses are not preached about very often in modern churches ( If they are preached about, it's to counter the common understanding as the teachers Cuck to the pressures of the world and Satan. Vox Day calls them Churchians.

Do you believe Apostle Paul, alive today, would say that a word invented in the 1970s ("abuse") countermands his instruction to wives to "submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord."? The Godless people who popularized the word "abuse" in today's context created them with the explicit intent to counter Apostle Paul's teachings. So, in short: No.

The Rational Male talks a lot about the "hamster wheel" and all the beta-orbiters & white knights that come to the woman's defense for her rebellious nature.

In the Church, these are pastors and other women who distort Scripture to justify the rebellious wife. The abused wife has an epiphany that she's been a "door mat" her entire marriage. Finally, she found other Christians to support her and give her the courage to finally stand up and say, "I'm not going to take it anymore!"

It's one thing to acknowledge that a wife's rebellious nature is too great and she can no longer, in good conscience, submit to her husband in defiance to Scripture. This I could respect. 

It's another thing entirely for Christian pastors and teachers to distort the plain meaning of scripture to encourage out-right rebellion from wives under the banner of, "my husband is an emotional abuser and I'm the victim, therefore, I can do no wrong."

I could try and claim that the wife divorcing a husband is a bad thing, but this is only due to the way the legal system is setup (ie. asset rape, custody, etc.). But in a context where the legal system is not involved, this frees up the man to wipe the dust off his feet and find a much younger, more attractive, and pleasant wife.

Depending on the man's situation and even with asset rape, the man may discover that her initiating the divorce was the greatest gift she could had ever given him. As Proverbs states, it's better to live on the corner of the house than with a cantankerous wife. But you can't divorce her for being rebellious, so you're stuck.

If it weren't for the government involvement, it works in a man's favor for an aged out woman to divorce her husband.
Live free! You don't need no man to be happy! You don't need to be told you're wrong. You are strong. You are woman! Don't let any man tell you how to live your life again!

No comments:

Post a Comment