Mark Driscoll

[McScribe]

I'd like to know WHY it is thought to be so disgusting.

 

[JaneFW]

Why what is thought to be so disgusting?

 

[k450ofu3k-gh-5ipe]

The interpretation of turn the other cheek as a directive to sit there and take it is badly off the mark. It was, due to the culture of the time and the "rules" about how you are allowed to strike someone, an insult or a challenge more than it was a show of meekness. I'll attempt to find the study I saw on the subject.

Exactly Chaz.

 

[chaz345]

Or his anger at his wife for being sexually abused.

Was he angry at her for being abused or was he angry that she didn't disclose it before they were married. There is a huge difference and one is entirely inappropriate and the other, not so much.

 

[hijklmnop]

I still don't see why someone would be so angry about their spouse not "disclosing" that they were sexually abused. It's not something you owe to your spouse to share. If you feel safe enough, you will, if not, you won't. I don't get anger as a response to that finally being spoken.

 

[hijklmnop]

Exactly Chaz.

Turning the other cheek was definitely an insult. In their culture, you would never hit someone with an open fist, your left hand, or with the back of your hand. So the only option to "properly" hit someone is with an open palm right hand. So by turning the other cheek (which would be your right cheek), you were in effect embarrassing the person hitting you by making them look like a fool because they wouldn't be able to hit you anymore with socially embarrassing themself.

Wait...I thought we were only supposed to read the Bible in it's most simple, literal and obvious translation, and that you aren't supposed to have to know details about the culture of the times, language, translations, etc to understand the real meaning of a passage...???

 

[k450ofu3k-gh-5ipe]

Wait...I thought we were only supposed to read the Bible in it's most simple, literal and obvious translation, and that you aren't supposed to have to know details about the culture of the times, language, translations, etc to understand the real meaning of a passage...???

Haha ya.

I think I am off on my cultural details though because the sermon I heard that in was a long time ago. I just know that "turning the other cheek" doesn't mean just take a beating though. There are specific cultural ways of striking that are extremely relevant to that teaching by Jesus.

 

[JanniGirl]

You turn the other cheek so that they can strike you there, as well. You aren't hiding your cheek from further slaps ....

 

[k450ofu3k-gh-5ipe]

I still don't see why someone would be so angry about their spouse not "disclosing" that they were sexually abused. It's not something you owe to your spouse to share. If you feel safe enough, you will, if not, you won't. I don't get anger as a response to that finally being spoken.

I also think that is odd.

I don't think he's condoning his anger in that reaction, though, so if we look at it that way I don't think it's odd at all. I think he's being brutally honest about how he felt, and in relating the story he wasn't condoning of his anger as much as it was an acknowledging his reactionary emotions and telling his full story.

There is not one person here who can honestly say that their responses to other people's actions have always been justified, calm, collected, and logical. Sometimes people overreact and get angry and emotional.

 

[chaz345]

I still don't see why someone would be so angry about their spouse not "disclosing" that they were sexually abused. It's not something you owe to your spouse to share. If you feel safe enough, you will, if not, you won't. I don't get anger as a response to that finally being spoken.

Really? You don't believe that you owe it to your spouse to disclose something that's likely to have a lifelong effect on your(and their) sex life? All I can say about that it just wow.

 

[BigDaddy4]

How do you know what plays well in Seattle? It seems to be, Driscoll is a big part of it, if not their leader.

Chaz nails it pretty good as to what Seattle is like. I know, I live in the Seattle area and am very familiar with the area where the Mars Hill main campus is, plus all of the other Seattle area campuses.

It is a very liberal base, anti-church for the most part. A few older downtown churches ("conservative"-type) have closed and sold off their property. Others are struggling with attendance and budgets.

Driscoll is not "their leader". We have other Godly men who speak louder in the community on political and social topics (Pastor Ken Hutcherson of Antioch Church for example). Driscoll, for the most part, just preaches the Gospel through the Mars Hill church and its campuses and stays out of the political limelight.

It may be a shock to others on this forum, but not everyone goes to church on Sunday mornings around here. I will give Driscoll credit for faithfully preaching the Gospel in what has been for years a difficult environment to preach in.

 

[JaneFW]

Was he angry at her for being abused or was he angry that she didn't disclose it before they were married. There is a huge difference and one is entirely inappropriate and the other, not so much.

Why does he have the right to be angry that she didn't disclose sexual abuse? Do you know anything about the victims of CSA? It's very, very difficult for them to openly discuss the abuse that happened to them. It evidently took her time to open up about this, and the last thing she needed was anger. How destroying that must have been.

 

[JaneFW]

Really? You don't believe that you owe it to your spouse to disclose something that's likely to have a lifelong effect on your(and their) sex life? All I can say about that it just wow.

See my post. Did you suffer CSA, Chaz? Can you speak to how easy it is to talk about openly? Should CSA victims have a different criteria? Are they the unclean? After all, we have almost ALL been subjected to inappropriate, um, stuff before we marry. Is it incumbent to go over every single crumb? Are you innocent of hiding anything? I know that I am guilty of hiding stuff (but not CSA, I hasten to add).

 

[hijklmnop]

Really? You don't believe that you owe it to your spouse to disclose something that's likely to have a lifelong effect on your(and their) sex life? All I can say about that it just wow.

Way to make something that's all about your spouse all about you. Wow is all I can say to that egomania too.

 

[BigDaddy4]

I still don't see why someone would be so angry about their spouse not "disclosing" that they were sexually abused. It's not something you owe to your spouse to share. If you feel safe enough, you will, if not, you won't. I don't get anger as a response to that finally being spoken.

Perhaps you have not experienced it. My wife was touched inappropriately a couple of times by a cousin as a child, did not disclose it to me until nearly 8 years into our marriage, and, subsequently, has refused intimacy ever since (going on 10 months). Counseling has not helped her. It has affected other areas of her life and our marriage. We are nearing seperation and/or divorce.

So yeah, I can understand someone being upset by not disclosing that. Especially when one refuses to seek help in dealing with it and lets it affect all aspects of their marriage.

 

[hijklmnop]

There were details of my h's extensive CSA that I didn't know till many years into our marriage. No, I'm not angry that he didn't tell me earlier. I'm sad for him that he carried that burden all alone for so long. If he discloses more later, I hope I will receive it with love and no hint of selfishness. With these attitudes (that CSA is something to be "disclosed", that it is something your spouse "needs" to know BEFORE marrying you because it might negatively affect THEIR sex life (noooo!!!) no WONDER it's so hard for people to share. Way to make CSA survivors feel more tainted than many already do (@ chaz's post)

 

[chaz345]

See my post. Did you suffer CSA, Chaz? Can you speak to how easy it is to talk about openly? Should CSA victims have a different criteria? Are they the unclean? After all, we have almost ALL been subjected to inappropriate, um, stuff before we marry. Is it incumbent to go over every single crumb? Are you innocent of hiding anything? I know that I am guilty of hiding stuff (but not CSA, I hasten to add).

Hiding something that's likely to have a long term negative effect on your and your spouse's sex life is wrong, period. It's the same as if I knew that it was impossible or difficult for me to form deep emotional connection, for whatever reason, and I decided to not say anything until after I had married.

That and like someone said, Driscoll wasn't saying that he was right to react the way he did, he was being real and transparent. Maybe I was unclear, I didn't mean to suggest that his anger and how he expressed it was fine and dandy. But it was, IMO, entirely understandable.

 

[k450ofu3k-gh-5ipe]

You turn the other cheek so that they can strike you there, as well. You aren't hiding your cheek from further slaps ....

But in that culture, they would not slap you on the other cheek.

I remember how it went! Here it is:

Turning the other cheek was basically calling someone out. In their culture, hitting someone on the right cheek as per the verse meant someone hit you with an right back hand. Back handing someone was the way of hitting someone who was inferior to yourself (someone of lower status, a servant, a slave).

A person in that culture would never hit someone with an open fist because hitting someone with an open fist implied (and still implies to this day in the middle east) that you want to kill them, so it is bad and people will not do it; a person in that culture would also never hit someone with their left hand because the left hand was considered "unclean" and you wouldn't touch anyone with it; and a person in that culture who was trying to demean someone would never hit them with an open palm because that implied that they were equal.

So the only option to "properly" hit someone to demean them is with an open back of the right hand. So by turning the other cheek (which would be your left cheek), you were in effect by your actions saying to the person hitting you "the only option available to you if you continue to hit me is your acknowledgement that we are equals". Which doing something like that would immediately stop the blows from the culturally informed person doing the beating.

 

[I Art Laughing]

Way to make something that's all about your spouse all about you. Wow is all I can say to that egomania too.

Before you marry it is about them. After you marry its about us. Disclosure is a good idea, if you are healthy you are likely going to know if there is a problem here. I think this needs to get worked out and healed before a marriage. It was disclosed on both sides in my marriage and we have paid for not getting pastoring/counseling.

 

[chaz345]

Way to make something that's all about your spouse all about you. Wow is all I can say to that egomania too.

NOTHING in a marriage is only about one of the two people involved though. Something that affects one as deeply as sexual abuse definitely has an effect on the other.