Abuse in a Christian relationship

[FreeSpirit74]

Very scary stuff. I hope more people leave these horrible relationships, and realize that they don't need to tolerate them.

I did. It only took me 9 years to put all of the pieces together (took 2.5 years for me to get any real indication of his true nature, that's how good of a liar and player he is - and of course I sluffed over it at that time) and to gain enough of a sense of self-worth and esteem and to get so damn fed up with his shenanigans that I wasn't going to take it any more. That's the opposite of how it usually goes - as time went on I got stronger, instead of weaker and beaten down. And I think he realized that, because he even said to me last year I would neither create nor relish the scenario of going toe-to-toe with you because of the apparent outcome. Yeah... but he did create the possibility of that happening by being dishonest while hoping I wouldn't find out about it.

I would have loved to see the look on his face when I texted him to tell him that I was on to him, had been the one who exposed him to his gf (who kicked him out of her house), and that I was done, but if we had had that conversation face to face I would probably be in jail right now for busting his skull with the nearest heavy object, that's how PO'ed I was at the time.

 

[FreeSpirit74]

I'm glad I've broken free, but there are so many people who have not and need help to recognize this kind of abuse.

The thing is, these people have to realize it for themselves. I would talk up the guy I was involved with, and people who never even met him were getting a vibe that he was hinky. Naturally, I would defend him "because they don't know him." I had to see for myself that he wasn't for real.

That meant going through the fire a few more times than I should have needed to, but those experiences definitely left their impression on me. At this point, the only guys I don't keep at arms length are the ones I contra dance with, but that is the nature of the dance, not because I want to get with any of them.

 

[Joykins]

as a product of a marriage where the man was abusive and claimed to be a Christian, I can say that I never ever once thought I was supposed to stay with him because of what the bible said. I knew he wasn't doing the job he was supposed to be doing as my husband.

The bible is really clear, when you take it in its totality, about abuse.

The overall message of the Bible certainly is against abuse.

What the Bible does not give instructions for, is exactly what an abused spouse or child ought to do. (FWIW I don't think that an abused spouse should stay with an abusive partner either. But I'm getting that more from the culture at large and principles of conscience than the words of the Bible.)

Some churches will "Matthew 18" the situation. The abused wife, after not getting her husband to stop, will involve, usually, the elders of the church. The abusive husband will give "his side" of the story and persuade the elders that he is well-meaning/repentant and will stop. The elders advise the wife to submit to him as he won't do it again and her submission may win him over, etc. And nothing changes, except the abuse which usually escalates.

I don't think this is what Paul intended by those passages, but it's really a foreseeable outcome. Where are the safeguards and protections for a victim? It is in these same authoritarian churches where victims of abuse are pressured to repent and forgive, before they have even dealt with recovery from abuse, or even stopped being abused sometimes.

 

[BL2KTN]

So thankful for this thread. I always knew there was something strange and disturbing about the Duggars. Hadn't heard about this Quiverfull movement, but so glad to know about their teachings.

 

[Glass*Soul]

So thankful for this thread. I always knew there was something strange and disturbing about the Duggars. Hadn't heard about this Quiverfull movement, but so glad to know about their teachings.

Despite having Michelle Duggar's picture at the head of the article (and her name misspelled below it) and mentioning the Duggar family tangentially, the article actually is not about the Duggars. I hate this sort of misleading stuff masquerading as "news."

Here is a link to the blog No Longer Quivering, started by the woman the article is actually about, Vyckie Garrison: No Longer Quivering ?

She has something important to say and I hate to see her hyped in a misleading way by Raw Story.

 

[Glass*Soul]

The overall message of the Bible certainly is against abuse.

What the Bible does not give instructions for, is exactly what an abused spouse or child ought to do. (FWIW I don't think that an abused spouse should stay with an abusive partner either. But I'm getting that more from the culture at large and principles of conscience than the words of the Bible.)

Some churches will "Matthew 18" the situation. The abused wife, after not getting her husband to stop, will involve, usually, the elders of the church. The abusive husband will give "his side" of the story and persuade the elders that he is well-meaning/repentant and will stop. The elders advise the wife to submit to him as he won't do it again and her submission may win him over, etc. And nothing changes, except the abuse which usually escalates.

I don't think this is what Paul intended by those passages, but it's really a foreseeable outcome. Where are the safeguards and protections for a victim? It is in these same authoritarian churches where victims of abuse are pressured to repent and forgive, before they have even dealt with recovery from abuse, or even stopped being abused sometimes.

Thinking a little more about what you and Preacher's Wife have said:

The bible can quite easily carry sincere seekers down a very bad path if they are naive about an issue.

If a matter is clear in your own mind, it will stay reasonably clear when you look at the Bible as a whole. Witness Preacher's Wife who luckily was clear in her own mind that she need not tolerate being abused. However bad conclusions like the one you've outlined above can feel equally clear. There is a definite thread in the biblical narrative of ennobling being abused that can come out pretty darned clearly if someone goes into it with the inclination to accept that.

So, I disagree a little with Preacher's Wife in that I think it is she who is clear on the issue of abuse, not the bible. Not Paul. Paul was missing some information that many of us today can fill in. I know that is a disturbing idea to some Christians. It challenges us not just on this issue but on every issue we might carry to the scriptures.

 

[BL2KTN]

Despite having Michelle Duggar's picture at the head of the article (and her name misspelled below it) and mentioning the Duggar family tangentially, the article actually is not about the Duggars. I hate this sort of misleading stuff masquerading as "news."

Here is a link to the blog No Longer Quivering, started by the woman the article is actually about, Vyckie Garrison: No Longer Quivering ?

She has something important to say and I hate to see her hyped in a misleading way by Raw Story.

Duggars follow the same belief movement.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/nolong...sited-are-jim-bob-michelle-duggar-quiverfull/

Yeesh...

 

[PreachersWife2004]

BTW, I want to congratulate you on not remaining with someone who was abusive toward you. I admire that.

Unfortunately I stayed longer than I should've, for even stupider reasons than thinking the bible was telling me I had to.

It took a few other people to help me, and it took me gathering up the courage (when there's abuse and the abuser threatens family members all bets are off).

I stayed even though I knew it was wrong and for me, that's worse.

The overall message of the Bible certainly is against abuse.

What the Bible does not give instructions for, is exactly what an abused spouse or child ought to do. (FWIW I don't think that an abused spouse should stay with an abusive partner either. But I'm getting that more from the culture at large and principles of conscience than the words of the Bible.)

Some churches will "Matthew 18" the situation. The abused wife, after not getting her husband to stop, will involve, usually, the elders of the church. The abusive husband will give "his side" of the story and persuade the elders that he is well-meaning/repentant and will stop. The elders advise the wife to submit to him as he won't do it again and her submission may win him over, etc. And nothing changes, except the abuse which usually escalates.

I don't think this is what Paul intended by those passages, but it's really a foreseeable outcome. Where are the safeguards and protections for a victim? It is in these same authoritarian churches where victims of abuse are pressured to repent and forgive, before they have even dealt with recovery from abuse, or even stopped being abused sometimes.

I can agree with this. It's a misapplication of Matthew 18, unfortunately.

 

[Joykins]

I can agree with this. It's a misapplication of Matthew 18, unfortunately.

It's my belief that Matthew 18 is misapplied in a number of abusive situations. The spiritually abusive church uses it as a means of covering up abuse (especially child abuse), protecting the institution, and isolating and gaslighting victims. I agree that's not at all what it's intended for.

 

[Glass*Soul]

Duggars follow the same belief movement.

NLQ FAQ Revisited: Are Jim Bob & Michelle Duggar “Quiverfull”?

Yeesh...

I guess I'm confused as to what about the article clarified why you were disquieted about the Duggers. Had you not realized previously that they were dedicated to having however many children time and effort would allow?

 

[BL2KTN]

I guess I'm confused as to what about the article clarified why you were disquieted about the Duggers. Had you not realized previously that they were dedicated to having however many children time and effort would allow?

I didn't realize they prevent their daughters from being formally educated, nor did I realize that they select their husbands for them.

 

[BigDaddy4]

That would make her submission contingent upon the church submitting to Christ. That wouldn't help her situation, unless I'm missing something.

Also, the blemish aspect strikes me as being figurative, unless an elderly, wrinkled wife is not presentable. In fact, many abusive husbands insist that their abuse is due to some inadequacy in the wife's behavior. This insistence upon the wife somehow making herself blameless would only tend to feed that.

You are missing the word "should". It is a suggestion, not a requirement or commandment (Thou shall...).

As for the blemish, I believe it can be both figurative and literal. Verbal and psychological abuse don't leave physical traces, but can be just as or more damaging than physical abuse. That's why the Bible teaches about controlling your thoughts and speech.

 

[BigDaddy4]

I don't believe as you do. So, we may never agree on this point.

That might be for the best...

 

[KitKatMatt]

The thing is, these people have to realize it for themselves. I would talk up the guy I was involved with, and people who never even met him were getting a vibe that he was hinky. Naturally, I would defend him "because they don't know him." I had to see for myself that he wasn't for real.

That meant going through the fire a few more times than I should have needed to, but those experiences definitely left their impression on me. At this point, the only guys I don't keep at arms length are the ones I contra dance with, but that is the nature of the dance, not because I want to get with any of them.

Yes, you can't force someone to see that they're in an abusive relationship, but the very least we could do as a society is have everyone educated on what abuse exactly is. When the knowledge is out there, it may help someone's mind finally "click", and they may realize that they are being abused.

 

[BigDaddy4]

Well it is assumed that god is superior to humans, but we come from an idea that all humans are equal. But that could be incorrect according to the Bible. The reason this idea that men are superior to men always bothered me, since I had read that god loved all of us equally.

So are men more like Christ than women are? How so? Are men more kind, giving, loving than women are? Or are we basing god off the description of more vengeful like in the OT? I don't remember the particular verses, but I have a faint recollection (I could be wrong) that men are superior to women because of the adam and eve thing. If this is correct, why are women punished for something that happened way before they were born (assuming you think the genesis story is real and not just a story to describe the creation of the earth).

If you don't think that it is literal, what passages explained that men are superior to women?

That's a lot of questions.

Anyway, this does end up being a matter of opinion of whether men are more like Christ than women are to those outside the faith. So to me, the answer does not really matter, but I am curious.

In the beginning God created not only the earth and all the creatures, but also order and structure. He gave man dominion over it all. God is no respector of persons. However, he does provide us with roles and responsibilities to mankind. In addition, He gives us free will to follow what he has laid out for us. Part of that structure is the relationship between a man and a woman.

As for Genesis, Adam was created first and given the task of working the land. Eve was created as his "helpmate". They became equal as in "one flesh", complimenting each other with their differences. When they ate the fruit and sinned, then God said that the man would rule over the woman (Gen 3:16) and that has been a point of contention ever since.

 

[BigDaddy4]

So the christian loop hole to being the one in charge of the relationship is by being the strongest? Alrighty then *goes to the gym to get buff* JK JK, that stuff doesn't apply to me.

Also, what is a woman is naturally strong (it happens), will there be a contest to see who is to be the head of the household?

That sounds like a reality show.

TUNE IN NEXT TIME TO SEE WHO IS....HEAD OF HOUSEHOLD!!!!!! *applause in back ground*

The Bible says the man is the head of the household, but that each must "submit to one another out of reverence for Christ" (Ephesians 5:21).

 

[Smidlee]

Was Jesus' love for us conditional?

And in ALL of those passages, never once does it say it's okay for a husband to take his position in the household and abuse his wife. NEVER.

Did he abuse her? ( It reads as if she just looking for an excuse to get out of her marry which is so common) The more I read her side of the story the more it seems she's the problem. (I haven't even heard his side yet) If true she's not going to get very far from her problem.

This is another sign of the Laodicea church age. Rev 3:16-17" ...because thou art lukewarm and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth. Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and need of nothing, and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked"

Here we are living in ease more than any generation as we are miserable , can't live without something to numb our brains.

 

[classicalhero]

as a product of a marriage where the man was abusive and claimed to be a Christian, I can say that I never ever once thought I was supposed to stay with him because of what the bible said. I knew he wasn't doing the job he was supposed to be doing as my husband.

The bible is really clear, when you take it in its totality, about abuse.

Quite frankly if that is the case, then the guy is a liar and not being truthful, since a Christian should never be abusing someone.

 

[PreachersWife2004]

Did he abuse her? ( It reads as if she just looking for an excuse to get out of her marry which is so common) The more I read her side of the story the more it seems she's the problem. (I haven't even heard his side yet) If true she's not going to get very far from her problem.

This is another sign of the Laodicea church age. Rev 3:16-17" ...because thou art lukewarm and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth. Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and need of nothing, and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked"

Here we are living in ease more than any generation as we are miserable , can't live without something to numb our brains.

It seems he abused her, or at least the claim has been made.

This would be a really really far fetched way to get out of a marriage.

Quite frankly if that is the case, then the guy is a liar and not being truthful, since a Christian should never be abusing someone.

The No True Christian™ argument may seem like it holds water here but what we need to remember is that this is the face these guys wear in public. Some of the worst abusers I've heard of were leaders in their church. Council presidents, church presidents, elders. So while most understand that Christians shouldn't abuse, people should also realize that being a Christian doesn't mean we aren't still sinners. Christians still sin. We still make mistakes. I don't know whether my ex really is a Christian or not. I hope he is, for his soul's sake. I know that his attitude wasn't Christ-like, but neither is mine on any given day.

 

[Syd the Human]

In the beginning God created not only the earth and all the creatures, but also order and structure. He gave man dominion over it all. God is no respector of persons. However, he does provide us with roles and responsibilities to mankind. In addition, He gives us free will to follow what he has laid out for us. Part of that structure is the relationship between a man and a woman.

As for Genesis, Adam was created first and given the task of working the land. Eve was created as his "helpmate". They became equal as in "one flesh", complimenting each other with their differences. When they ate the fruit and sinned, then God said that the man would rule over the woman (Gen 3:16) and that has been a point of contention ever since.

The Bible says the man is the head of the household, but that each must "submit to one another out of reverence for Christ" (Ephesians 5:21).

Yeah but why?