Don’t Buy Her Another Box of Cookies

While I’m sure many women won’t appreciate the analogy, the following passage on parenting whiny children proves to be remarkably relevant for husbands:

Some [men], who are concerned about frustrating [women], give in to [women]’s whims when they are crying, mistaking these whims for genuine needs. In the broken cookie example, a [husband] may take his [wife] to the store to buy another box of cookies. The result of this indulgent style of [husbandry] is that the [wife] generally becomes more and more demanding and difficult to live with. This is not because [she] has been given too much. It is because [she] never has an opportunity to release pent-up feelings by crying and raging. These are [women] with stress just like all [women], but their [husbands]’ inappropriate responses to their attempts to release stress have prevented the [wives] from healing themselves.

When [husbands] “give in” after a wife has whined and begged for a long time, [she] is prevented from having a good cry and releasing stress. The [wife] will soon find another reason to whine and beg, and this will continue until she is allowed an opportunity to have a full-blown cry. This is the main mechanism by which permissiveness can lead to [wives] who are demanding and obnoxious.

-Tears and Tantrums by Alethea J. Solter, Ph.D., pg. 86 [Noun substitution by me…without permission.]

The Superiority of Biblical “Porn”

It’s arguable that the Song of Songs can be accurately classified as pornography.

It’s certainly not low-class pornography, but it is certainly “naughty” and inspires the reader to explicitly imagine sexual acts that would normally only be found in pornography.

Regardless of how you classify it, what matters is understanding it.

Towards that end, I have posted a rendition of the Song below. I have used Dr. Haupt’s “restoration of the Hebrew text” as my basis for the sequence. While I’d normally be skeptical of attempts to reorder the sequence of the received text, I find that Dr. Haupt’s version simply makes sense while the received version is mostly nonsensical. At the least, the Haupt version can stand alone as a work of art with useful insights into sexuality. It is probably the most “red pill” poem ever written.

The only limitation of Dr. Haupt’s text is that he took a good deal of liberty with the translation (it’s more of a paraphrase) and he left out a good deal of material for the sake of rhythm. But since I’m wanting to study the Song of Songs rather than read as poetry per se, I have used the Concordant Literal Version for the biblical text in place of Dr. Haupt’s paraphrase.

So all that aside, here is the Song of Songs restored to what is (most likely) the proper sequence.

(There are 12 scenes that are not necessarily connected through a unifying plot. The titles are Dr. Haupt’s, not mine.)

The song of songs, which is Solomonic

1. Procession of the Bride

Who is this ascending from the wilderness
Like pillars of smoke,
Who is this ascending from the wilderness,
Intimately leaning on her darling?

Behold, his couch, that which is Solomon’s!
Sixty masterful men surround it,
From the masterful men of Israel,
All of them holding a sword, taught in warfare,
Each with his sword on his thigh,
Because of alarm at night.

King Solomon made the sedan-litter for himself
From wood of Lebanon.
Its columns he made of silver,
Its bolster of gold,
Its riding seat of purple,
Its interior inlaid with love
By the daughters of Jerusalem.

Before I knew it,
My soul set me among the chariots of my princely kinsmen.
Come forth, O daughters of Zion, and see king Solomon,
With the crown with which his mother crowned him
On the day of his espousal.

 

2. Charms of the Bride During Her Sword-dance

Who is this who gazes forth like the dawn,
Lovely as the moonbeam,
Pure as the sunshine,
Majestic as standard bearers?

Return, return, Shulamitess;
Return, return, that we may perceive you.
What do you perceive in the Shulamitess?
Something like the Mahanaim chorus?

How lovely are your sandaled footsteps,
O princely daughter;
The curvings of your thighs are like eardrops,
The work of true craftsman hands.
And your two breasts are like two fawns,
Twins of a gazelle.

This is your stature: it is like the date palm,
And your breasts like clusters. I said,
Let me ascend into the date palm;
Let me take hold of its topmost branches.
Oh that your breasts may become like the clusters of the vine,
And the scent of your nose like apricots.

Your head upon you is like Carmel,
And the tresses of your head are like purple:
A king is bound by the strands.
Your neck is like a tower of ivory.
Your eyes are like reservoirs in Heshbon by the gate of Bath-rabbim;
Your nose is like the tower of Lebanon, watching the face of Damascus.
And your palate like the best wine.
May it go to my darling,
As evenly gliding over lips and teeth.

How lovely you are, and how pleasant you are,
O love, among rich delights.
Your belly is like a grain pile of wheat, fenced about by anemones.
Your navel is like a goblet, well-rounded, which does not lack liquor.

 

3. Brothers of the Bride

I am my darling’s, and my darling is mine;
He is grazing his flock among the anemones.
I am my darling’s,
And his impulse is toward me.

Like an anemone among the thistles,
So is my dearest among the daughters.

Do not stare at me because I am dusky,
Because the sun has glared upon me;
My mother’s sons burned hot against me;
They placed me custodian over the vineyards;
Over my vineyard which was for myself, I had not the custody.

Get hold of the foxes for us,
The small foxes that harm the vineyards,
For our vineyards have vine blossoms.

We have a young sister,
And her breasts are not yet grown.
What shall we do for our sister
On the day when she is spoken for?

If she is a wall,
We shall build a battlement of silver upon it.
We shall make bead-rows of gold for you,
With specks of silver.

And if she is a door,
We shall buttress it with planks of cedar.

I am a wall,
And my breasts are like towers;
I have, then, become in his eyes
Like one providing peace.

O that you were as a brother to me,
Who suckled at the breasts of my mother!
Then if I found you outdoors I would kiss you,
And no one would despise me.

I would lead you and bring you to my mother’s house,
Who has taught me.
There I shall give my affections to you.
I would give you to drink of wine that is compounded,
Of my pomegranate juice.

His left hand is under my head,
And his right arm embraces me.”

I have adjured you, daughters of Jerusalem,
Why do you rouse, why do you rouse up love,
When it already delights?

 

4. One sole love

For Solomon, there was a vineyard in Baal-hamon;
He gave out the vineyard to custodians;
Each would bring for its fruit a thousand silver pieces.

I have my own vineyard before me;
The thousand are for you, Solomon,
And two hundred for the custodians of its fruit.

Sixty queens, they may be, and eighty concubines,
And damsels may be without number,
But only one is she, my dove, my flawless one,
The only one is she of her mother,
The pure one is she of the one who bore her.

Daughters see her and call her happy;
Queens and concubines, let them praise her.

 

5. Protection from All Dangers

With me from Lebanon, O bride,
Come with me from Lebanon;

Regard the scene from the summit of Amana,
From the summit of Shenir and Hermon,
From the habitations of lions,
From the mountain ranges of leopards.

 

6. Beauty of the Lover

I was asleep, yet my heart was aroused;
The sound of my darling knocking!

“Open to me, my sister, my dearest,
My dove, my flawless one,
For my head is filled with night mist,
My locks with moisture of the night.”

I have stripped off my tunic; how should I put it on again?
I have washed my feet; how should I dirty them again?

My darling put forth his hand into the latch hole,
And my bowels clamored for him.
I arose to open for my darling;
My hands dropped myrrh,
And my fingers with overflowing myrrh–
On the handgrips of the latch. I opened for my darling,
Yet my darling had vanished; he had passed aside.

My soul had gone forth when he spoke;
I sought him, yet I did not find him;
I called him, yet he did not answer me.

The guards who go around in the city found me;
They smote me; they injured me;
They lifted my cape off me, those guards of the walls.

I adjure you, daughters of Jerusalem,
If you find my darling, what shall you tell him?
That I am ailing with love?

“Whither has your darling gone, loveliest among women?
Whither has your darling faced?
Let us seek him with you.
How is your darling better than another darling, Loveliest among women?
How is your darling better than another darling
That thus you adjure us?”

My darling is shimmering and ruddy,
Preeminent among ten thousand.

His head is certified gold, glittering gold;
His locks are pendulous, dusky as a raven.
His eyes are like doves by channels of water,
Washed in milk, seated by a brimming pool.

His cheeks are like beds of aromatics, towers of sweet compounds;
His lips are like anemones, dropping overflowing myrrh.
His hands are like ring-bands of gold, filled with topaz;
His belly is like reflecting ivory, bedecked with sapphires.

His legs are like columns of marble, founded on sockets of glittering gold;
His appearance is like Lebanon, choice as its cedars.
His palate is most sweet,
And all of him is coveted.

This is my darling, and this is my dearest,
O daughters of Jerusalem.

 

7. The Bride to the Bridegroom on the Morrow After the Marriage

How lovely you are, my dearest!
How lovely you are; your eyes are like doves!
How lovely you are, my darling, indeed so pleasant!

Indeed our divan is under flourishing trees,
The rafters of our grand house are cedars,
And our gutters are firs.

Like an apricot tree among the trees of the wildwood,
So is my darling among the sons;
In his shadow I covet that I may sit,
And his fruit is sweet to my palate.

He brings me to the house of wine,
And his standard over me is love.”
Support me with raisin cakes;
Reinvigorate me with apricots,
For I am ailing with love.

His left hand is under my head,
And his right arm embraces me.
While the king was in his surroundings,
My nard gave forth its scent.

A sachet of myrrh is my darling to me,
Lodged between my breasts.
A cluster of henna blossoms is my darling to me,
In the vineyards of Engedi.

Let him kiss me with kisses of his mouth.
Indeed your affections are better than wine.
As for scent, your attars are well pleasing;
Your name is like attar as it is being emptied out;
Therefore, the damsels love you.
The upright love you.

Draw me after you; let us run;
The king would bring me to his chambers.

We would exult and rejoice with you;
We do commemorate your affections as better than wine.
Eat, associates!
Drink and be drunken, friends!

My darling is mine, and I am his;
He is grazing his flock among the anemones.

While the day blows gently,
And the shadows flee,
Turn around, my darling, be you like a gazelle
Or a fawn of the deer on the sundered mountains.
Hasten away, my darling,
And be you like a gazelle
Or a fawn of the deer
On the mountains of aromatics!

I adjure you, daughters of Jerusalem,
By gazelles or by hinds of the field:
Do not rouse, and do not rouse up love
Until it delight.

 

8. The Maiden’s Beauty

How lovely you are, my dearest!
How lovely you are!

Your eyes are doves behind your face veil;
Your hair is like a drove of goats that streams down from Mount Gilead;
Your teeth are like a fashioned drove that ascends from the washing;
All of them have their twin,
And there are none among them bereaved.

Your lips are like thread of double dipped scarlet,
And you mouth is comely;
Like a slice of pomegranate are your temples behind your face veil.
Your neck is like the tower of David, built for an armory;
A thousand shields are hung on it, all cuirasses of the masterful.

To my mare among the chariots of Pharaoh I liken you, my dearest.
Your cheeks are comely with bead-rows,
Your neck with threaded gems.
Your neck is like the tower of David, built for an armory;
A thousand shields are hung on it, all cuirasses of the masterful.

Your two breasts are like two fawns,
Twins of a gazelle that graze among the anemones.

While the day blows gently,
And the shadows flee,
I shall go myself to the mountain of myrrh
And to the hill of frankincense.

You are lovely, my dearest, as Tirzah,
Comely as Jerusalem,
Majestic as standard bearers.
Turn your eyes about from in front of me,
For they beset me.

Your hair is like a drove of goats that streams down from Gilead;
Your teeth are like a drove of ewes that ascend from the washing;
All of them have their twins,
And there are none among them bereaved;
Like a slice of pomegranate are your temples behind your face veil.
Turn your eyes about from in front of me,
For they beset me.

Your hair is like a drove of goats that streams down from Gilead;
You stir my heart, my sister, O bride, you stir my heart
With one glance from your eyes,
With one coil of your necklace.
How lovely are your affections, my sister,O bride,
How much better are you affections than wine,
And the scent of your attars than all aromatics!

Your lips drop sweetness as the honeycomb, O bride;
Honey and milk are under your tongue,
And the scent of your raiment is like the scent of Lebanon.

You are a garden latched, my sister, O bride,
A garden latched, a spring sealed.
You are a spring for gardens,
A well of living waters,
Even those flowing from Lebanon.

Your runners form a park of pomegranates,
With finest fruit,
Henna blossoms with nards,
Nard and saffron, reed and cinnamon,
With all the woods of frankincense, myrrh and aloes,
With all the topmost aromatics.

Rouse, north wind, and come, south wind;
Blow on my garden that its aromatics may flow!

 

9. The Bride’s Fair Garden

The Bride:
Let my darling come to his garden
That he may eat its fine fruit.

Do come, my darling, let us go forth to the field;
Let us lodge among the henna bushes;
Let us go early to the vineyards;
Let us see if the vine has budded,
The vine blossom has opened,
And the pomegranates have flowered;
There I shall give my affections to you.

The mandrakes give forth their scent,
And at our portals are all fine fruits,
Both new and stored,
That I have secluded for you, my darling.”

The Bridegroom:
I descended to the walnut garden
To see the pollination about the watercourse,
To see whether the vine had budded
And pomegranates had flowered.

I come to my garden, my sister, O bride;
I nip off my myrrh with my aromatics;
I eat my wildwood fare with my honey;
I drink my wine with my milk.

The Bride:
My darling has descended to his garden,
To the beds of aromatics,
To graze in the gardens
And to glean anemones.

 

10. Springtide of Love

Hark, the voice of my darling!
Behold, this one comes,
Leaping over the mountains,
Bounding over the hills!

My darling is like a gazelle
Or a fawn of the deer;
Behold, this one stands behind our house-wall,
Peering through the windows,
Gazing forth through the lattices.

My darling answered and said to me:
“Arise, you, my dearest!
My lovely one, now go you forth!
For behold, the wintry weather has passed;
The downpour has passed on and has itself gone.”

“The flowers are seen in the land;
The season for pruning is attained,
And the voice of the turtledove is heard in our land.”

“The fig tree flavors its green figs,
And the vines give scent to the vine blossoms.
Arise, you, my dearest!
My lovely one, now go you forth!”

“My dove, in the encircling crag,
In the concealment of the cliff,
Let me see your appearance;
Let me hear your voice;
You who are dwelling in the gardens,
The partners are attending to your voice;
Let me hear it.”

“For your voice is congenial,
And your appearance is comely.”

 

11. Pasture Thy Kids

Do tell me, you whom my soul loves,
Where do you graze your flock?

Where do you recline them at noon?
Why should I become like a muffled woman
Beside the droves of your partners?

“If you do not know for yourself, loveliest among women,
Go forth for yourself at the heels of the flock,
And graze your kids by the tabernacles of the shepherds.”

 

12. Omnia vincit Amor

On my bed in the nights
I sought him whom my soul loves;
I sought him, yet I did not find him.

Let me rise now, and let me go around in the city,
Through the roadways and through the squares;
Let me seek him whom my soul loves.

I sought him, yet I did not find him.
The guards who go around in the city found me.
He whom my soul loves, have you seen him?

Barely had I passed by them
When I found him whom my soul loves;
I held him and would not slacken my grip on him,
Until I brought him to my mother’s house,
To the chamber of her who became pregnant with me.

I adjure you, daughters of Jerusalem,
By gazelles or by hinds of the field:
Do not rouse, and do not rouse up love
Until it delight.

Place me like a seal upon your heart,
Like a seal upon your arm,
For love is strong as death,
Its jealousy hard as the unseen,
Its burning coals as burning coals of fire,
The blaze of Yah.

Many waters cannot quench love,
Nor can streams overwhelm it.
If a man should give all the wealth of his house for love,
People would despise, yea despise it.

A Christian Parenting Manifesto

One sure way to make people angry is to talk about parenting.

My intention here is not to tell you how to raise your kids. This is simply a short manifesto I came up with for myself after studying the Scriptures. I’m posting it here because it might be helpful to some. Make of it what you will.

5 “rules” for raising children:

1) Children should believe that, by obeying their parents, their life will go well. The parents should demonstrate that they have a better understanding of the present reality than the child does. (Eph 6:1-3; 1 Cor 13:11)

2) The father should not rouse anger in his children by coercing them to do things they don’t want to do. (Eph 6:4; Prov 15:1)

3) The father is to supply the resources needed for the child to fully develop according to his or her kind. Children should not be forced to learn in ways that are unsuitable to their inclinations. (Eph 6:4; Gen 1:11)

4) The father is to understand the Lord’s will for his children and provide both the “sting of correction” and explain the why behind God’s warnings so that his children do not stray from the path of truth. (Eph 6:4; Prov 15:1)

5) The mother should adapt her parenting approach to align with the father’s values. (Eph 5:24)

My guess is that the root parenting problem in conservative circles has to do with framing parenting as a “discipline” job while neglecting what God revealed to be the central challenge of parenting: not provoking your children.

Confessions of a Heretic

Call me a heretic if you will, but I think any Christian would do well do adopt the mindset of A.E. Knoch:

The adherents of creeds and confessions are satisfied that they have “the truth” and that all else is false. They exalt human deductions from the Bible above the Scriptures themselves and denounce all who do not bow down to their dictum. Oh, that the saints would awaken to the deceptive nature of the present day delusion!

Let us rid ourselves of the idea that we are pure, that we have no error, and that we can apostatize only by departing from our present position. Almost all of the saints are stupefied by this fond delusion. It takes no reasoning power at all to show that the conflicting camps in Christendom cannot all be right.

Let us rather take every doctrine and subject it to the rigid scrutiny of the inspired text. Let us hold it subject to such modifications as the further study of the Scriptures may impose. In other words, let us hold to God’s Word and not cling to creeds.

We are well aware that our refusal to subscribe to man-made statements of doctrine may be made the basis of serious charges against us. Nevertheless, we wish to repeat that we absolutely refuse to sign any unscriptural or extra-scriptural creed or doctrine – even if we believe it. A statement which cannot be expressed in the words of divine inspiration is inspired by the enemy of truth, and has no claim on the man of God.

Creeds which conform to the truth of the Scriptures are useless; those which do not are dangerous. If we believe a truth of Scripture, let us express it in the language of Scripture. It is almost invariably the case that any change from the inspired form of sound words indicates a deviation from the full and perfect truth itself.

We desire to believe all that God has spoken, and to reject all that man has imported into it.

— Editorial
Unsearchable Riches, Volume 13 (1922)
(edited)

Quoted from the Bible Student’s Notebook.

The “Good Husband” Trap

I found an unexpected nugget of wisdom while reading a parenting blog by Roslyn Ross.

The post is about the danger of thinking of parenting as a job rather than a relationship. But she also inadvertently hit upon the masculinity problem faced by many husbands today:

To illustrate why it’s so unhealthy to turn a relationship into a job, imagine a new husband takes on the job of being a Good Husband. He starts doing all these things he doesn’t really want to do–mowing the lawn, taking out the trash, reading to the kids, helping his wife with the dishes, he gets the highest paying job he can and works his tail off, and at first he’s patting himself on the back going, “I am such a good boy” but after a while he starts to feel like being a good husband is a huge obligation, a chore, a long list of things to do. It’s not fun anymore. And he’s starting to resent his wife and see her as this kind of slave driver.

The reason being a Good Boy is so unfulfilling is that he’s following a pre-written “script.” He’s not learning or discovering or growing and without growth there is no life.

The other reason it’s so unhealthy is who wrote the script. It wasn’t the husband.

The concept of the “Good Husband” is nothing but coercion… both to yourself (because someone else said you had to do it) and to your family (because you expect them to give you something in return.) The harder you try to do the right things, the less your wife will respect you and the more you’ll resent both her and yourself.

Instead, take the lead by deciding for yourself how you want to live. Take charge of your learning and growth. Don’t follow someone else’s script.

A woman is a follower by nature. She will follow and submit to a man who takes charge of his own life.

I Asked Red Pill Christians About Porn. Here’s What They Said.

I recently dropped an obnoxious question over at the Red Pill Christian reddit. This is what I asked:

What is the problem with porn?

Since most Christians regard pornography as sinful, where do we draw the line?

Song of Solomon => Erotic Poetry => Erotic Stories => Nude Paintings => Paintings of Sexual Acts => Video Animation of Sexual Acts => Photos of Nude Women => Photos of Sexual Acts => Videos of Sexual Acts.

More importantly than WHERE you draw the line. WHY do you draw the line there?

Please use biblical principles and logic to justify your answer.

The post received almost 500 views and got 31 comments. If you got time to kill, it’s worth checking out.

Otherwise, I’ll summarize the responses below. And, since this is my own blog, I will gleefully exercise my sovereign right make a final judgment on every argument.

1. There is no biblical scripture against porn because it wasn’t around back then. But the bible does tell us to “flee sexual immorality” so this would apply to porn.

Actually, porn has been around for a LONG time. Just as junior boys instinctively cover every bathroom stall with crude etchings of penises and tits, so have artists been graphically depicting sex since ancient times. The only thing that has significantly changed since biblical times is the quantity of images available and the resolution.

And, by definition, “sexual immorality” does not automatically refer to porn. It refers to engaging in prostitution and promiscuous sex.

2. The Bible tells us to abstain from “the appearance of evil” (1 Thess 5:21)

This is worth further investigation. At minimum, it can apply as an exhortation to avoid any pornography that portrays unlawful sexual acts (e.g. bestiality, homosexuality, etc.). Though sex itself is not evil so I don’t find it plausible that all “appearances” of sex would be evil. But a further point worth investigating is the fact that a lot of visual porn is produced in a sexually immoral context so technically, you are viewing a picture of a sinful act. But there would be no way to know this from the image alone…

3. Arguably, using sexually explicit material in a marriage is fine if it’s building unity. But it’s best to avoid it altogether when single.

This makes sense to me. Often times, it is helpful to see a graphic depiction of a sexual act for instructional purposes. The next question is, what about inspirational purposes?

Avoiding sexually explicit material altogether when single sounds nice in theory, but is that really practical advice when one lives in a culture saturated with sexual imagery?

4. Isn’t it clear that looking at porn is lusting for a woman other than your wife?

Not when “lust” is properly understood in the Greek. The English word “lust” means to have a very strong sexual desire for someone. The problem is that the English word doesn’t convey the same precision as the Greek word epithumeoLust in the English sense is certainly part of epithumeo, but it’s not necessarily the same thing. In order for “lust” to qualify as epithumeo, the desire must also include (1) an intensifying focus, (2) an intense emotion that borders on rage, and (3) a longing to have sex with or possess the woman of focus. In colloquial terms, we might say that biblical lust is the same as being “madly in love” with a woman who belongs to another man.

Now imagine you were the judge of a case where a young man was accused of evil intent. The evidence? He was caught ogling over his friend’s wife’s cleavage as she bent over. You talk to the young man and find he seems to be a “normal” guy. He shows no signs of mental unstableness. He works a steady job. He’s seems to be a genuinely “nice guy.” You find no evidence that the young man is stalking the wife or is obsessed with her in any way. Turns out he’s just got a thing for big tits. Would you condemn that man for adultery? Would you ask the husband if he would like you to put him to death? No! You’d have a good chuckle, pat him on the back and say, “Look man, you got to be more discreet about that stuff. You’re gonna have a hard time getting a good woman if all you can do is stare at her tits with your mouth open.”

The man who spends his time jerking off to porn is not an adulterer. He’s just the dumbass friend who can’t get laid because he just stares at the girl’s chest instead of talking to her.

5. Song of Solomon was basically 50 Shades of Grey for women back in the day and that was considered “holy.” So why not mainstream visual porn today?

I think Song of Solomon has a lot more wisdom that 50 Shades of Gray. But I don’t have a problem with the logic of the question. I think the distinction is not so much an ethical distinction as a qualitative distinction. Once you delve into Song of Solomon and start to understand female desire, you’ll realize that the mainstream porn just makes you sexually retarded. How is watching yet another variation of “Busty Blonde Gets Pounded” really gonna help you?

Dig into the Scripture’s erotica. Study the female psyche. Learn to make up sexual fantasies.

The key to getting laid is leveraging female desire in your favor.

Biblical Counseling Falls to the Feminist Narrative

I was saddened,, though admittedly not surprised, to see the following article published on the CCEF (Christian Counseling and Education Foundation) blog:

Sexual Abuse in Marriage

The title alone should be a red flag to those with an advanced understanding of the red pill.

I was saddened because the (now deceased) founder of the institute, Jay Adams, did a lot of great work for the Church. He was the pioneering voice that helped spark a revival of biblical counseling at a time when people assumed the Bible had no relevance to people’s personal problems.

One of the key ways that Satan infiltrated the Church in modern times was to trick pastors into believing that mental and emotional problems were best handled by “qualified” secular psychiatrists. This meant that pastors could provide abstract “spiritual” guidance, but practical problems were best left to outsiders. Apparently the Enemy was fine with leaving the church to teach theology and share inspirational Bible stories… so long as he had influence over the practical matters like sex, relationships, abuse, anxiety, finances, and all the other personal problems.

But Jay Adams boldly stood against all this nonsense back in the 1960s. The Lord blessed his work and it turned into a movement.

And now feminism is ruining it.

I’ve provided a commentary below on some relevant excerpts for those who are interested. This is how today’s Biblical Counselors, who genunely want to help people change by applying God’s Word, are going to be taught to deal with marriages. [Emphasis mine.]

Though the recent #metoo movement has revealed the prevalence with which people are violated sexually, my heart remains heavy for wives who are victims of marital sexual abuse. Their stories remain untold, and I am concerned that many pastors and counselors are unaware of its occurrence. I hear many stories (too many stories) of women being abused, violated or even raped by their husbands.

“Abuse” is a vague concept. What’s going on in these “many stories”? Is he punching her in the face? Pulling a gun on her? Keeping her in a cage? Given the timidness of most Christian men today, I find this doubtful. Also, a husband cannot “violate” or “rape” his own wife. Here’s the common definition of rape:

1. unlawful sexual activity and usually sexual intercourse carried out forcibly or under threat of injury against a person’s will or with a person who is beneath a certain age or incapable of valid consent because of mental illness, mental deficiency, intoxication, unconsciousness, or deception — compare sexual assaultstatutory rape
2an outrageous violation
3an act or instance of robbing or despoiling or carrying away a person by force
Call me crazy, but I’m pretty sure that having sex with your wife is (1) lawful, (2) doesn’t qualify as an “outrageous” violation, and (3) doesn’t involve stealing your wife away from her home.

Sexual abuse in marriage occurs when husbands make demands on their wives that are not based on love .¹ These demands for sex are not sanctioned by 1 Corinthians 7:3-5,² though the passage is often used as a goad to require a wife’s compliance. To be clear, the men who do this are troubled themselves. They usually have deep-seated problems including a weak or non-existent relationship with God and an inflated sense of entitlement. They believe that other people (including their wives) exist for them—for their comfort and to meet their needs, including sexual ones. When their wives fail to respond as desired, it often results in a pattern of coercive and punishing behaviors designed to force their compliance.³

Having sex with your wife is part of love (Ex 21:10), so this reasoning doesn’t make any sense. And wives do, in fact, exist to help her husband, including meeting his sexual needs (Gen 2). And if your wife has some repressed submissive desires, establishing “a pattern of coercive and punishing behaviors designed to force [her] compliance” might actually be the best thing you can try for your marriage.

The author then lists some examples that are indeed unloving, or at least are stupid strategies for getting sex with a woman. But judging by the dishonest start to the article, I doubt these scenarios are as common as she’d like us to believe.

Marriage does not equal consent. It does not obligate spouses to participate in any sexual act at any time. But devastatingly, many Christian women have come to believe that sex-on-demand is their “wifely duty.”

Actually, this is exactly what the Scriptures do NOT say (1 Cor 7:5).

Those suffering from these distorted, abusive demands should not be left questioning what God says about such evils. The Apostle Paul speaks clearly here. “Put to death therefore what is earthly in you: sexual immorality, impurity, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry. On account of these the wrath of God is coming” (Col. 3:5-6). Paul is calling on us to eradicate all sexual sin that stands against our identity in Christ—any sexual impurity. He is not setting a low bar here and saying “just don’t cheat on your spouses.” He is saying: Wipe out all sexual covetousness—all your greedy taking—for all sexual impurities deserve the wrath of God.

The author claims to have a “Master of Divinity” degree from Westminister Theological Seminary. But apparently they don’t cover reading comprehension in that program or how to use a Greek lexicon or concordance.

  • sexual immorality (porneia): a “selling off” of one’s body (as in prostitution and other promiscuous sex)
  • impurity (akathartos): being not pure because of a mixture; being adulterated with a “wrong mix” and hence unclean (such as keeping company with sexually immoral people)
  • passion (pathos): raw and depraved strong feelings (implicitly, feelings that are not guided by God)
  • evil desire (epithymian kakos): a passion to do evil, rotten things
  • covetousness (pleonexia): the desire for more things; a desire for beyond what is needed; implies fraud and extortion

I have a hard time believing that any of these terms could possibly apply to “demanding” sex from your wife. The worst it could be is a poor sexual strategy executed by a sex-starved beta husband.

 

Why Do Men Look at Porn?

Wayne suggests adding some spiritual dimensions to the basic definitions of sexual terms. He has some good thoughts so I’m highlighting them here and including some additional comments.

1. Lust – According to my understanding, lust is equivalent to a ‘sexual poverty mentality’. When a man has sexual access to a worthy woman, he doesn’t indulge in lust or porn. He simply gets to work on it. To get sexual access, a man needs to have an ‘abundance mentality’. If he languishes in a ‘sexual poverty mentality’ (i.e. lust), then he will have difficulty in his sex life, and will resort to porn.

This makes intuitive sense to me. The less sex a man has the more likely he is to fill the void with porn. I actually read a conversation on Twitter awhile back started by Hunter Drew (of Family Alpha) where a lot of men admitted the reason they watched porn was because they were insecure about their dick size and felt they were unable to satisfy their own wives in bed. So sex ends up turning into a “spectator sport” for a lot of men. They simply don’t feel qualified to participate.

Though I wouldn’t go so far to say these men are ‘lusting.’ I think there is a key distinction between having a burning desire to possess something and merely wishing you had something. I suspect the problem with the stereotypical porn consumer is that he does not truly desire sex enough. He does not desire sex enough to work through rejection and ‘failure’ to get what he craves. He only half-heartedly wishes his wife would do more things in the bedroom and he finds a variety of obstacles (such as the size of his plough) that supposedly prevent him from getting what he wants. In reality, it is the scarcity-based beta mindset that prevents him getting to bedroom paradise.

2. Erotica, Porn, and Art – I would argue that the greatest difference between erotica, porn, and art (from a spiritual perspective) is the mindset which a man entertains in the viewing. A man in a poverty mindset will view porn and erotica as a vehicle of sexual expression (i.e. masturbation). But when a man shifts to an abundance mindset, porn and erotica are merely seen as art. He makes some comments about the art to his woman, they laugh, and then they go home and do it. No lust there. There is desire and passion, sure, but no lust. If the man resorts to lust (i.e. the sexual poverty mentality), she’ll be creeped out and he’ll end up with porn for the night.

Wanking off while viewing porn certainly changes the experience. Many Christians would argue that masturbation is proof of lust. I wouldn’t be to quick to make that conclusion. Practically speaking, the women in porn are not seen as “real” women. In other words, most men don’t obsess over them, try to stalk them in real life, or even entertain the idea of actually having sex with them. It’s just fantasy.

I think regularly using porn for “solo sex” is akin to what Dr. Robert Glover, in No More Mr. Nice Guy, describes as “settling for bad sex.” No sane man would argue that masturbation is preferable to real sex. It doesn’t exactly leave a man feeling proud when he’s finished. We’d all rather be like this guy:

I think the the risk of jerking off while watching porn is that it can easily become an addicting experience. Since it’s more convenient than going through the trouble of learning how escalate with a real woman, it can become a crutch that prevents a man from making the real-life improvements he needs to make to get laid.

But these men already feel bad enough about themselves. Equating their porn viewing habit with adultery on top of being a loser is not going to help them change. They need encouragement, not brow-beating.

3. Sexual Immorality – This is an insightful start. We could make this better by describing what sex is sold in exchange for, and why.

As best I can tell, the biblical problem with sexual immorality is that it shows contempt for one’s own body. God gave us our bodies so that we could manifest spiritual truth. Having sex within marriage is a manifestation of Christ and the church. But having sex outside of marriage indicates that you only see your body as something to barter with for temporal gain. Money would be the obvious exchange. But I think other forms of “currency” would be included such as using sex to “win friends and influence people.”

I am sure we’ll have to add a definition of idolatry to reach a full understanding of this.

As I mentioned in my previous post, I think the equation of sexual immorality with idolatry is an example of “common sense” being incorrect. The New Testament equates idolatry with greed for material gain, not sexual immorality. Though I suppose one could “sell off” one’s body in service of material gain.

It’s possible I’m wrong about this. If anyone can find a passage of Scripture that clearly equates idolatry with sexual immorality, I’ll adjust my opinion accordingly. But since I’ve already searched the ends of the earth (i.e. quickly scanned through Page 1 of a Google search), I don’t think anything’s going to show up.

The Rise of the Incels

As if the Church wasn’t in for a big enough shock already, here’s yet another sexual movement on the rise:

The above screenshot is the estimated traffic stats (from SimilarWeb.com) for Incels.me, a discussion forum for men who have taken the “black pill.” The site’s terminology page is telling of the frustrations:

Rollo Tomassi offers some insights into the movement [emphasis mine]:

So what’s different now? Well, to start, we have a generation of lost boys who’ve been acculturated to think that even asking a girl out is a form of sexual misconduct. The Village has raised boys as if they’re defective girls, devoid of any of the masculine discipline necessary to teach these young men how to cope with real rejection from a girl, how to deal with defeat or how to come back stronger as a result. As we’ve feminized these boys so to have we embedded the same feminine victimhood narrative that women rely on into their collective psyche. Except these boys are still beholden to the old social contract that women believe incumbent upon men. This puts these boy-men into a very precarious position: they are educated like defective girls and as such adopt the same frail sensibilities and are subject to the same entitlement narrative as most women are, but they are also male and therefore are expected to suck it up, take it on the chin and carry on. They are told to express their feelings and in the next moment are told to check their male privilege.

Most of the lost boys generation are not ready for the disillusionment that the Red Pill brings to them, but it’s not the manosphere that’s opening their eyes so much as they are having it thrust in front of them by a communication age steeped in the Feminine Imperative. Today, Red Pill truths are harder and harder to get away from as Open Hypergamy and all of the unflattering truths about the female nature are triumphantly lauded by women themselves. Every swipe left on Tinder is one more confirmation of exactly the harsh truths that push Incels to their limit.

Of every article I’ve read on Incels since the Toronto killings not one author has analyzed the problem correctly, but also none have any actionable idea about how to solve the problem of Incels snapping. There are no longer the same outlets that ‘losers’ had back in my day to channel that sexual frustration to more productive ends. Many a frustrated high school boy became his generation’s iconic artist or musician. I think it’s the height of irony that Mark Zuckerberg essentially created Facebook to stalk his ex girlfriend. There are no longer the creative ways to deal with the discontent that comes from sexual rejection. Some will say to me there are, it’s just these guys are too unmotivated to apply themselves. And while that may be true, there are much easier outlets that further stunt that boys development. Rather than redirecting that sexual angst to something creative, it’s much easier to lose themselves in online porn or immersive escapisms facilitated by this age’s technology.

Or they can seek out a forum of similarly disaffected young men and commiserate about the truth of a world that has no place for them. I read that Dr. Jordan Peterson suggested that a social order based on ‘enforced monogamy’ might be a cure for Incels. I get what he was trying to say, but it’s just one more flippant redirection away from the real causes of this rise in Incels. I can remember reading a post that Roissy had made about a knife wielding man in China who had gone to a day care center to specifically kill women and children. As horrifying as that is what had prompted the guy was the understanding that he’d essentially been selected out of the reproductive game because there was a huge imbalance in the ratio of men to women in China as a result of their one-child policy for so long. Roissy went on to suggest that as more and more men are disaffected by a feminine-primary social order, one that bases all its legislation and social doctrine on optimizing Hypergamy, the men disenfranchised by it will become either more violent (in their effort or angst to reproduce) or more suicidal – which we also see in men killing themselves at 5 times the rate of women.

Incels are the canary in the coal mine that is a gynocentric social order. They are what results when a society prioritizes and incentivizes Alpha Fucks (enthusiastic consent) while Beta Bucks is more or less assured by direct and indirect resource transfer to women. When 80%+ of men are evaluated as ‘unattractive’ to women fed on a steady diet of ego inflating social media, you get Incels.

I don’t know if the world has ever faced a problem of this sort at the magnitude we’re going to experience it. But there will always be plenty of work for the righteous to do.

Be as a father unto the fatherless, and instead of an husband unto their mother: so shalt thou be as the son of the most High, and he shall love thee more than thy mother doth.
Ecclesiasticus 4:10

I’m not sure how to apply the “husband unto their mother” part, but it is obvious who the fatherless are in this generation.

9 Fun Facts About Sexual Immorality and Idolatry

So here’s some fun things you may or may not have known about sexual immorality. A few of them surprised me during my study.

First, I want to clarify the terms. This is a topic that is usually obscured by word trickery, so I want to make sure you know where I’m coming from first.

sexual immorality (porneia– to sell off one’s body; to engage in “whoremongering”, prostitution, or other forms of promiscuity.

idolatry (eidólolatria– service or worship rendered to an image

For clarity, I will be using the more readily-understood word “promiscuity” in place of the ambiguous word of “sexual immorality.”

With that out of the way, here’s some interesting finds in quick-hitting fashion:

1. Promiscuity on part of the wife is the only biblical grounds for a husband to divorce a wife (Matthew 5:32; 19:9)

Hence the disciples shock at Christ’s teaching. When a man takes a wife, she is under his care and instruction for life… in spite of any foolishness or sinful behavior she engages in. It would do a man well to learn to enjoy the process of shaping an imperfect woman into a radiant bride.

2. Promiscuity is a manifestation of one’s inner character and desires. (Matthew 5:28; Mark 7:21)

One does not simply fall into promiscuity by impulse. It is a manifestation of one’s inner thought life. If someone is engaging in promiscuity, it is because they already corrupted themselves on the inside. It’s a reflection of their true character. Hence we should not “feel sorry” for someone living a sexually promiscuous lifestyle. Rather, we should expose the error of their ways and lovingly point them to repentance and the path of life.

3. Promiscuity is a sin against one’s own body (1 Cor 6:18)

Similar to how King Solomon instructs his son not to waste his seed on unworthy women (Prov 5), so Paul instructs us not to sin against our bodies by uniting them to prostitutes. The fact that it is our own body makes it an especially shameful sin. Our bodies were made to serve the Lord (including sex in marriage). Why would you throw away your body like a piece of trash by uniting it to whores?

4. The temptation to engage in promiscuity is a righteous reason to marry (1 Cor 7:2)

As far as I can tell, there are only three (initial) biblical reasons for a man to marry:

  1. To make babies (Genesis 1)
  2. Sexual attraction (Song of Solomon)
  3. To avoid promiscuity (1 Cor 7)

In other words, the reason to marry is sex, sex, sex. Other than avoiding pairing with a bad spouse, no other advice is given.

5. We are to cut off anything that energizes us towards promiscuity (Col 3:5)

This could mean different things for different people. It could mean that a woman shuts down her Tinder account. It could mean avoiding frat parties. It could mean changing friends. Any situation that gives creates a temptation for you to engage in illicit sex should be cut out of your life.

6. Rather than engaging in promiscuity, men are to learn how to get a wife and “possess” her (1 Thess 4:3-4)

I believe if the Apostle Paul were alive today, he would be a big proponent of the “married red pill.” He does not simply instruct young men to get a wife. He essentially tells them to grasp the reality of women (i.e. take the red pill), get a wife, and learn how to make her hot for you within the context of your marriage.

7. Promiscuity is frequently associated or caused by idolatry (Rev 9:20)

It’s easy to imagine how idolatry can lead one to promiscuity. In ancient times, many religious ceremonies involved engaging in orgies, having intercourse with animals, or other such promiscuous behavior. Even today, women who serve the idol of Feminism engage in the “ceremony” of riding the “cock carousel” to prove they are a “sexually liberated” woman. And pick up artists boast of their notch count while they pump-and-dump as many of these “sexually liberated” women as they can.

8. Promiscuity is used as a symbol for idolatry (Rev 17:4)

God frequently uses references to promiscuity to help us understand how he feels about idolatry. Idolatry is described in Romans as becoming debased and focusing on the created thing at the expense of the larger context:

For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles.

Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised.

The most graphic example of such darkened thinking is found in Ezekiel 23:20:

There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses.

In other words, idolaters miss the point. They are like women who judge men solely on the size of their cock… not realizing that there is a purpose to sex beyond just seeing how big of a member they can stuff into their overstretched vaginas.

9. Promiscuity is not synonymous with idolatry

All this leads to this final point, which surprised me.

I had always assumed that sexual immorality was equated with idolatry. In other words, sexual immorality was equivalent to “worshiping sex.” I’ve heard this sentiment expressed in churches many times.

But I could not find a single passage in the Scripture that made this connection. There are passages that describe sexual immorality as a result of idolatry. And there are passages that use sexual immorality as a metaphor for idolatry. But nothing saying that that sexual immorality is the same as idolatry. (Someone please correct me, if I overlooked any data.)

So why does this distinction matter? And why were we led to believe they were the same?

I have a good guess.

It’s a diversion to prevent us from seeing what is synonymous with idolatry… namely, pleonexia, which is typically translated in Colossians 3:5 as “greed” or “covetousness”:

So put to death your worldly impulses: sexual sin, impurity, passion, evil desire, and greed (which is idolatry).

The definition of pleonexia is telling:

properly, the desire for more (things), i.e. lusting for a greater number of temporal things that go beyond what God determines is eternally best

The Strong’s Concordance sheds further light on the term:

From pleonektes; avarice, i.e. (by implication) fraudulency, extortion — covetous(-ness) practices, greediness.

In light of these definitions, the equation of pleonexia (greed) with idolatry makes perfect sense:

If one’s desire to gain more possessions drives one to commit fraud and extortion, then that is serving an idol rather than God.

Now can you think of any institution that might want to hide this sin?

And can you think of a reason that institution would want us to think that our sexual “immorality” was the problem instead?

The Second Lateran Council of 1139 A.D. presents sheds some light on the motives [emphasis mine]:

5. We enjoin that what was laid down in the sacred council of Chalcedon be rigidly adhered to, namely, that the goods of deceased bishops are not to be seized by anyone at all, but are to remain freely at the disposal of the treasurer and the clergy for the needs of the church and the succeeding incumbent. Therefore, from now on, let that detestable and wicked rapacity cease. Furthermore, if anyone dares to attempt this behaviour henceforth, he is to be excommunicated. And those who despoil the goods of dying priests or clerics are to be subject to the same sentence.

6. We also decree that those in the orders of subdeacon and above who have taken wives or concubines are to be deprived of their position and ecclesiastical benefice. For since they ought to be in fact and in name temples of God, vessels of the Lord and sanctuaries of the holy Spirit, it is unbecoming that they give themselves up to marriage and impurity.

7. Adhering to the path trod by our predecessors, the Roman pontiffs Gregory VII, Urban and Paschal, we prescribe that nobody is to hear the masses of those whom he knows to have wives or concubines. Indeed, that the law of continence and the purity pleasing to God might be propagated among ecclesiastical persons and those in holy orders, we decree that where bishops, priests, deacons, subdeacons, canons regular, monks and professed lay brothers have presumed to take wives and so transgress this holy precept, they are to be separated from their partners. For we do not deem there to be a marriage which, it is agreed, has been contracted against ecclesiastical law. Furthermore, when they have separated from each other, let them do a penance commensurate with such outrageous behaviour.

8. We decree that the selfsame thing is to apply also to women religious if, God forbid, they attempt to marry.

In other words, the church couldn’t have men with wives or concubines in leadership. This would mean that the property would go to the man’s own heirs rather than to the church. And that just won’t be favorable for building a religious empire.

But it would be too obvious to simply try to take the property by force like a barbaric army. No. You’d need something much more subtle. Something that rings with holy rhetoric.

So the church presents a fraudulent gospel. A gospel where marriage is seen as unholy and the congregation is held in a state of perpetual guilt under an ambiguous and expanded definition of sexual sin.

With the sexual men ousted from leadership, and the congregants distracted by their perpetual guilt over sexual sin, there is no one left who is fit enough to call out the sin of idolatry in the church.

Now the Spirit explicitly says that in the later times some will desert the faith and occupy themselves with deceiving spirits and demonic teachings, influenced by the hypocrisy of liars whose consciences are seared. They will prohibit marriage and require abstinence from foods that God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. (1 Timothy 4:1-3)