It is well known by now that Jinger Duggar Vuolo has written a book highlighting her differences with Bill and is on an active interview schedule promoting that at the moment. We have ordered the book and will make further comments as appropriate.
We respect Jinger – and all of the siblings – for having endured both the fame and the shame of being a public part of a famous family, standing for the Lord and His standards in a godless day. Fame and success are never without their consequences, perhaps designed so by God to keep us humble. For their part the Duggars have been on the national stage for decades, honored and followed by many, publishing books, traveling the world. They have also endured the ridicule of many, a lightening rod for the hatred our generation has to standards that remind them of God and their responsibilities toward Him. The ongoing nightmare with their oldest brother Josh is well known, culminating in his recent conviction on child porn charges and a decade long sentence in prison.
Based on all that we know it appears the Jinger has herself suffered mentally and emotionally. After she married she became convinced that her troubles were due to Bill Gothard’s teachings and now is dishonoring him in public. She stopped just short of calling IBLP a “cult”, but apparently called him a “false prophet”. We are opening the discussion here without the benefit of the book in hand expecting that facts will clarify as we go.
Let’s talk about James. The Apostle James tells us that there will always be consequences that come with becoming a “public figure” in the church of God, let alone the world:
“My brethren, be not many masters [teacher, respected public persona], knowing that we shall receive the greater condemnation. For in many things we offend all. If any man offend not in word, the same is a perfect man, and able also to bridle the whole body.” (James 3:1-2)
Two things are clear. First of all, being revered as someone to respect and listen to turns into greater scrutiny from others. “Greater condemnation” the old English says – greater tests, greater criticism, folks jumping on every transgression in dramatic and equally public ways. Then it is also clear that because we now represent our Lord before others, even greater and quicker reactions will come from Him for our “iniquities”, things in our live where we decide we know better than He does.
The second verse tells us that we ALL sin in many ways. For ordinary folks most of those transgressions produce a small ripple, things we can manage. Not so with public figures. Every misstep becomes somebody’s excuse for savage attacks, and the body and soul begin to suffer. For Jinger a part of this negative scrutiny had a worldwide network of fan-emies spinning up an active forum called, “Free Jinger”. For decades it followed her, and the rest of the family, seeking to tear down their aura of righteousness, attacking their standards.
That was difficult, on all of them, and for some reason Jinger got special attention. Winning the lottery makes for absolutely miserable people, often destroying them and their families. How much more so living in a fishbowl with many unfriendly eyes looking for any handhold to pull them down. I am amazed that they have held up as well as they have. Respect.
The third of our J’s is Job, a righteous, rich man that had to endure the abrupt removal of his entire wealth and family, saving his wife, and then his health to boot. His wife, the only one to escape, turned on him, and his close friends came to chew him out for clearly being a fake.
We know in hindsight that it was the public display of a public man of God by the Lord to prove that his character was real, not the result of things always going well for him. It remains that part of that trial was being forced to endure severe mental suffering as only the devil can instigate, fears, terrors, nightmares, likely debilitating depression in a day where there were no meds or therapists to help. In the end it was proven the accusations were all false and God gave him back double of everything He had allowed to be taken away.
Jinger has also suffered mentally, and apparently still deals with anxiety. There are many of us that can relate. One thing Job never did was blame God or anyone else as he sought to make sense of it.
“In all this Job sinned not, nor charged God foolishly.” (Job 1:22)
Therapists often seek a point of blame to provide relief, a moral high ground shedding the burden of personal responsibility. You source all of your troubles in a scapegoat, then you kill the scapegoat, and you move on with your life. Bill Gothard has become that scapegoat for many ex-ATI students seeking to cope with the stresses of their adult lives. It isn’t fair and carries its own set of God ordained consequences.
For his part we know that Bill stands ready to work through the concerns that Jinger has with him and what he has taught her and her family. In any manner that is fair and she is comfortable with. We can count on one hand the number of aggrieved individuals in the last decade willing to do what Scripture demands and go to him directly.
And for our part we hope to speak to those same issues, most if not all of which have already received their own OP over the years. May the Lord be honored in all. We know in the end, He wins. And anyone that loves and reverences Him, wins. May this turn to good for both Jinger and Bill.
I’ve actually read the whole book. This article is totally off based. I would suggest to read the whole book once you get it. I have not read any of the other Duggar books, but this is a home run and probably why it is now #1 best seller on Amazon. She echos all the other testimonies I’ve read of those that have walked away from the teachings of Bill Gothard. Trying to tie James and Job to Jinger is just grasping at straws here. She does not blame her parents in the book. She shows no bitterness or anger in the book. She is raw and honest about how the ideas of Bill Gothard negatively affected her and her motivation is really to point to those that have left Christianity all together due to the false teachings of Bill back to real faith by disentangling faith from fear which is what she did.
What about the article is off based? Yes, we will read the book. But as you said, it appears that nothing in the book is new. We have dealt with all of that here and we will continue to do so. We are thrilled she hasn’t taken this out on her parents.
You just stated above that you ordered the book and will be reading it. So which is it, you ordered it and will be reading it or you ordered it as an ebook and did actually read it? The way you stated it on Saturday makes it sound like you are ordering a hard copy. Your statement here now between Saturday and Sunday is that you read it which is curious unless it was an ebook.
🙂 We ordered the hard copy. I like to take notes. I have not read it yet.
Rob,
Thank you so much for sharing your review of her book. I haven’t read her book, but I’ve watched every interview I can find in which she discusses the book and everything that you say lines up with her comments in the interviews.
“but this is a home run and probably why it is now #1 best seller on Amazon. ”
I’m very happy that she is being heard. Thousands of those trapped in this spiritual legalism grew up on the Duggars. In fact, I know families who were allowed to watch zero TV, except for the Duggars- often watched on VHS tapes. Many of these individuals know very well already who she is and they are interested in what she has to say. She has the potential to reach more of them than any who have previously warned of Gothard’s false teachings.
“She does not blame her parents in the book. She shows no bitterness or anger in the book.”
And this is exactly what I’ve seen in her interviews. She speaks of how much she loves her parents, and she understands that they were just doing what they thought was best. When asked about her current relationship with her parents, she says that it is good and that she just spoke to her mom yesterday. She indicates that there are some things that they agree to disagree on and not once have I heard a negative word about her parents.
“She is raw and honest about how the ideas of Bill Gothard negatively affected her and her motivation is really to point to those that have left Christianity all together due to the false teachings of Bill back to real faith by disentangling faith from fear which is what she did.”
That is exactly what she said in her interviews, that she was motivated to write the book after she realized how many who were brought up in the false teachings were leaving the faith due to them. She desires to point them back to Christ by disentangling the false teachings from God’s word, to separate the teachings of a man vs God’s word.
Her book has shot to become a #1 Amazon best seller, with excellent reviews. I’ve read many of these reviews. The very few semi negative ones often say things like “It was a good read, but she talks about God too much”. And in her interviews, her love of Jesus shines through. From all appearances her faith is solid and she has done a great job of disentangling truth from manmade rules and false teachings.
Ironic that so many deep in the teaching have been so quick to throw her under the bus and accuse her of writing the book to gain financial profit. Some have even tried to suggest that her writing this book means she has walked away from her faith. I find that kind of ironic and very telling. If walking away from the teachings of Bill Gothard’s teachings is something which they equate with walking away from her faith, is Gothardism a different religion? In one interview I watched, she did indicate that she now feels it is basically a different religion. People can be lured into following a man and away from following Jesus and not even be aware that they are doing so.
I’m very proud of her for having the courage to write this book. She is very intelligent and articulate. Having watched several hours of her interviews now, I can say that I have not yet come across anyone who articulates the dangers of these false teaching as well as she does. The fact that she is so well known in the IBLP/Gothard circles will go a long way towards helping her reach these people. I just attended a gathering over the weekend with many others from the homeschool world. There was much discussion about her book and interviews and from all appearances she is being very well received. Now, I don’t expect that on this website, but that is predictable. So far she has been thrown under the bus. We shall see if the tone here changes after folks have read her book.
I follow the world of Elon Musk with great interest. He is not a saved man, but the amount of practical wisdom he has shown is breathtaking. He has lamented over and over in recent months about the “woke mind virus” that is affecting great swaths of people, a destructive way of thinking that is almost worship. Whatever it is, reason and logic has left the room and society is following foolishness as a great herd movement.
That same spirit has affected believers, our churches. Self evident truths that cannot be supported by the one authoritative holy book we have, the Bible, nor by thousands of years of church history. The notion that we, suddenly, in these “last days”, have suddenly come to a fuller understanding of the Lord and His ways and mind than all that have gone before. It is simultaneously coupled with a direct abandonment of the Bible as authoritative as we relegate the parts we do not like to “culture” and the things we do not understand to “misunderstandings”. Jinger knows better. As far as I have heard from the interviews, her proof of falseness is the fear that she endured. Scripture is crystal clear that a true understanding of the Lord will leave us in fear, even trembling, even as we lay hold on the glories that God has given us:
“Therefore, my dear friends, as you have always obeyed—not only in my presence, but now much more in my absence—continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling,” (Philippians 2:12)
We want to be free of trouble, free of fear. But that is our “governor” in this life which keeps us focused on the eternal and untainted by the world. We like the world, we want to be friends, to be respected. It is, as it has always been, the snare of the devil.
The “bus throwing” comes from a sense of betrayal. See, those that see no way clear to shed the constraints that Scripture lay on us are left with less oxygen to breathe, perhaps others drawn away as well. My generation went hard after Bill in a day that the world was already creeping in, threatening to destroy the light of faith, of the fear of God. It gave us decades of strength and hope. Now in these last days hope and strength are in short supply. Abandoning Scripture and the “old ways” will give momentary relief, but with a terrible loss of grip on the truth.
Yes, will adjust or confirm as the book becomes available to us.
“Jinger knows better. As far as I have heard from the interviews, her proof of falseness is the fear that she endured”
“Yes, will adjust or confirm as the book becomes available to us.”
Your comments and criticisms of Jinger, see above, demonstrate that you have judged her book and her story already, before you have even read it. Your claim that her proof of falseness come from the fear that she endured? You’re guessing. Clearly you are intent to tear her down, and you have not even read her book or heard her speak about it. Shoot first, ask questions later, then shoot some more.
Looking forward to your totally “unbiased” analysis following your reading her book.
I know what Jinger was taught, so she knows better. God’s Word never changes. What changes is our experience which becomes a fire to try us. Sometimes we find that we are out of balance during the fire and that part I accept because I have lived it. That is the “dross”, to use the KJV term for impurities mixed with the gold. That does not negate the former, the gold, only clarifies it.
As to “unbiased”, I will do my best. Accept the fact that Bill has not changed in 50 years and the Bible has not changed in that time, and neither has the reasoning of those that oppose. So forgive me for jumping to conclusions based on a lot of water under the bridge. Without reading the book I am going to guess, in no particular order:
1) My parents meant well
2) Bill is extreme, cult-like – here are some examples.
3) Lots and lots of theologians disagree with him, so he must be wrong.
4) Lots of people have left the faith because of lies Bill taught. Them leaving the faith is proof per se that what they were taught is wrong.
5) There are rumors of malfeasance on his part (ad hominem, shows he must be fake, even though there is no proof)
6) Whatever good came from Bill is “God drawing straight lines with crooked sticks”.
7) Bill “twists Scripture” to align them with his goal.
Every point of opposition has sprung from two sources:
1) Unexplained, intense suffering that did not match the vision of glory that Bill presented from Scripture.
2) Theologians who are bothered by the lack of rigorous proofs or by surface analysis of his positions that does not support their theology.
Point 1 is completely consistent with the witness of Scripture, from one end to the other, let alone untold testimonies of men and women of God over the millennia. The solution, as always, is to get our roots in the Lord and His Word alone, no man or movement. Search the Scriptures daily to see if these things are so. God forbid that we abandon anything that God has, in fact, taught us, blaming it on some other person or group.
Point 2 is a classic checks and balances process that happens between the gift of teaching and the gift of exhortation.
My problem arises when either group turns on Bill to declare him evil or a “false prophet”. He is neither. That tells me that something else broke. At the very least that the individual has not made the effort to go to Bill and “establish every word”, as Scripture commands. I know for a fact Jinger has not done this.
I cannot tell you how many people have openly attacked Bill on the one hand, then told me or implied privately that they are afraid of him, “emotionally not ready” to obey the commands of the Lord Jesus. THAT cannot be. THAT is our own iniquity.
re: James, Job, and Jesus
On 1/4 above, our moderator is accused of grasping straws in his comparison.
If comparisons among Jinger, James and Job are grasping straws, then what better straws shall we grasp? James warned Christian teachers that they must expect to be scrutinized and criticized, even accused.
What man was accused more earnestly than Job? Satan accused Job of being a lightweight who would fold under pressure. So God made a cosmic wager and placed his bets on Job. Job staggered under pressure from Satan and man, but outlasted the ordeal.
Consider a fourth J-name for comparison. How about Jesus himself? His great apostle Peter commended Jesus to us as the model for Christian forbearance. “Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously.” Shouldn’t Christ be our ultimate model in suffering?
“For his part we know that Bill stands ready to work through the concerns that Jinger has with him and what he has taught her and her family.”
People have attempted to do this for decades, meeting and corresponding with Bill about what they view as his false and damaging teachings. It never goes anywhere, because Bill always just doubles down on his position.
She has articulated very well how his teachings damaged her and created this world where something very bad was going to happen at any moment if you don’t follow Gothard’s man made rules. If Bill wants to learn and grow, why doesn’t he read her book and really hear her? Perhaps at that point he can respond.
One reality is that the most genuine, accurate preachers of God’s mind have always endured tremendous opposition, from the evil as well as sometimes the well meaning. For every one that finds problems there are many more than have found blessing and wisdom and encouragement from what God has given him. We believe that Bill has no need to change his positions. Our reasons for this are presented in great detail in many corners of this site. We like to use lots of Scripture to back that up, find that few opponents are much interested in addressing them. Perhaps you will be different. You will have to be patient with us as we do have day jobs. But we hope to open each of her complaints up for discussion in this way.
re: doubling down, creating worlds, really hearing
Did Bill Gothard should double down on his positions? Were his positions correct or incorrect? which positions? Church history is a long story of mutual straight-setting from Bible days to the present. If men have failed to set Gothard straight, were they any straighter than Gothard? Which men were they, and how were they straighter?
Can Bill Gothard create worlds of cause-and-effect? or only describe them? did he describe them well or poorly? accurately or inaccurately?
Should Bill Gothard really hear Ginger Vuolo? Buy what medium? by reading her book? what reconciliation ever happened that way? How difficult would it be to contact Gothard directly? Did Mrs. Vuolo attempt and fail? Why or why not?
As for really hearing, who should really hear whom? Should Bill really hear Jinger, or should Ginger really hear Bill? Books are monologues. Is that a substitute for dialog?
I am not sure what wisdom you see in Elon Musk except that he does believe in having lots of kids, but with him, they are by a variety of women. This is like people seeding wisdom in Jordon Peterson, another close but not really Christian man. While Elon did meet the Pope with a number of his sons, I think he more of an agnostic in his personal beliefs and I am not sure why people like Elon, Steve Jobs, Disney are fascinating to you because you have brought them up before.
Even Paul cited “secular” important people when they spoke the wisdom of God. Elon’s method of increasing the population is more in line with the potentates of earth and their many wives and concubines . . . But he almost stands alone in declaring the insanity of “population control”. That is wisdom from God. May the Lord find a way to bring him home.
There is a big difference having a few quotes from Greek Philosophers by St. Paul and stating that you yourself follow and admire Elon Musk. St. Paul’s audience were Greek and pagan so quoting Greek Philosophers and from a Greek song was bridge building with his targeted audience. Yes, he does stand alone against Population control because I think he sees the long term fruit of it which is lack of younger workers to support an older aging population.
The worship you are implying on my part is not warranted by my comments 🙂 But we can leave it there.
re: pro-life public men, factories, and divine art
To Elon Musk, we can add another voice. Vladamir Putin is advocating large, traditional Russian families. A recent photograph showed him posing on a stage with a Russian family of maybe nine or ten. It resembled Bill Gothard at similar moments with large ATI families. Putin haters will impute guilt by association, but pro-life is gathering momentum.
Some sneer that fruitful mothers are only “baby factories.” But Holy Scripture portrays the womb as a studio where custom art is crafted. The Bible gives this poetic account of the divine craftsman making his masterpiece:
“My substance was not hid from thee, when I was made in secret, and curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth. Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect; and in thy book all my members were written, which in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them.” Does that describe an automated factory, or an art studio?
Putin is only doing this because Russia has been under atheism for too long and has been one of the biggest proponents of abortion and it finally has caught up with them with an aging population and not enough young people. We must be getting desperate here to go to the likes of Putin and Musk.
re: Putin’s pro-family agenda
We see a good point on 2/9 above. Politicians probably operate with many motives, with incentives pulling in all directions. In this, Russian politicians are unlikely to be any different from others. Even so, isn’t it refreshing to see something positive come out of international politics? As the old saying goes, even a stopped clock shows correct time twice per day. Let’s rejoice in good news wherever we find it.
Same pattern repeating itself. When someone shares their personal experience of spiritual damage, if your first impulse is to always throw the individual under the bus, rather than hear them, you will never see it. The damage from the teachings that she shares, is her personal experience. It is consistent with how scores of others have reported how the teachings damaged their walk with Christ. I’m glad that she was able to sort through the man made nonsense and establish a healthy relationship with Jesus.
No problem with any of that. Up to the point of blaming Bill. Bill’s ministry affects different people different ways. Because we are different. Eating one type of diet for years on the assumption that there is no other diet will turn into a revelation when you discover other foods. Perhaps even a long avoidance of the previously blessed cadre of nourishment. You gain missing vitamins and may enjoy a surge of health and energy as a result. Fact is, folks moving in the opposite direction experience the same. Pulling in the analogy, her parents – my generation – were starved for the practical teaching Bill offers and it had a powerful impact. With miracles following. What Bill meant to us may not be fully realized in our offspring. But he is no false teacher, false prophet.
I have the book and am reading.
re: repeating patterns, healthy relationship with Jesus
On 2/10 above we introduce the topic of repeating patterns. The pattern is supposedly under-bus throwing for grumblers and gossips.
But don’t we see a parallel pattern? When former ATI students vent resentment against their upbringing, they absolve their parents. Even so, parents deserve blame for bad and credit for good. But according to pattern, former ATI students vent their resentment elsewhere. In this model, poor homeschooling cannot be blamed on parents, but the blame must be remote. Poor teaching must be blamed upon the teacher who taught the parents. That’s the pattern.
Hadn’t we also better beware which Jesus enjoys a healthy relationship with us? Many unseen spirits rejoice if the can seduce us into patterns of damnation. If we are seduced, we might even assign a flattering name to a seducing spirit. We might even name him “Jesus.”
David,
You said this on 2/11/2023.
“On 2/10 above we introduce the topic of repeating patterns. The pattern is supposedly under-bus throwing for grumblers and gossips.”
Your wording, characterizing Jinger Duggar or anyone else who would share their story, as a grumbler and a gossiper is dismissive and cavalier.
The moderator is reading her book, so that he can comment with the knowledge of what she is saying. But, you dismiss her out of hand. If you were wondering what was meant by not hearing or seeing other people, dismissing them out of hand, as a grumbler and gossiper is a perfect example.
I hope that if your children ever want to talk to you about how they feel about how the Gothard upbringing affected them, that you don’t dismiss them as grumblers and gossipers. I have seen first hand damage done, or, if you prefer, perceived damage done. Sometimes the children can talk to their parents about it, as they know it will be received with love. In other families they know that they can’t speak to their parents about such things, or risk being dismissed, perhaps as a grumbler or gossiper. Not a good way to have a meaningful relationship.
If someone is sharing that they have been spiritually damaged, how can you dismiss them out of hand with such arrogance before you have even listened to them or read what they have to say? If you actually do read her book or listen to her, perhaps you would have more grounds to load your guns with such inflammatory words. But, your position consistently lacks compassion and using such derogatory categorization will likely get you nowhere.
re: word guns, critics, and teaching
If guns shoot words, which guns fire the largest projectiles? books published in exchange for money in a lucrative market? or questions raised at no expense for no profit?
Which projectiles do the most damage? commercially-published cannonballs? or an observer’s BBs? As Anton Ego said, the work of a critic is easy. One critic is a commercialized victim reaping a reward for public victimhood. The other critic is a lightly-armed observer on the sidelines. Which is Goliath and which is David? Which is the cannonball critic and which the peashooter critic?
But the question remains: does bad teaching victimize, as the Jinger book supposedly says? One Bible example says not. Some of the harshest words in the New Testament appear at the beginning of Galatians. Instead of soothing victims, St. Paul scolded the Galatians for being suckers. They should have heeded better teaching.
Sigh, again David, to site Putin really shows a lack of awareness with him initiating an unjust invasion and war in Ukraine. It just again amazes me to what lengths someone twists themself into in order to justify Bill Gothard. Did also occur to you that a lot of lives have been lost in this war and he needs to resupply the lost lives in order to continue his war machine? But that seems to be ok with you. It is very twisted.
Both Jinger and Jill have come out and stated that they have used it are using some kind in artificial birth control. I think they both have seen the toll the constant pregnancies of their mother has taken on herself as well as the last child Josie who is special needs do to her premature birth.Likewise the grief of the two still born babies after Josie. While I do not believe artificial birth control is right, I think I can understand why Jinger and Jill have taken the route they have. There are two extremes, one is the predominate mentally if artificial birth control, the other is what Bill Gothard taught in having as many children whether or not that is healthy and wise for the mother as well as the children she is having. But you want to ignore this extreme. Having as many children as possible to the point to destroying the health of the mother and resulting in miscarriages and premature births etc. is not Godly either. This isn’t a baby contest. Someone isn’t more blessed because they could have more children. Children are not trophies to collect which is the mentality I see in the Duggars and the teaching of Gothard.
“Lo, children are an heritage of the LORD: and the fruit of the womb is his reward.” (Psalms 127:3)
“All these were the sons of Heman the king’s seer in the words of God, to lift up the horn. And God gave to Heman fourteen sons and three daughters.” (1 Chronicles 25:5)
Children are considered a blessing, and many children is considered a great blessing. I wonder in this day and age if God wanted to give someone 14 sons and 3 daughters, how many would be able to trust the Lord to know what is best.
This might be off-topic to this discussion. This might be better broken off into another thread. But I have some thoughts here.
I have longed these arguments and as a young man decided to look really close into it from as unbiased a perspective as possible. Ultimately, I want to do right and what is Biblical as much as you guys do.
On the subject of large families, I wonder if many of our teachers are missing some crucial information found in the passages they often quote. Everyone quotes the “arrows in the hands of a mighty man” passage. It’s a good passage, and often it is used to justify having many kids.
But there is something I noticed when I looked closely at this passage. It is “as arrows” not “as sticks.” The mighty man needs finely crafted weapons to fighting. Children don’t come out finely crafted for battle. They need training to be there.
I would say the passage isn’t talking about just a bunch of kids, but a bunch of well-raised and disciplined kids.
And I appreciate that the Bible never gives a clear number here. How many arrows are needed in battle? Well, that will change depending on the battle. One might plenty in some cases. Do we know? No. But I think we should be careful using it to belittle or correct others who practice some form of birth control.
The argument of “don’t you have faith/don’t you trust God,” I have to take some issue with as well. Let’s not make it a habit of questioning others’ faith. That leads bad places very quickly.
I would challenge this way. Do we believe God can lead us to the right job he wants for us? Do we believe God can lead us to the right car He wants us to have? I trust you all say yes.
Why then would we go to college or job training? Why then would we look in want ads in the paper (maybe that’s too outdated)? Why then would we visit car dealerships?
We understand that God expects us to use our faculties wisely. We trust in Him while working with our hands. I believe we can and should apply the same logic to all aspects of our lives, including birth control decisions. We can and should pray over these issues individually. We can see control methods as in line with God’s Will, carefully. We can.
Basic agreement on the arrows. It remains that “more is better”. More sticks means less arrows? Probably not. Until you realize that the Lord is one firing them. We all know of plenty of sharp arrows that were NOT trained so by their – in come cases incompetent – parents, but the Lord shot them out to huge effect. If you don’t have a stick, you can’t have an arrow. Of course we don’t want arrows for the devil either. But given that we see that the devil fears babies, it is safe to say that quantity does give the advantage to the Lord.
As to trust, there are certain things where God says that HE is fully and endlessly in charge. Children are one of those. From “opening the womb” and “giving conception” to “weaving” the little one together with His own fingers to actually taking the baby out (verses supplied on request), we can be sure there are no accidental, inappropriate, unintended children. Please address this point as it figures heavily in all of this.
I know there are points to ponder here, being one were we have used birth control in several seasons of life, where my wife was overwhelmed and did not have the grace and faith. Maybe I did not either – I didn’t have enough to insist for sure. Times of severe illness. Birth control is never presented as a sin. If it were then Daniel would have preferred and insisted on death before castration, like he did with the meat offered to idols. My own stance is that this area, unlike most any other, demands that both husband and wife be of the same mind. 1 Cor. 7 says as much – he controls her body, and she controls his, equal authority. So we need to note that God is in charge of children from the first second to birth, and also that He works with us in our weakness at times. Understand that not everyone on our team is in agreement with these sentiments.
Well my stance is that the Lord is still in charge. He always is. Even when He allows us the space to decide, He is still on the throne.
That of course doesn’t give us endless license. It just means ultimately He is still running the game. If it were truly His will for me to have another child, I believe we would have another child, regardless of method used to prevent it, even vasectomy.
Of course He could choose to let the method work. It’s His plan. I’m just a player in it. But we understand that God has natural forces in place and He even works through these natural process in our lives and for His plan.
If God can lead us to the right car or job we’re supposed to have, but we have to look at want ads and car lots to do so, I have no problem saying God can lead us to have the right size family even though we practice birth control.
I would agree husband and wife need to be of one mind here. That’s always wise. Problem I really see is Christian fighting over this topic when there isn’t need to.
Yes. I dislike some of the methods, such as many of the pills and devices on the market that work chemically. But that doesn’t mean the entire concept is the same.
It all comes down to faith, right? Jesus COULD NOT do mighty works when impeded by a lack of faith in the audience (Mark 6:5-6) When we lack faith, God may still work as you say, but He does not force it. We refuse to say, “Your will be done”, so He says, “OK, your will be done.” Children are a miracle, a mighty work of God. He scans the earth to find those whose hearts are tipped towards Him . . . And believe.
How big of a topic it is to you is a factor of how much faith you have. Some feel so much differently. Some of the reasons for that were expressed above. If I understand correctly (as laid out), the national sins of sodomy and abortion both have their roots DIRECTLY in Christians, the conscience of the nation, making childbearing “a choice”.
If someone is engaging in baby making activity and if all their parts and pieces are working, they will more likely than not end up with a baby and this happens whether or not the people involved are “trusting God”, believe in God, don’t believe in God, don’t care, are married, are not married, etc. It is a phony use of “faith” to teach and tell people that are engaging in baby making activities to just “trust God” for the size of their family. That is not what faith is about and is a wrong use of faith. Babies will come if there is baby making activity and it has nothing to do with faith, no faith, wanting a baby, not wanting a baby, marriage, no marriage etc. Bill who was never married himself telling married couples that they just need faith concerning the size of their family and children is a completely false use of faith and what faith is about and he having never been married has no business telling others it is just a matter of faith.
Explain these verse to me:
Psalms 139:14-16 “I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made:
marvellous are thy works; and that my soul knoweth right well. My substance was not hid from thee,
when I was made in secret, and curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth. Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect;
and in thy book all my members were written, which in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them.”
Most people I know believe that this tells us that God is personally weaving each baby together in the womb.
And this:
Genesis 29:31-32 “And when the LORD saw that Leah was hated, he opened her womb: but Rachel was barren. And Leah conceived, and bare a son, and she called his name Reuben: for she said, Surely the LORD hath looked upon my affliction; now therefore my husband will love me.”
That indicates quite clearly that is it the LORD, not baby-making activities or fertility treatments that determines whether there will be a baby or not.
Then this from David:
Psalms 22:9 “But thou art he that took me out of the womb: thou didst make me hope when I was upon my mother’s breasts.”
So . . . Apparently a baby can’t be born excepting the Lord takes him or her out.
It is abundantly clear that EVERY aspect of childbirth is personally controlled and implemented by the Lord. So, yes, it is a lack of faith to believe otherwise.
No. I would challenge your interpretation of that passage. It’s not that Jesus COULD NOT do it. He certainly could have. He’s God, but He chose not to for seeing their lack of faith.
Nothing says Jesus is constrained by our faith. He works with us, yes, but we are just the instrument. If He can appear to Thomas to dispel Thomas’s doubt, then He can certainly work with an absence of faith.
He still performed miracles despite the unbelief of the Pharisees ina few occasions, and even of Lazarus’s family.
No, I would say God doesnt need us to accomplish His ends. It is more than a privilege He allows us to help. It is a blessing.
That said, having faith doesn’t automatically require you to do certain things. As I keep bringing up, I had faith when I was looking through want ads and visiting car lots. I believed God would bring me to the right job and car. He did. But I didn’t just sit around saying “I’m waiting on God.”
Yes. People actually do that. I am related to a few of them.
God has instituted certain elements to govern and move His world. And He gave us brains to understand these things. He expects us to be wise in these matters.
Practicing birth control isn’t a lack of faith. It might show more faith than we often expect.
I would like to hear how using birth control is based on faith in God.
Sigh,
Psalm 139 is about the mystery and value of all human life, probably the best reference against abortion. This means all human life, whether or not the parents involved are good, bad, Christian, wonderful, awful etc. This has nothing to do with Bill’s teaching on having a family as big as possible whether or not the couple are healthy, have financial means for support, capable or not. That really is what we are trying to discuss in reference to Jinger’s book. Psalm 139 is a poetic tribute to how a baby develops in the womb. It is not a justification to have a family the size of the Duggars. The very first time I ever heard of the Duggars was in a People magazine article at the check out. It was about them and I think maybe they were on either child 17 or 18 and the article was about the warning they were given by the Doctors that further pregnancies would be high risk and could endanger her own life and that their response was that they were going to ignore this and still have children and Michelle was willing to sacrifice her own life and health. What did result was premature Josie who still suffers from that and two more still births. That is irresponsible behavior and has nothing to do with Psalm 139 but has everything to do with following Bill Gothard who was never married and never had to raise his own yet people like the Duggars and Bates sold their supersize families to IBLP and their conferences. Jinger does write in her book her own knowledge of friends from IBLP that ended up with big families yet hardly able to support financially on the father’s income and living in small trailer like quarters, barely able to make it. This is just more than “have faith” and telling people “God will supply”. And none of this has anything to do with the Bible verses you just cut and pasted again.
If “poetic” means not literal, we disagree strongly. God wrote this Psalm and in it He personally assumes responsibility for the “weaving together” of that baby. And the birth. It is all Him, from conception to birth.
As to “hardly able to support”, when was that ever a determinant of the eternal value of a task? Missionaries, let alone a great many pastors and servants of the Lord are often “hardly able to support” themselves, living “by faith”. But they do it anyway, because God has promised to supply and obedience is better than certification of personal ability to see it through.
Saw an interesting chart the other day . . . Have a look. THAT is the result of convincing people that they can’t afford a lot of kids, or that those kids are unwanted or that those kids will be bad people or that those kids are a harm to the planet and to all of those other much more important people out there. It breaks my heart. Somehow our forefathers, with FAR less wealth and ease than we have, figured out how to make it happen. I see many, MANY families with 8 or more children who are far from rich – but they make it work. God is faithful. “What He orders, He pays for.”
https://ourworldindata.org/world-population-growth
Re: copulate until you populate?
JM Makes a good point above. Like man, beasts can usually produce offspring, but the offspring are merely beasts. Good men expend effort to raise good sons and daughters. That’s one of the messages of Hebrews 12. God is like a good father who trains and chastens us to raise children of good character.
As for quantity, why not yield to natural law? why not both enjoy your spouse and enjoy whatever fortune follows? Why not leave fruitfulness or barrenness in the hands of God? He can be glorified in either vocation.
How much love is too much? how many sharp arrows are too many to win?
re: able to support
Above, we debate whether men are able to support large families. Ability to support is a reasonable objection, which God seems to enjoy overruling. The Bible documents Christ feeding vast crowds with almost nothing, and it also documents this ability-to-support objection. “There is a lad here, which hath five barley loaves, and two small fishes: but what are they among so many?”
We know what happened next. Christ filled more than five thousand bellies which he was supposedly unable to support. Can’t you visualize his serene smile as he did it? Then just to rub it in, he generated a surplus of leftovers. God enjoys the impossible.
For every example of straitened Christian families which Jinger could show us, aren’t there many more comfortable families cruising to destruction on a broad way, through a wide gate? is Jinger’s new family one of them? Hopefully not.
re: awareness and twisting, wars and babies
On 2/11 above, we consider awareness, twisting, virtue and vice. We begin with war and end with babies. Those extremes help us examine the questions. Let’s begin with war.
Awareness considers both St. Augustine’s just war doctrine, and facts. Russia’s legislature ordered Putin to relieve Russians being slaughtered by Ukrainians in Donbass. Putin’s “special military operation” complied with Augustine’s doctrine. The Ukrainian slaughter of Donbass innocents did not. So Putin models Christian virtue in at least one way. But twisted media accounts deny this.
Now consider babies. Bill Gothard’s Protestant enemies have smeared him for being too “romanist.” Among other things, they accuse him of agreeing too much with JPII and Christopher West. Gothard agrees that our bodies are designed to declare God’s fruitfulness. Are JPII, West, and Gothard correct? or mistaken? Shall our bodies tell God’s story? or twist God’s story?
David,
This is not a political board, but I just have to comment when you present something so twisted as this:
” Russia’s legislature ordered Putin to relieve Russians being slaughtered by Ukrainians in Donbass.”
This false flag has been roundly been debunked by historians around the world.
“Following the invasion, Ukraine brought a case before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) concerning Russia’s military activities in Ukraine. During the proceedings of Ukraine v. Russian Federation, the ICJ found no evidence to support the Russian accusation of genocide, and subsequently ordered Russia to “immediately suspend the military operations” of the invasion. Further reports by 30 legal and genocide scholars warned that Russian accusations against Ukraine are part of the “accusation in a mirror” technique, ultimately revealing the Russian incitement to wage genocide against Ukrainians.[1]”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accusations_of_genocide_in_Donbas
https://newlinesinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/English-Report.pdf
If any side has committed genocide, it is the Russians:
https://www.usip.org/publications/2022/09/russia-committing-genocide-ukraine
Of course, none of this will matter to you. The fact that you would make such a nutty claim suggests that you likely subscribe to conspiracy theories. Claiming that Ukraine is the perpetraitor of genocide and that Russia was just protecting its people ranks right up there with Holocaust denial. You would need to literally claim that every reliable source of information is part of a giant conspiracy to hide the truth.
For a good analysis of Russia’s lies and propaganda to justify its invasion of Ukraine, see the link below.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11185-022-09258-5
A more recent interview. Jinger really tears up in this one near the end and brings the whole panel to tears.
‘It Was Very Cult-Like:’ Jinger Duggar Vuolo on Breaking Free From Strict Christian Teachings”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUu-mi2S4fQ
Truth be told, Jesus, the Bible are very “cult-like”.
“And there went great multitudes with him: and he turned, and said unto them,
If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple. And whosoever doth not bear his cross, and come after me, cannot be my disciple.”
Luke 14:25-27
Bill has had the courage to focus on this “discipleship” as the church careens further and further away from genuine, simple faith in Christ. Jinger was part of a rigorous discipleship program. That is not unique nor even as “hard” as other movements of God.
She accepts that distancing herself from Bill cost her friends and family, sort of like a cult. Reality is nothing like this. She has lost very little. “Kill Bill” is very much in vogue these days. In fact, page 203 of her book:
Her tears are hers and I am sure there are a lot of emotions there, but losing family and friends? That is not a consequence, from all I can tell.
She also goes with a popular perspective on Bill’s teachings that she knows is wrong. She claims that Bill taught that if you give yourself to the “7 Universal Principles” you will have an “umbrella” and be protected from harm. That is not what Bill taught, and she knows it. Being under “Authority”, highlighted as one of the 7 principles, yes. But Bill never taught that keeping a list guarantees God’s protection. In fact I have heard him say on multiple occasions that “There might be 6 or there might be 8”, that the lists are not Scripture declared (in so many words) or God ordained in and of themselves. The lists help things get memorized and kept orderly.
I may break this out as its own OP, so forgive me if the following comments get lifted out for that purpose later on. I hardly know how much time to focus on this. But let me address the “drums = car wrecks” account, as she has brought this up repeatedly. She says she “freaked out” because someone started playing music with drums in the car while they were riding. Because Bill told a story of a young man who did just that and died in a horrible car wreck.
First comment, for those trying to live a godly life separated from “uncleanness” and evil, God has clear warnings to others who, not seeing a problem, flaunt their freedom to do things the other finds offensive or dangerous. Paul speaks of some Christians freely eating “meat offered to idols” which others feel is a sin of the highest order. Whoever put on the “drums” in Jinger’s car knew exactly what they were doing and they stand before God to give account for stressing a weaker sister.
This is Bill’s response when I asked for clarification of this story:
Makes sense to me. Some parents believe rock/pop music is wrong, “unclean”, having spiritual influences that drag us away from God and into sensuality. Do you think they are wrong? The Lord is grieved when we “love the world”, calling us “adulterers and adulteresses”. The fear of God has left the room. It gives us relief . . . But at what cost. And we wonder why God is allowing our churches and families and nation to be attacked and destroyed. Jinger will one day regret deriding Bill and her upbringing.
re: correlation, corruption, and catastrophe
Everyone knows that correlation does not prove causation. The rooster’s crow correlates with sunrise, but does not cause it. So what is the relationship between worldly music and catastrophe? Did Mrs. Vuolo accuse Bill Gothard of confusing correlation with causation? What a straw man!
The above explanation shows the actual cause-and-effect in Gothard’s warning. A corrupt boy lived to gratify his appetites. He loved the world and served his flesh. His corruption produced the usual symptoms, including his affinity for worldly music. Unfortunately, the warning we read in Romans 8 proved true, “for if ye live after the flesh ye shall die.” The poor kid lived after the flesh, then he died. Hopefully, the Duggars warned their kids against living after the world and the flesh. Did some Duggars heed the warning? Did others ignore or mock it? They reap what they sow.
David,
It is pretty screwed up to think Putin is in a just war. The reasoning you gave was the same reasoning Hitler used against Czechoslovakia. Just war was more developed under Aquinas anyway. This is not a just war.
Theology of the body is about much more than being against artificial contraception. The definitive work is Humanae Vitae. Maybe you should read that instead. I think you can find it on line. All Christopher West did was put JP II book in laymen’s language since JP II can be pretty academic to read, since he wrote with scholastic philosopher’s language. Quite bringing them up, they are not supporting your cause
I allowed two comments from James and one from Rob in rebuttal. Bad topic for here. David, if you want a closing – short – statement, do that. Then let’s leave this one alone.
Which topic? we have commented on Putin, the Russo-Ukrainian war, Theology of the Body, and Jinger Vuolo. I’ll summarize each in fewer than 150 words.
Vladamir Putin is a head of state and public figure who agrees about natural family size with both a late pope and Bill Gothard. Whether the Russian state ought to make war on the Ukrainian state is “capable of question” as Thomas More once said. Did a court ruling settle the question? Who paid the court? Was it neutral? disinterested?
Because of Christian orthodoxy and natural law, both the pope and Bill Gothard affirmed natural family size and opposed artificial contraception. They were right.
What is the connection with Jinger, James and Job? All three are public figures. Jinger inherited publicity from her family, which was public because it was large, and large because of Christian orthodoxy affirmed by Putin, pope, and Gothard.
Putin and Russia. All the rest is fine 🙂
I was glad to summarize all three topics anyway. Don’t we sometimes need to revisit our opinions to see whether we still believe they are true? At least I do.
What is the real goal? Have big families, or as big a possible no matter what and what is pointed to for support is an atheist dictator and an agnostic billionaire or just not use artificial contraception? What is coming across is what is important is having a big family or as big a possible no matter what and individuals without faith but support so called big families get mentioned but that does not mean that these people don’t believe that contraception or abortion is wrong, just that they believe in having big families. It seems like being able to have a big family supersedes anything else and becomes a source of inflated pride when it shouldn’t.
I cannot see the immediate context. General response: People the world over are waking up to the danger of population collapse. China is now PAYING their citizens to have a 3rd child . . . A far cry from the draconian methods use to enforce the single child policy from a while back. Elon is seeing that, from a purely statistical perspective, a declining population will kill the human race. God made it that way. Evil people like the Ehrlichs in the 1960s convinced us that growth was not only bad, it was dangerous. A lie from the pit of hell. There are solidly scientific, pragmatic reasons to decry a low birth rate.
No one articulated the real goal better than Christopher West. Summarizing the message of the late pope, he said, “our bodies tell God’s story.” If anything, the goal is self-giving and the result (not goal) is fruitfulness.
But it may be unhelpful to explore goals. Does love have goals? Isn’t it absorbed with the beloved instead of goals? When love is authentic, is it goal-oriented? Does it keep a checklist of accomplishments and expectations? What was the goal which motivated the lovers in Song of Solomon? They did not waste attention on such absurd questions. Who needs goals when we have our beloved? The goal is our beloved and our beloved is the goal. If our plumbing works, babies sometimes follow.
David, I am not sure why you keep quoting Christopher West when you don’t even believe in the Pope to defend a fundamentalist who does not believe in any pope. I am not sure what the Song of Songs has to do with contraception or its use. Theology of the Body is about much more than contraception. The authoritative document is Humanae Vitae. That is what you should be quoting here. Inconsistency, misquoting, misuse does not serve your cause. John Calvin wrote a very clear condemnation of contraception. It seems like his Reformed followers like John Piper who Jinger does quote in her book obviously forgot this. Instead you want to use a book that celebrates the body to defend Bill Gothard who is a dualist, denying anything to do with the body. You are not winning the argument
re: winning arguments or savoring joy?
Why not quote good men who are correct and who also agree? As for pope and Calvin and Piper and Gothard and Solomon, might their agreements be more important than their disagreements?
Rivals employ arguments to vanquish one another, but lovers savor their joy. Neither James nor Job nor the Song nor Calvin nor West nor Gothard are about contraception. Instead, they are about joy and life. Aren’t those better topics for Christians?
“Copulate till we populate”?
Can we get much cruder here? Maybe David you ought to re-read Christopher West again. In his latest book “Introduction to Theology of the Body” her wrote this:
” So, does fidelity to the wedding vows imply that couples are to leave the number of children they have entirely to “change”? NO. In calling couples to a responsible love, the Chruch calls them also to a responsible parenthood. Pope Paul VI stated clearly that those are consider “to exercise responsible parenthood who prudently and generously decide to have a large family, or who, for serious reasons and with due respect to the moral law, choose to have no more children for the time being or even for an indeterminate period.” (HV 10) Notice that large family should RESULT FROM PRUDENT RELFECTION NOT ‘”CHANCE”. Notice too that couple must have serious reason” to avoid pregnancy and must respect the moral law, the “ethics of the sign. …The Church has always recognized that the only method of “birth control” that respects the language of divine love is “self-control.”
You want to quote Christopher West but he and JP II are not promoting “copulate till populate” which is what basically Bill Gothard promoted and people like the Duggars and Bates sold on their TV shows. Stop misquoting and equating them to Bill Gothard. They are not teaching the same.
Christopher West further states: “Contraception, by definition is the choice to engage in an act of intercourse, but then do something else to render it sterile…. Couples who use natural family planning (NFP) when they have a just reason to avoid pregnancy, NEVER render their sexual acts sterile; they never contracept. They track their fertility, abstain when they are fertile and, if they so desire, embrace when they are naturally infertile. ” That is not the teaching and ideas of Bill Gothard.
(All emphasis was added).
Trying to copulate till you populate is what according to the above quotes, is irresponsible parenting. It ignores the health and fitness of the mother, the well-being of the children they are raising, and ignores the financial ability support of all of the above. Watching Jesse Duggar have another devasting miscarriage emphasizes the point. Having pregnancies and babies to the point of endangerment to the mother’s health, premature births, dangerous pregnancies is irresponsible parenthood and none of that is promoted whatsoever by Christopher West, JP II, Pope Paul IV and the Catholic Church.
Isn’t satire the art of being simultaneously serious and unserious? West’s thesis was serious and good. Our bodies really do tell God’s story. But the straw-man caricature blamed on Gothard deserves nothing but mockery. God loves people and pleasure. Satan hates both population and lawful copulation. Whose side are we on, anyway?
re: carnality, populating, and planned barrenhood
Thanks to the lecture on 3/4 above, we have permission to combine carnality and barrenness. All it takes is expert fertility management. But what have we accomplished? Sodomites have always done that. Is that our loftiest vision? Sodomites have mastered both carnality and fertility management. Can’t we aim any higher?
What is carnality if not Satan’s bait-and-switch substitute for lovemaking? Consider the lovers in the Song of Solomon. They are thinking neither of populating nor of fertility management. Instead, their “bodies tell God’s story.” Why not imitate those lovers?
Is that all you think about? The above “lecture” was a direct quote from Christopher West himself. You are ignoring that.
As for thinking about, West does not seem to think much about contraception. Both West and God seem to think more about love. Do they deserve to be scolded? Isn’t it probably Satan who overthinks contraception?
Remember in Matthew 19 when Christ’s enemies tried to trick him into a controversial statement about divorce? Remember The Lord’s reply? He explained that Moses was constrained to make concessions. He needed damage control because of hard-hearted men. Has anything changed?
Hard-hearted men are still pro-carnality and anti-life. West addresses contraception only enough to accommodate hard-hearted men. But mainly, he rejoices that our bodies tell God’s story.
re: quoting, misquoting, and ignoring West on 3/4 above
Although West was constrained to make “serious reason” exceptions to our fruitfulness, he was miles away from pagan notions of planned barrenhood which the world deems “responsible.” Does vice become virtue when we assign it a virtuous label? West did not think so. Neither did Gothard.
re: relief, grief, and baby-making on demand
If only fertility where as certain as implied on 3/14 above. To the relief of some and the grief of others, the probabilities of conception and live birth are lower than we sometimes think.
Statistics show that fertile young couples have only 20% probability of conceiving every month. That’s 80% probability of barrenness. Even after conception, the grim reaper of miscarriage hovers, hoping to claim his prey. The man who aspires to baby-making deceives himself. Only God can make babies. Sometimes he does, but not always.
Jinger, James, Job, and Jephthah
Childbearing is obviously dangerous, so the role of faith is easy to see. But above, we consider contraception and faith.
That invokes the mystery of Jephthah. He appears in God’s trophy case of faith, despite his mixed record. He rose from bastard outcast to victorious captain and judge of God’s people. Even so, his record is besmirched by his dubious oath. Did he actually slay his daughter as a human sacrifice? The Bible hints that he might have. Yet he is listed among God’s heroes of faith. How do we reconcile that? Also, how do we reconcile contraception and faith? That is yet another mystery.
Psalm 139 has nothing to do with contraception, world population etc. There are a number of views about how the many authors of sacred scripture actually wrote sacred scripture. The one view which you are espousing which is pretty typical in fundamentalist circles is that the author is just a robot doing dictation. The other healthier views are that the authors wrote under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit and being under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, God uses that person’s own understanding of things. King David in writing Psalm 139 didn’t have what we know now on how babies develop in the womb and yes babies develop by God using genetics etc. that God has set up. Instead, and using his limited science knowledge of the time, uses poetic language to describe a mystery on how we are fearfully and wonderfully made. This is why hyper-literalism doesn’t work as a means of Bible interpretation. This is why viewing the writing of scripture as a robotic dictation mode doesn’t work. And finally, Psalm 139 as nothing to do with artificial contraception, population control and all the rest.
We will have to – strongly – disagree on this. God is not much of a God if He does not absolutely control His “inspired” Scriptures. We do not consider anything else even remotely “healthy” . . . Or safe.
Matthew 11:25-26
“At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes. Even so, Father: for so it seemed good in thy sight.”
I completely fail to see how this verse from Matthew 11 has anything to do with how scripture was written. This is just quoting a verse with the hopes that it will stick and the reality is the repeated verse quoting that you do does not support at all what you are trying to support. Just another fine example of what is called proof texting. Bill Gothard has taught you very well. One or two line verse quoting only causes me to roll my eyes and think “there he goes again”. Chopping up the Bible in one or two line quoting disrespects scripture in the the long run. Fallible human beings were used to write an infallible holy book. That means God used the author’s understanding, culture, perspectives, etc. But that does not mean scripture is not infallible or less than.
There was no proof texting. God reveals His truths to children, not the “smart” people. Which is why we need to be like little children. It doesn’t make any sense to a child that Almighty God can’t absolutely control His Holy Book and tell us exactly what He means, regardless of the instrument – including language – chosen. We only start to doubt that when we realize that it says things we don’t like, or we don’t understand. We either comply with what we don’t understand, or we twist it to match what we understand.
re: proof texting disapproval
Does any Christian believe that the Bible proves nothing? Is proof-texting a smear we use when the Bible proves something we disapprove? or when it proves our disapproval?
re: fail to see
Above, we are treated to irony; failing to see the meaning of a verse about failing to see. The Matthew 11 text described Jesus rejoicing in God’s wise discretion. Jesus praised God for both revealing and concealing.
Those from whom God concealed must necessarily fail to see. When we fail to see, what is God concealing from us? and why? We had better find out what and why. Have we neglected some duty to repent? or do we simply have not because we ask not?
No David. Since you have stated liking Chesterton, one of Chesterton’s closed friends was Hillary Belloc, a historian. He wrote a book, “The Great Heresies” which maybe you should read. All heresies start out with quoting of Bible verses to try and prove the heresy. Satan tempts Jesus via quoting scripture verses. Proof texting isn’t a smear but pointing out that quoting verses here and there, out of context, usually trying to support an idea, teaching thought that if one actually reads the quote in the whole context and with support elsewhere in scripture is a highway to heresy and false teaching and ideas.
re: knowledge, ignorance, and fools
For a generation which knows so much about our flesh, we seem pretty ignorant. How else do we explain our absurdity during the recent virus panic? First, we knew that fabric on our face would not protect us from illness. Then we knew that it would (especially multiple layers).
Next, we knew that we were threatened by a polite virus. The virus would threaten us only upon entering a restaurant, so that was the time to mask. But at our table, the virus turned benign, so we could unmask and eat.
If we know so much about our flesh, why are we so gullible? Between us and the Bible writers, who is more of a knuckle-dragging fool? who is the robotic scribe? who understands mysteries?
Does a fool believe his Bible only until he doesn’t?
re: a distinction without a difference?
What is the difference between opinions about how God inspires men to write holy scriptures? When I served as an army officer, my commanders and other superiors often supplied “guidance.” Their guidance carried more force than mere suggestion. I brought my own understanding to the task, but submitted it to my commander’s will. Whether I was inspired or guided, the result accomplished my commander’s will.
Why quibble over process? What differs between inspiration and guidance when they both produce the same result? Either way, God gets the Bible text he wants.
We are talking about divine revelation not military commands here. Yes, this matters because at the crux of the debates over Bill Gothard and his teaching is how the Bible is used and understood and that includes how it was written. How one understands how the Bible was actually written is the basis on how one interprets and uses sacred scripture and sacred scripture is far and above military orders.
Of course our Bible is above military orders. Neither is it below military orders. If mere men can accomplish their will through men, so can God.
That is partly why Jesus commended the faith of a Roman company commander. The centurion knew that his will would be accomplished remotely through men, and also that the healing power of Christ could come through a softly spoken word from a great distance. God’s whisper of inspiration is the power behind our Bibles. James and Job understood this. Does Jinger? Do we?
re: Bible truth and Bible heresy
On 3/31 above, we are warned against spinning heresies from Bible verses, as Satan did when tempting Jesus. If quoting the Bible is presumed heretical, what do we make of the Bible text which Christ used to rebut Satan? Were Christ and Satan merely a pair of heretics playing Bible ping pong in the wilderness?
We define heresy in contrast to truth. Shouldn’t we give more attention to truth than heresy?
You didn’t read what I wrote. To make some ignorant sweeping statement that quoting the Bible is heretical is not answering what was stated about misquoting scripture and using that as a basis for heretical ideas and teaching and obviously demonstrating complete ignorance.