A few weeks back I quoted a post from Pastor Doug Wilson castigating Christian men for listening to pastors and living by the rule if mama ain’t happy (emphasis mine):
When a false definition of servant leadership is mandated for the church, the only people who will simply ignore that teaching will be the dullards and pigs. The sincere Christian men, who falsely believe they are being taught in accordance with the Word, will dutifully disarm. They will abdicate their essential role of actual leadership in the home, and they will call it servant leadership, leading from behind, or “just-what-I-was-going-to-suggest-leadership.” But there is a vast difference between real servant leadership, the kind Christ practiced and enjoined, and the kind that requires men to stand down whenever mama ain’t happy. By so emphasizing servant leadership, the church has not succeeded in establishing more of it, but they have succeeding in giving men a noble-sounding name as a fig leaf for their cowardice.
A number of readers speculated that Pastor Wilson himself had taught the very message he was castigating husbands for following. After reading the introduction to Wilson’s book Reforming Marriage, I can confirm that their suspicion was correct.
In the introduction Wilson explains that we can determine if a home is pleasing to God if the home has a distinctive spiritual aroma. This is something that can’t be faked (all emphasis mine):
…keeping God’s law with a whole heart (which is really what love is) is not only seen in overt acts of obedience. The collateral effect of obedience is the aroma of love. This aroma is out of reach for those who have a hypocritical desire to be known by others as a keeper of God’s law. Many can fake an attempt at keeping God’s standards in some external way. What we cannot fake is the resulting, distinctive aroma of pleasure to God.
How do you test to see if God is pleased with a home? For married couples, Wilson tells us that this aroma comes from the mood of the wife. If the wife is happy, this means that her husband is loving her as the Bible commands.
In the home, where should this wholehearted obedience begin? Where should the aroma originate? Jesus taught us, with regard to individuals, that cups must be cleaned from the inside out. If we apply this principle to the home, we should see that the “inside” of a family is, of course, the relationship between husband and wife, as they self-consciously imitate the relationship of Christ and the Church.
…
The health of all other relationships in the home depends upon the health of this relationship, and the key is found in how the husband is treating his wife. Or, put another way, when mamma ain’t happy, ain’t nobody happy.
Wilson tells us that teaching husbands how to create this aroma (a happy wife) is the purpose of the book:
In the same way, husbands are to love their wives alone. This is the duty I hope to explain and amplify throughout the course of this small book.
He includes a caveat that husbands must not worship their wives, but he is teaching that the wife’s mood is the unfakable sign of God’s pleasure! If your wife is happy, this is a non falsifiable sign that God is pleased with you. If she is unhappy, this is likewise proof that God is angry with you. He closes the introduction with:
When a husband seeks to glorify God in his home, he will be equipped to love his wife as he is commanded. And if he loves his wife as commanded, the aroma of his home will be pleasant indeed.
See Also: Women as responders
I note the false dichotomy* in Wilson’s first two sentences:
There’s a fourth option: sincere Christian men who know the Word well enough to know that the definition presented is false. Wilson’s omission of this category is particularly striking since by writing this paragraph, he is by necessity putting himself in that category he omitted: he is claiming that the widespread teaching on servant leadership found in the church is false. I’m certain he would call himself neither a dullard nor a pig, and he is clearly not found in his third category, so there must be a fourth category that he (for one) is part of. His own text leaves no logical alternative. Yet he omits that fourth category, leaving the false impression that the three categories he presented are the only possibilities.
* Or is it a false “trichotomy” since he presents three options, omitting the fourth?
So… avoid Doug Wilson. Got it.
Then among authors (besides the Bible itself), are there any worth reading? Is anyone “doing it right”? Is anyone teaching the truth?
Pingback: If mama ain’t happy | @the_arv
“He includes a caveat that husbands must not worship their wives”
How else do you define worship in this context but defining the quality of the marriage solely based on whether the wife is happy? What if God does not want the wife to be happy? Does God want me to sin with impunity and then go on being happy? Does God want my wife to sin with impunity and go on being happy? What about my responsibility “to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless.” (Eph. 5:26-27)
Obviously, God wants a lot more than a happy wife. He wants a holy and blameless wife. But the verse says to wash her in the water through the word. This means presenting biblical truth and holding her accountable for it. This means confronting sin and rebellion. This means establishing clear lines of communication and building a relationship of trust and accountability. Sometimes that will make her happy. That’s the fun part. The part that is not so fun is when the wife is clearly acting outside biblical boundaries. It’s those times when “if mama ain’t happy, it’s because God is punishing mama for her sins.”
He may be right about having a happy wife by virtue of loving her right, but his definition of loving her right is what’s all screwed up. To love someone right is to do the things necessary, not doing things that are “nice”. It’s called tough love for a reason. But alas, there isn’t anyone on this site that isn’t fully aware of Doug Wilson’s fatal flaw in his heresy, errr logic.
I think Robin has a sound analysis. (Probably false trichotomy IMO).
Wilson’s intro made me think of this passage from 2 Corinthians
14 Now thanks be to God who always leads us in triumph in Christ, and through us diffuses the fragrance of His knowledge in every place. 15 For we are to God the fragrance of Christ among those who are being saved and among those who are perishing. 16 To the one we are the aroma of death leading to death, and to the other the aroma of life leading to life.
Notice, that the aroma is there, but it is perceived completely differently depending on whether you are saved or perishing. So While there may be some Biblical support for Wilson’s use of this metaphor, he ultimately gets it wrong. The aroma CANNOT be used solely as a metric whether the home is pleasing to God, b/c one must first know the state of the one who perceives the aroma.
And if that’s a churchian or feminist, then according to Scripture, they are highly unlikely to smell a pleasing aroma.
Wilson’s sophistry fails again.
“Happy wife, happy life.”
May this saying have the same ignominy as the phrase “arbeit macht frei.”
The shallowness of such teaching is clear. I imagine your marriage blissfully coasting along based on the wife’s feelings and deeper issues remaining unchallenged and left to fester. Like heading over the waterfall but either ignoring this impending disaster or unaware because all attention is elsewhere. The man has so many challenges in life that basically are outside of the woman’s ‘happiness’ and would require her to hunker down with him for as long as it takes to establish the security needed to become happy again.
I’ve been following this series with great interest.
Each time another post re: Doug Wilson appears in my RSS feed, I think to myself, “no, Wilson can’t possibly outdo his previous hypocrisy…” and then, once again, Dalrock proves me wrong. Unbelievable.
He thinks women will be happy by giving them what they want/desire in marriage…control. Western women have been given all the control they could ever want and they are unhappy and offended all the time. And now MGTOW is a thing because men are tired of putting up with it.
Can somebody please answer Joe’s question? I’d like an answer myself. Joe, so far the best I’ve come up with is Todd Friel of “Wretched Radio” fame.
#preach
In other words, Wilson is saying that the health of all other relationships in the home (does that include the spiritual relationships?) is dependent on the feelz of the wife. I don’t think you can find the idea that emotions are to be the primary factor in the behavior of a Christian anywhere in the Bible.
Again, the assumption that, if the husband is godly, the wife and any children in the home will respond in a godly way. What about the similar situation, where the wife is godly, but the husband is not? If women are so spiritually superior to men, why aren’t these men becoming Christian in droves? Perhaps these women are missing the key action in 1 Peter 3:1, “be submissive to your own husbands”.
I got a rhyme for them.
Happy man, happy land.
Todd Friel is pretty decent, even if his voice and delivery can be a bit annoying.
Dr. Laura Schlessenger is supposed to be good, she has a book. “The proper care and feeding of husbands”. She also has “10 Things WomenDo To Screw Up Thier Lives”, and “The Proper Care And Feeding Of Marriage”.
I have not read these books, but have heard that they are no-nonsense, and good. Maybe Dalrock can pick one apart…
If your wife is happy, this is a non falsifiable sign that God is pleased with you. If she is unhappy, this is likewise proof that God is angry with you.
Did Mr. Wilson at least refer to an out of context passage of scripture to make this fantastic leap? I’ve heard similar “women are more spiritual” teachings before, but I’ve yet to hear the scripture that backs it up.
Even more, I’ve been reading the Bible front to back for several years, and I’ve yet to come across a passage that made me think, “you know that must mean women are more spiritual and discerning than men.”
Can we stop with the posts about Wilson?
Well, when you start interpreting scripture in accordance with a money driven agenda, you tend to be hoist on your own petard. The correct solution now for him is to castigate men even more fully, such that their still small voice of God that speaks the truth to them is drowned out.
Much like every SJW, communist commissar, or serpent, ever.
Didn’t Milton have a special circle reserved for that kind of thing?
@Mad Kalak
Why?
@Joe
Dr. Laura usually put the onus on the woman that is was fully in her power to have a successful marriage. She emphasized femininity and soft power, including a woman’s control of sex, as a woman’s means of offering enough value to a man such that the man, who is in control of commitment, would choose to remain committed to her.
Like biblical patriarchy, or something.
It’s also why she went to XM only, as the SJW Feminazi’s could not stand her advocacy of femininity that reached large numbers of people and held women accountable…
@Kalak
Wilson is a case study of Churchianity and the insidious effects of libertarianism as applied to theology, or not enough self-limiting choices made and enforced.
Mad_Kalak : “Can we stop with the posts about Wilson?”
Why you mad bro?
This is what Wilson’s crusade against God and Man hath lead to:
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/03/28/holy-cross-theology-professor-says-jesus-drag-king-queer-desires/
Breitbart reports, “The theology program at the Jesuit-run College of the Holy Cross has taken on a new tone ever since the school appointed a gender-obsessed Chair of New Testament Studies who claims Jesus was a “drag king,” a new article contends.”
If you understand what actually makes a Woman happy, all of these statements by Wilson take on a very different tone. I hope it’s just sheer ignorance on Wilson’s part, but that’s hard to say. It’s really the “aroma” choice that stands out. A Christian home should have the presence of the Spirit. It doesn’t smell like anything, and the use within the Bible is in reference to burnt offerings and burial spices.
“The collateral effect of obedience is the aroma of love.”
Wilson is twisting definitions left & right, and the theology just doesn’t hold up. So, I really hate to ask this, but is Wilson pushing a form of his own sadomasochism on other Christians?
I realize I’m used to picking out clear Narrative Pushes in normal news content, thus heretical theology might be the answer over imparting his own warpedness on others. However, you can try to shoehorn this into 2 Corinthians 2:15, but you’re still back to burnt offerings and quite a ways from “aroma of love”.
“Many can fake an attempt at keeping God’s standards in some external way. What we cannot fake is the resulting, distinctive aroma of pleasure to God.”
He wrote that, as quoted by Dalrock. “Pleasure” has multiple definitions, so he can easily hide behind that via wordsmithing, however, why should it be read in the most charitable way? He’s clearly attempting to put Husbands in obedience to their wives, so there’s a very clear thread about the nature of those relationships. (I’m fully aware foolish Christians can run themselves headlong into this type of multiple reading issues, but Wilson is clear on his direction so he doesn’t get the benefit here.)
Am I wrong that this construction is extremely strange? And, if we’ve already established him as a false teacher, that something like this is very possible? He’s a solid worthsmith, so he knows what he is doing.
Jason, Joe,
I am not aware of a good marriage book for men.
Several red pill women recommend; Fascinating Womanhood, and Love and Respect.
A woman I attend church with turned her marriage around by attending the seminar, Surrendered Wife by Laura Doyle. She also paid for the 6 month counseling program. She told me the coaching was a lot less costly than a divorce. She now looks at, and brags about her husband with the same mixture of awe, respect, and admiration that Scott’s wife exhibits.
Doyle is not perfect, she does recommend getting the husband to do chores around the house. Her husband does the dishes every night. But, he orders her to bring him a cold beer and she does it!
http://www.surrenderedwife.com/
Oh my, just when you thought things couldn’t get any worse…
Jason, Joe, Wilson’s apostles,
I have found a good marriage book for men.
It is called the Bible:
Genesis:
6 To the woman He said:
“I will greatly multiply your sorrow and your conception;
In pain you shall bring forth children;
Your desire shall be for your husband,
And he shall rule over you.”
1 Cor. 11:3; Eph. 5:22; 1 Tim. 2:12, 15
Dat means dat marriage sanctifies sex, as once a woman is married, her sexual desire shall be towards her husband.
Furthermore, her husband shall rule over her.
This noble system worked wonders for thousands of years, until Wilson rose to destroy the family, while playing Judas for a few pieces of silver, or even less–a few fiat buthehtxtx dollarslzlzlzo
lzozlzzloz
“Can we stop with the posts about Wilson?”
No. Floggings will continue until theology improves.
I came across a verse once while driving and listening to a Bible audio program:
Proverbs 30:21-23
“Under three things the earth quakes,
And under four, it cannot bear up:
Under a slave when he becomes king,
And a fool when he is satisfied with food,
Under an unloved woman when she gets a husband,
And a maidservant when she supplants her mistress.”
Notice that next to last line. I almost drove off the road. “An unloved woman when she gets a husband.”
Not, “A woman who is unloved BY her husband” but an unloved woman who enters marriage with an insatiable appetite for affection that is unrealistic and overwhelmingly perverted.
The writer says that Earth itself will not be able to bear up under this insane level of expectation. Literally – the husband will be crushed under the weight of this woman’s insanity.
I also realize GBFM is back, so bringing up what Wilson might be pushing is going to get weird. However, what I brought up is a proper read of a narrative Wilson is pushing, unless we completely assume he has no clue the way Male-Female relationships actually work & he’s just being ignorant.
Oh and I wrote a book.
Be advised, I wrote it a couple of years ago and I might have rewritten some of it based on things I’ve learned since then, but it is Biblically based and simply takes the primary verses about marriage and unpacks them in an unapologetic fashion.
I’ll send you a copy @Dalrock if you give me your address
Looking Glass reads text by Doug Wilson
Am I wrong that this construction is extremely strange?
Good summary of the last two threads.
@JDG
He makes references to parts of Scripture, and even quotes a Puritan*, but none of it really backs up what he is saying. I think you can read the whole introduction in the “look inside” feature at Amazon. He also uses the same text nearly word for word in the first part of this August 2016 sermon. Skip to the 10 minute mark to hear Wilson explain the biblical principle of “When mama ain’t happy, ain’t nobody happy!”
*Using a quote from a puritan to claim “If mama ain’t happy, nobody happy” strikes me as Wilson in a nutshell. It is the wisdom of the 1970s dressed up as old time theology.
What is “the aroma of love?” Is that homecooked meals and baking bread and freshly done and folded laundry and babies in clean nappies and vacuumed carpets. Or you know obedience to that whole being despot of the household he was trying to twist around.
If momma wants daddy to bring home the bread and do all the cleaning, yes, the house will stink with an aroma that is very much not love.
@Rudolph
I don’t know if there’s anything more frustrating or disgusting to me than a man that works 40 hours a week then comes home and cleans, cooks, and takes care of the kids so his wife can have some “Me time.” Strangely enough all that nonsense doesn’t stop once the kids are in school, either. And she’s still griping and bitter that he’s not helping enough around the house or supporting her.
I ask again :
Why aren’t these cuckservatives being hit with a tsunami of divorces, to the extent that they are in prison for non-payment of CS, or at best, living at subsistence level?
I mean, they :
a) believe that female attraction is the sole determinant of virtue.
b) repel women with their pedestalization.
So shouldn’t they get hit by a wave of divorces, for which they blame themselves and descend into a spiral of depression? Shouldn’t they be in jail by the millions for non-payment of CS?
Commenter ‘American’ pointed out that he knows many cuckservatives that divorced and re-married, but given their beliefs, and what the laws are, they should be in far worse shape, collectively, than that.
Why haven’t any of these specific pastorbators gotten a divorce inflicted on them?
Given how many articles Dalrock has written about Pastor Wilson, is there no way he can be made aware of them? It is desirable for him to see what is written about him, and get drawn into a Streisand effect.
Dear Anon,
Given that Wilson is a Boomer, the decline of marriage and the culture, even when he is responsible for it, is of no concern to him.
Boomer’s wish for power and money over all else.
The Bankerslzzozoz realized this, and gave them a few fiat dollzozlzzozo to spearhead the decline.
He would likely rejoice and thank Satan for all his glory were he to read the words here.
Reminds me of books by Scott Peck and Rollo May. You can never quite figure out what the goal is suppsed to be (‘true mental health’, ‘spiritual growth’), but if you hire a licensed mental health professional for 49 fifty-minute hours a year, he’ll sit there and make an occasional comment while you locate through aimless talk. Cha-Ching.
Pingback: If mama ain’t happy | Reaction Times
If your wife is happy because she’s having an affair with the pool boy, this is a non falsifiable sign that God is pleased with you.
If your wife is happy because she’s racking up the credit cards behind your back, this is a non falsifiable sign that God is pleased with you.
If your wife is happy because all her Facebook friends liked her latest post, this is a non falsifiable sign that God is pleased with you.
If your wife is happy because she just met with the divorce lawyer, this is a non falsifiable sign that God is pleased with you.
Is this “aroma” somehow related to the hot farts issue?
I never even knew if my mama was happy or not. I knew she was holy, not to mention sweet, and joyful, and available, and seemingly tireless. We were happy because she was there, not because she was “happy”.
Holy wife, focused life.
If your wife is happy, this is a non falsifiable sign that God is pleased with you. If she is unhappy, this is likewise proof that God is angry with you.
Due to my wife’s Intimacy Anorexia an intimacy avoidant behavioral addiction, I guess I must have been created for the fires of hell according to Douglas Wilson.
Funny, I found that keeping the refrigerator stocked with alcohol and encouraging her drink it made her somewhat happier. But I stopped doing that knowing her family has a history of liver trouble.
Apparently I was most favored by God when I was keeping my wife half lit. And my relenting out of concern for her health, is clearly of Satan.
I’ll be praising God for eternity while the false teachers sizzle like bacon. Amen and Amen!
Repent Douglas Wilson!
@squidhunt
Me time is very popular with the younger generation
Remember rebelution?
The teenagers who went around preaching to teens.
If you follow them on social media
One of them is a full time house husband and preacher.
The other went to Harvard law but makes sure he runs the home after work and on weekends is on baby care so his wife can spend time with God on Saturday…
Just hilarious
Modern men are nothing but slaves to their wives.
Can u imagine a man coming home after work in Bible times telling his wife he will look after the kids and all her duties every time he is at home so she can have me time…
Younger evangelical women are really self obsessed, including the stay at home types
@ OKR, March 28, 2018 at 12:54 pm
I agree.
To me it’s the aroma of the hamster cage that I smell. Those little guys are so well fed and trained by Wilson that his womenz must feel completely liberated from any sense of moral agency.
@ Mad_Kalak
No. Just like tanks and machine gun nests on the battlefield, Wilson is a high priority target.
We are indeed at war and as men we must not, must not ever, shrink from this challenge. Onward true Christian Soldiers and all that sort of stuff. (Hat tip to seventiesjason)
Re the wife not being “haaaapy”…
As long as she is provided for, treated respectfully relevant to her position/duties/behavior, etc., that is really her private issue, not to be inflicted upon others. If she manages (as IMO she is duty-bound) to still be polite, obedient, industrious, faithful (to include nonrejectionist of touch and approaches), etc., then that’s what matters. If she ceases to be any of those, then in a just/Christian society it should be possible to expel her with the clothes on her back with a minimum of effort, but everyone here knows that we haven’t lived in a country like that for a long time.
Mad Kalak,
Can we stop with the posts about Wilson?
Don’t be a pearl-clutcher.
But I do think that it is more important that he become aware of existing posts before incremental ones are written.
Looking Glass says:
March 28, 2018 at 2:11 pm
“I also realize GBFM is back”
Next question is WHY. Does Cr*ppy TV For Poufters have embarrassing pictures of Dalrock that he’s holding over our esteemed host’s head? Is CTVFP a b*stard blood relation with autism that he feels compelled to indulge in letting his nonsensical “ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZLOLZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ”
posts once again pee all over his great forum? As rational and bright as is our host, I can’t make sense of it with the information I have. My suggestion still stands: when a post contains more than 2 Zs in a word, the whole post should be deleted, no warning or explanation, and the poster put on immediate Double Secret Probation, where if it happens again that year, his ISP is spammed for the rest of the year.
@vfm7916
Dr. Laura did not leave radio because of SJW pushback. She was fired after an on-air rant about the n-word. The crux of her rant was noticing how African-Americans can use the n-word with impunity, while white people are demonized for it. So her argument or observation had some merit, but a white woman repeating the n-word over and over on a live broadcast was just too much. And she didn’t say “n-word”, she actually used the real word that “n-word” stands for. She was booted the very same day.
Please note that this is not heresay. I used to listen to Dr. Laura on my lunch break and heard her rant live on the radio.
It is rare that multiple comments in one thread evoke the LOLs from me, but this thread did:
Hahaha!
Hahaha!
Hahaha!
As soon as words are forbidden, you know are in f-word deep s-word, n-word!
I’d like to see some Scriptural proof this is what causes God’s wrath…because most if not all the examples in Scripture of what stirs God’s anger have to do with worshiping idols.
But I wouldn’t expect Wilson to actually read Scripture and stay on the ‘your wife is god’ train.
The bonus is from what I can tell holy women are in fact much happier too.
@bdash
The cry that men aren’t helping came from watching too many sitcoms. Interestingly enough, men aren’t the ones in the relationship designated as the help.
@squidhunt
but the church claims it comes from the bible
servant leadership
Mountain Man,
Thanks for the Dr. Laura info. I used to listen to her too and then she was gone.
Being happy is a pursuit of affluence and comes from being calloused to the harm of sin and the evilness of Satan. Even if women are happy, show me secular evidence that the family and nation will prosper. Not all people can have a self-government, and most women will not pursue a large loving family willingly. There happiness in todays America means work, recognition, less kids, exhausted half-effective husbands. And the church loves it!
We don’t care if we are saltless, we only really fear being made fun of, and wrecking God’s plan for the family is fine with “us” as long as “we” show emotionality and great cultural awareness. Keeping mama happy feels right and keeps the church from its fear of being different so I don t it changing. They’ll come up with a new phrase to keep them in the cool gang. Tried sensitive, went to complementarian, then servant-leadership, and now there will be a new phrase, but not new hearts or people.
Has anyone listened to Dobson recently? He is our model man. Listen to how effeminate he and Rainey are, it is dosgusting to me. He replaced Graham as the Prot Pope for awhile, and now the TGC may be replacing Dobson.
Dalrock says:
March 28, 2018 at 2:30 pm
So the passages are Eph 5:1 and Eph 5:25-28. Thanks for the pointers.
It’s a shame that men who devote so much of their lives to studying the Bible buy into the whole “Women good” narrative. How do they not see other relevant passages like:
Jeremiah 17:9 – The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick; who can understand it?
Isaiah 64:6 – We have all become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous deeds are like a polluted garment. We all fade like a leaf, and our iniquities, like the wind, take us away.
Psalm 14:3 – They have all turned aside; together they have become corrupt; there is none who does good, not even one.
Isaiah 53:6 – All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned—every one—to his own way; and the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all.
No one is righteous, male or female. The female heart is just as wicked as the male heart. Trust it at your own peril.
More food for thought:
Ecclesiastes 7:
25 I turned my heart to know and to search out and to seek wisdom and the scheme of things, and to know the wickedness of folly and the foolishness that is madness. 26 And I find something more bitter than death: the woman whose heart is snares and nets, and whose hands are fetters. He who pleases God escapes her, but the sinner is taken by her.
27 Behold, this is what I found, says the Preacher, while adding one thing to another to find the scheme of things— 28 which my soul has sought repeatedly, but I have not found. One man among a thousand I found, but a woman among all these I have not found. 29 See, this alone I found, that God made man upright, but they have sought out many schemes.
@JDG
these men have phds etc in theology yet their wives boast about how domestic their husbands are and make him stay up with the babies all night the day before he preaches….
these men have phds etc in theology…
This may be a large part of the problem. The vast majority of this nations seminaries are infected with feminism and are no longer teaching sound doctrine.
JDG,
Much of that is because our love of wordliness. Being so busy with pleasure we look to experts for things we need, and those three letters now confer spiritual expert” to most believers. Then we add some empty lip service about the PhD being a man of God and being called to the position because we don’t want to be honest with ourselves. We deserve and want Mr. Rogers or James Dobsons as our pastor-models.
They are social club CEOs. Wilson os a great example. Entertaining and good with words according to those who see or listen to him. The same goes for the popular conservative pastors in my area. NThey never ruffle feathers, do share the good news, but rarely the bad news, and have a congregation obsessed with never being offensive (other than to their husbands).
Why do I ask that Dalrock stop with the blog posts about Wilson? [and I ain’t mad bro].
Because that ground has been tilled enough times already, and we are not learning anymore from repeating the same lessons we learn from calling him out. And frankly, it gets repetitive.
Yes, yes, I know…no one is forcing me to read this blog. Dalrock can post what he wants and I will just skip the ones on Wilson.
TMAC,
You might want to release an updated version of your book. That is a common practice and helps keep it relevant.
Dalrock and JDG,
The saying is accurate (about momma being happy), but the reason is not what most believe.
My favorite book in the Bible has always been Job. It’s rarely mentioned how Job’s wife responds to the calamities: children all dead, fortune gone, Job’s own body attacking him, and yet, she remains faithful and happy as further proof that Job is a godly man. Ha just kidding. She tells him to give up his integrity, curse God, and die. And yet right after that verse we read, “In all this Job did not sin with his lips.” I don’t know how Mr. Wilson can square that circle. I mean we have proof right there that she aint happy, and yet the Bible continues to say that Job hasn’t sinned.
This shit he writes aint worth wiping my ass with. And it will (has) done much harm to many believers.
Mad_Kalak says: “Because that ground has been tilled enough times already, and we are not learning anymore from repeating the same lessons we learn from calling him out. And frankly, it gets repetitive.”
No, even if you’ve learned the lesson there are others for whom the ground needs more tilling. In cases like this, naysayers always first accuse the critics of gaslighting, or misinterpreting, or reading in bad faith, or failing to read some other piece which allegedly balances out the thing being called erroneous. And it’s not just about Wilson. This same joyless slog — to establish once and for all to third-party observers that some erroneous teaching is not merely perceptual or accidental, but is the deliberate intent of the teacher(s) — is what faithful Catholics are currently having to endure against Francis’ and the rest of the lavender mafia’s attempts to repudiate Catholic moral theology. Saturation bombing with Truth is the only remedy.
Agree with craig. If you do not comprehensively strike down false teachings from a wide variety of the sophist’s works (particularly from an author with an output like Wilson’s), rather than small samplings, then you permit the charge of, “that’s only ONE little part of his teachings” or “that doesn’t represent his TRUE position on the matter, etc.” We have seen that defense of Wilson attempted on this very blog.
Anon, go shove it. The last thing I am doing is pearl clutching.
I often wonder if a lot of guys get into trouble with women because of this.
Mad_Kalak says: “Because that ground has been tilled enough times already, and we are not learning anymore from repeating the same lessons we learn from calling him out. And frankly, it gets repetitive.”
There are 8 years of archives here. Go read those until the front articles stop being about Pastor Wilson (which has already happened over the last two articles).
Tell you what : If you can ensure that Pastor Wilson reads the articles Dalrock already wrote (as evidenced by a response from him), then I will agree with you that our job is done.
He omits the possibility that the woman is unhappy because of her own sins. Sin is the source of the “problem with no name”. And feminists asked women to double down on their sin to solve their problem. Make your own money to buy more things, sleep with more people, follow your heart instead of the Book.
It’s not entirely about Wilson. It’s about analyzing bad arguments and untrue premises. Our enemies have a few basic templates, and what you call being repetitive is actually identifying a certain feminist template, in the hopes of understanding structure, and thereby making our work more effective.
He omits the possibility that the woman is unhappy because of her own sins. Sin is the source of the “problem with no name”. And feminists asked women to double down on their sin to solve their problem.
Very well put.
Adam also worked diligently to be a Godly man who kept eve happy. How’d that turn out?
Anon, thank you for a calm reply. I was angry earlier today.
I have been reading Dalrock for about six years now. I have seen most of them. I rarely comment.
My thought is that Dalrock is preaching to the choir. Those who make their way here from elsewhere in the manosphere have already taken the red pill. Sure, we help the new fellows out, it is a great service, but as for correcting false teaching? I can only one purple pill pastor ever actually engaging.
Mad_Kalak,
A choir member I might be, but Dal has been somewhat successful in breaching my defense of Wilson. As one of those who initiated posting links to Wilson on this blog, I did so rejoicing that Wilson seemed to be influenced in some ways by red pill thinking. Dalrock’s work has shown me the deep underlying fault lines in Wilson’s theology of men and women.
This flawed theology is significant, but it doesn’t cause me to reject Wilson entire*. He is still on the front lines of other cultural battles about speech and genderism, and I value his work there. But I will no longer recommend or use his works on marriage and family to others.
*Any more than Luther’s later opinion of the Jews causes me to reject the Reformation.
BTW, Dalrock, Wilson gets a shot in at you today, here:
https://dougwils.com/books-and-culture/books/dalrockian-and-disoriented.html
You all are completely misunderstanding Wilson. When he links the aroma of a home to how well a husband is leading he clearly means you can tell if a man is leading properly if you can smell apple pie and chocolate chip cookies. He led her exactly where she should be.
Pingback: Wilson deflects. | Dalrock
Pingback: Pastor Wilson will no doubt thank me. | Dalrock
Pingback: What do pastors teach Christian women about relationships and marriage? | WINTERY KNIGHT
Pingback: Non-Toxic Masculinity – The Neo-Ciceronian Times
Pingback: An invitation to Pastor Wilson’s defenders. | Dalrock
Pingback: Harkening back to the golden age. | Dalrock
Pingback: Theological Rot Produces Christian Culture that Agrees with “Courtly Love” – The Lexet Blog
Pingback: How to tell if a woman is looking for a man who will lead the home | WINTERY KNIGHT