His family and church encouraged him, despite his sexual abuse for a year or more of five young girls, to be a very public face in the media and essentially earn his living by talking about Christian values about sex. He also saw no legal ramifications, and very little any other form of ramifications, from his early illicit sexually abusive behavior. IMO, this had to foster an idea that he could basically get away with any sexual behavior he wanted while still being given kudos
True. Forgive him doesn't necessarily mean trust him, though. It also doesn't mean he shouldn't face consequences. I think most people agree on those points, but I'm not sure.Luke 17:4 And if he sins against you seven times in a day, and seven times in a day returns to you, saying, ‘I repent,’ you shall forgive him.”
The instruction here is clear: we are to assume that the repentance is genuine.
well, the problem is when people 'brag' about their faith...i never think that is a good idea.We know way, James says: "Let not many of you become teachers, my brethren, knowing that as such we will incur a stricter judgment." If your going to set yourself up as an example to others then you have to lead by the example you set. Walk your talk.
The parents have bragged all through these shows that theirs is the superior way to raise children. No media, no pop music, no mixing with 'undesirables', no public school, patriarchy rules ... and yet somehow they have raised a child molester/adulterer/inappropriate content addict. That simply makes it clear to me that cutting your kids off from everything is not the superior way - which I had figured out years ago anyway. In fact, people like that with their restrictive child raising, can end up with kids who go absolutely wild when they do get out into the world. There is an in-between way to raise your kids, where you do things in moderation and don't assume that you can lecture everyone else on the "right" way to do things.well, the problem is when people 'brag' about their faith...i never think that is a good idea.
The parents have bragged all through these shows that theirs is the superior way to raise children. No media, no pop music, no mixing with 'undesirables', no public school, patriarchy rules ... and yet somehow they have raised a child molester/adulterer/inappropriate content addict. That simply makes it clear to me that cutting your kids off from everything is not the superior way - which I had figured out years ago anyway. In fact, people like that with their restrictive child raising, can end up with kids who go absolutely wild when they do get out into the world. There is an in-between way to raise your kids, where you do things in moderation and don't assume that you can lecture everyone else on the "right" way to do things.
if the fruit that was produced showed similar in more than one child, yes. However this was one, so no. And no nature does not mean natural. Nature (born that way) vs Nurture (raised that way).
“We were promised a beautiful love story ‘without regrets’ if we followed courtship teachings and authority principles. My husband and I have so many regrets about how we ‘got to the marriage altar’ since those principles put us in bondage, sparked such a nightmare in my family, and left me with significant emotional damage. We were promised a love story we could share with others to help them see a better way, with God’s hand evident at every turn. We ended up with a story that causes others to respond with, ‘What?! You can’t be serious!” and serves to show others a destructive way to avoid.” J. K.
And finally, for many, we regret the opportunity in our youth to come to know God as He truly is, as we struggle with being afraid of God’s wrath. Or being afraid that someone else will spiritually trick us with more empty, unfulfilling promises. We are paralyzed: too afraid to approach God, yet too afraid to leave Him.
Those of us who have found Jesus in spite of our upbringing, wrestle with the knowledge that the misery and sometimes terrible things we suffered in our upbringing were done to us in the NAME of Christ. A false Christ. That makes all of this a lot worse than being raised without Him in the first place. We were raised with the most subtle of lies, “This is the real Christ”, when in fact it was not Him at all.
These “universal, non-optional” principles not only failed to give us the promised success and happiness, they left us with more regrets than can be counted.
One can't help noticing the wording of the admission: "I have been the biggest hypocrite ever..." = past tense.After his latest apology, the cynic in me wonders if he's actually ashamed of what he's done, or that he got caught.
One can't help noticing the wording of the admission: "I have been the biggest hypocrite ever..." = past tense.
Forgiveness is not the same as trusting. But many believe that once God forgives something we can all go back to acting like X never happened in the first place.True. Forgive him doesn't necessarily mean trust him, though. It also doesn't mean he shouldn't face consequences. I think most people agree on those points, but I'm not sure.
Forgiveness is not the same as trusting. But many believe that once God forgives something we can all go back to acting like X never happened in the first place.
Not true.
Yeah - that is a poor excuse for biblical repentance. Why does no one teach that any more?It also seems that (according to the literature from ATI) all that's required is "freeing one's conscious by confession"---there's nothing about change of behavior.
That's a really good question. I think this is a case of layered issues causing the "perfect storm".Yeah - that is a poor excuse for biblical repentance. Why does no one teach that any more?
Article said:The flip side of the strict sexual prohibitions in the culture to which the Duggars belong is a belief, sometimes bordering on the prurient, in the unbridled nature of male sexuality. Men are often portrayed as sexually ravenous, constantly on the edge of losing control of their libidos. Women, meanwhile, are generally seen as guardians of purity who must not stoke men’s passions.
Let me tell you: Anna Duggar is in the worst position she could possibly be in right now. Anna Duggar was crippled by her parents by receiving no education, having no work experience (or life experience, for that matter) and then was shackled to this loser because his family was famous in their religious circle. Anna Duggar was taught that her sole purpose in life, the most meaningful thing she could do, was to be chaste and proper, a devout wife, and a mother. Anna Duggar did that! Anna Duggar followed the rules that were imposed on her from the get-go and this is what she got in reward- a husband who she found out, in the span of 6 months, not only molested his own sisters, but was unfaithful to her in the most humiliating way possible…. She lived up to the standard that men set for her of being chaste and Godly and in return, the man who demanded this of her sought women who were the opposite. “Be this,” they told her. She was. It wasn’t enough.
In some circles - definitely not. In others; probably so. Like the pastor I know of who married a woman who had been divorced 4 times already for unbiblical reasons and now "had the guy God wanted her to have from the beginning." She directed the choir and her immediate ex husband was the lead tenor.Do you think the same attitude would be displayed (the, "God is faithful to forgive" attitude) if this were Michelle Duggar that was discovered to have been having online Facetime chats with other men? Because.....I don't think so.