Where are all the Christian women? Are Christian women ready for marriage?

I have noticed some very alarming things about single Christian women lately, and I want to write about some of them.

I think that the main thrust of courting from the man’s perspective is that you want to 1) communicate your plan to make the marriage and the children have a positive impact for Christ and his kingdom, 2) you want to demonstrate that you understand the needs of women and that you are capable of meeting those needs, especially the needs for love and companionship, 3) that you understand the roles of a man and you have made preparations and decisions to be ready to fulfill those roles, and 4) you want to ask the kinds of questions that will allow you to ensure that the woman you are courting is ready to fulfill her roles – because she has also made preparations and good decisions.

Well, the problem I wanted to talk about has to do with objective 1). I have communicated my plan to many women and I find that there are particular parts where they resist. The main thing I would like to do is to have four children who all go into different interesting fields and make an impact for Christ. Here are some of the areas I think would be most useful:

  • cosmologist or astrophysicist
  • biochemist/bioinformatics
  • economist to research marriage and parenting
  • lawyer to join the Alliance Defense Fund

The goal here is that the children will be able to pursue their field of study without being persecuted by secular leftists, and be able to earn a living, and be able to make a contribution in an area that matters.

So what I normally do is lay out this plan to the woman and then see if she is supportive and helpful and starts to take action to help with that. But I have had some alarming reactions and I want to talk about some of those below.

1) Several women have told me that children can have as much impact for Christ as a ballet dancer or poet as they could as a Chief Justice of the Supreme Court or as a President. The part of this objection that I find most alarming is not that it is obviously false, but that my authority to lead, which is secured by my role as provider and saver of money, is being denied. I am still expected to bring savings and income into the family, but without any of the decision making authority about how hard the children should study and what fields they should be steered towards.

For me, the whole point of getting married is to serve the Lord – and if my plans to serve are threatened by marriage, then I will not do it. I would rather use the fortune I have to make donations to individual events than to be married and have those resources wasted on ballet dancers and poets. Further on this point about education and careers, I feel that one of the things that a man struggles with is the fear that his children will not be able to grow up and be prosperous and independent in the world. I especially worry that they will feel pressure to compromise their faith because of financial concerns.

Many people think that there is this Santa Claus in the sky who will magically provide money no matter how reckless they are – but I don’t think God is like that. I think he values stewardship, wisdom and prudence – and that’s what I intend to teach my children. I want my children to have enough money so that they can be independent of the state, and resilient against peer pressure. I see many many people who get degrees in fields where they fall under pressure to adopt viewpoints that are non-Christian simply because of financial concerns. Money matters a lot to keeping your convictions, especially when you get married and have children – it’s something that needs to be planned for.

I am afraid of getting overruled by someone who thinks that the world is a safe place for Christians, or that any field is as good as any other for serving Christ. There is a reason why people know who William Lane Craig and Michele Bachmann are – they have the skills. But what I am seeing from Christian women is that Christianity can be reduced to just reading the Bible, singing in church and praying to hear the voice of their emotions. (Which they call the voice of God) There is no thought being put into how to make children achieve at a high level by setting goals and funneling them into areas that matter.

It’s like Christian women think that the children’s happiness is more authoritative in the family than my knowledge and experience about how to build up children who will retain their faith, maintain their financial independence and have an influence in the world. Often, the women who tell me that the choice of career doesn’t matter are themselves riddled with credit card debt. And the ones who tell me that science apologetics doesn’t matter are the ones whose parents and siblings are becoming apostates after reading Richard Dawkins books. If I am the one who is earning the money and providing the savings up front, then I am the one who should be leading on things like education, careers, jobs and so forth. If I was smart enough to study the right things, to work and to save before I got married, then I shouldn’t be overloaded after the marriage by someone else’s feelings, emotions and desire to be her children’s “friend”.

2) Another concern I have is about how these Christian women are moved by liberal sob stories so that they vote against a strong foreign policy, self-defense, deterrence, capital punishment, and men using force to punish evildoers in general. On the foreign policy front, one woman complained to me that American helicopter gunships had used excessive force by attacking Islamic terrorist infantry with the gunship’s machine gun. Now some of you will have caught on that military issues and platforms are an interest of mine because I am a war gamer. I play military simulations ranging from squad-level infantry combat right up to full-scale carrier strike groups. So I am informed about tactics, strategy, weapons, vehicles and so on.

Anyway, I took a look at the full guncam footage she linked me and read the AARs and noticed that there was a convoy of BLUFOR Humvees coming into range of the OPFOR infantry, and that the OPFOR infantry was armed with RPGs. I asked her to tell me what she thought an RPG could do to a Humvee. She had no idea what an RPG was or what it could do to a Humvee. I explained that RPGs are ROCKETS that explode and it would kill all the occupants of Humvees. It seemed to me that her only reason for complaining about it was that her friends had sent it to her, and she felt pressured to agree with them. She had no understanding of the capabilities of the arms and vehicles at all, yet she felt qualified to make judgments about unnecessary violence. In fact, it became clear that she was taking this position because she thought that it made her look morally superior. She felt “compassion” for the poor Islamic terrorists. It’s so easy to second guess American military forces when you know nothing at all about war in general, or Islamic extremism in the Middle East in particular.

This terrifies me. I do not want to be overruled by someone who makes decisions based on ignorance, emotions, intuitions and peer pressure. This person went on to assure me that shooting terrorists was the same as blowing up busloads of children, and that killing convicted serial killers was the same as killing unborn babies. Because killing is killing, right? That scares me. Who would want to be a passenger in a car with someone who was drunk and color-blind? Not me. It’s hard to consider someone for marriage who can’t see the difference between good and evil or guilt and innocence, but instead tries to lift up evil and bash down good. (Not only was she anti-capital punishment but also anti-self-defense – all without having done a moment’s worth of research on the peer-reviewed studies showing how capital punishment deters crime, and how concealed-carry laws reduce rates of violent crime).

Should I marry someone who is uncomfortable with the male role of making moral judgments and exercising force against evil? Someone who takes positions without knowing anything about the details of what she is talking about? Of course not. No one can be happy married to someone who takes positions on moral issues based on ignorance, emotions, vanity and peer pressure. And some Christian women are unwilling to learn anything about war, or even to come to the firing range to fire a handgun. They have opinions, they make pronouncements about how they will overrule you if you get married to them, they vote to undermine national security and world peace by emboldening aggressors and then they refuse to learn anything about the issues. All they need to know are their feelings. And they vote based on those feelings, not based on studies or history or anything factual.

3) A final example has to do with Christian women embracing socialism because it is “compassionate”. Believe it or not, some women do not really understand the effect of having the government spend more and more money equalizing life outcomes. Most of the Christian women I spoke to had enormous difficulty understanding how single motherhood by choice creates child poverty. They wanted to believe that child poverty was just spilled milk – it just happened, and wasn’t anyone’s fault, and that subsidizing it wouldn’t create more of it.

One Christian pro-life activist wrote to me that she was “great with kids” and was going to have one out of wedlock and raise it with money from the government. This woman never finished college and had not held any sort of serious job. She complained that no men were marrying her (note: this woman was completely irresponsible and penniless and unsuitable for marriage) and blamed the men. I told her that the reason why men were not marrying her was because they were paying a third of their income in taxes and looking at the 1.65 trillion deficits and 14.5 trillion national debt. She said that men didn’t really care about money and numbers and that if they loved her, they would marry her anyway, but they were just selfish lazy cowards. She was willing to inflict fatherlessness and day care on a child, but she was “great with kids”.

Another Christian woman told me that the government should provide free meals to children so that they were all equal regardless of whether their mothers had married or not. I explained that every time that government takes a responsibility away from men, that our household income would go down because of higher taxes, and my job would be put in jeopardy because of government debt. I also explained that the more government does, the less control there is inside the family – like when Christians have to pay for public schools so that all the children will be equal. Equally illiterate and innumerate. Instead of proposing free market solutions to poverty that retain family integrity – like school voucher programs – they always seem to leap to the big government solutions first.

But you can see how this idea of economic equality captures the emotions of some Christian women and they don’t even realize how they are undermining men’s desire and ability to achieve their goals for the marriage. They don’t read economics and they don’t realize that Christian marriage plans cost money. Men need money in order to put their own children through college. Men need money for homeschooling, stay-at-home moms and private schools. And men need money for apologetics books and to take children to apologetics conferences. It’s amazing because this woman expected me to keep her at home as a stay-at-home mom, but she wanted my salary to go to subsidize the single mothers by choice in the next neighborhood over.

That is the level of self-destructive economic ignorance I am seeing from some Christian women. They look at social problems like child poverty, and the only solution they can come up with to these problems is government-controlled redistribution of wealth by a secular government. (Together with all the high unemployment that this deficit spending creates). Why are they so opposed to men and marriage and family? Because they have never taken the time to read even a basic book on economics. Newsflash: free market capitalism is better for the poor than socialism – that’s why the poor are wealthier in the United States than in any other country, and their standard of living has gone up over time.

For example, take health care. I know another Christian woman who complained to me about some poor child of a single mother who could not get treatment for some condition or other. Notice how there was no emphasis on what this single mother chose to study, whether she chose to work, whether she chose to save, or whether she married a good provider. No. The problem is taken as is – as a case of spilled milk and all questions of responsibility and accountability are dismissed. I was asked how capitalism can solve the problem.

Well the first thing to point out is that her solution is to defund the family, grow government, reward irresponsibility, undermine my plan by diminishing the earnings I save that fund my plan. And why? So that she could feel better and see God’s aim of making us all happy achieved. It is very important to understand this point. Women who claim to be Christians may not actually be Christians. If a woman thinks that God’s job is to make his human pets happy, then she is not a Christian at all, but a socialist-to-be, with an unnecessary Santa Claus riding on top of her emotional delusions. These are the people who claim to be opposed to abortion and then vote for single-payer health care which provides… taxpayer-funded abortion. Don’t believe a word of it. No one can be a Christian who is a socialist, and if they don’t know anything about economics, that’s what they are. No matter what a woman says, if her solution to poverty is the secular government taxing your family and your employer, and reducing the family’s earnings and destabilizing the family’s revenue stream, then she does not have a Christian view of family, government and charity. She will undermine your role as provider because she values socialism MORE than she values marriage and family.

Secondly, there are solutions to poverty that are compatible with the Bible and capitalism that she ought to know about, if she had actually done any reading about it. The first thing that should have come into her mind is private charity. If the government has any role at all, it should be to provide tax credits for private charity. It is important for government not to crowd out the virtuous character of the people by taking over the job of helping neighbors. But even more than that, every Christian woman should be familiar with the horrors of socialized medicine in countries like Canada and the UK, and the alternative to socialized medicine – consumer-driven health care. If a woman is not well-read on consumer-driven health care policy, then she is at risk for being taken in by this socialist undermining of the family. Real Christian women choose policy based on economics, not based on their emotions and their ridiculous theology of God making his human pets happy regardless of what they believe about him. Our job as Christians is not primarily to make people have equal net worths regardless of their personal decisions. Our job is to make them know about God’s existence and character, and we can do that better with private charity – certainly better than any secular government can. Your money is your voice. Don’t give it to a SECULAR government that will turn around and enact taxpayer-funded abortion, taxpayer-funded IVF, taxpayer-funded day care, taxpayer-funded fatherlessness welfare, and so on.

And more

I’m going to stop now, but I could go on and on about how some Christian women neglect to study Christian apologetics or theology, but instead learn about trendy secular practices like yoga, vegetarianism, recycling, etc. Or how they think there is no Hell. Or how they think that the Bible was written by men and that they can just pick the verses they like. Or how they think that science is not worth studying to confirm the Bible. Or how they know nothing at all about how premarital sex and cohabitation decrease the stability of marriage. Or how they think that same-sex unions are no different than married couples when comparing stability, domestic violence, promiscuity, and so on. Or how they want to subsidize single motherhood by choice because fathers are not really important to children and can easily be replaced by taxpayer-funded welfare and taxpayer-funded IVF. Or how they think that single-payer payer health care is good, even though it means taxpayer-funded abortion, in practice. Or how they think that taxpayer-funded day care is good for children. Or how they think that public schools need to be funded with more family money, so that all children will be “equal”.

I could go on forever with examples of how woefully unprepared some single Christian women are for marriage. But I’m going to end by explaining what the underlying problem for all of these symptoms is, and then you can leave your comments.

Conclusion

Basically the underlying problem is this: when some Christian women say they want marriage, they actually don’t want marriage at all – not a marriage to a man who is going to take on the traditional male roles anyway. The reason why men work is so that they are the sole or primary breadwinners – so that they have the authority to make decisions and lead in the home. Men want to have children who are self-sufficient and morally upright, and who can have an influence for Christ and his Kingdom. And they know that although the compassion of their wives is useful in the early years of a child’s development, that moral responsibility and accountability are needed later on to change children into adults.

Men need to be providers SO THAT they can be respected as protectors, when they set out moral boundaries and push their children to know truth from lie, right from wrong, and practical from impractical. Men also need to be able to make arguments about theology and apologetics using evidence, and not to be overruled by emotions, intuitions, and even e-mails that are debunked on snopes.com (yes, one woman told me that Splenda was not safe – I sent her 100 peer-reviewed studies from the NCI web site and she responded with a CONSPIRACY E-MAIL that was debunked on snopes.com).

So the real problem is that some Christian women say they want marriage, but what they actually want is a Stepford husband who will perform none of the traditional roles of a man, which they find icky and mean. They want the money to be brought into the home and the wedding to be photographed and the babies to play with, but they don’t want the men to act in the traditional male role of protector, provider and moral/spiritual leader. It is very important for men to get this out there and in the clear during the courting process. And I also really recommend that men avoid sex before marriage, because sex makes you stop caring about male roles and serving God. If you want to serve God by executing a plan, then stay away from premarital sex. I have had to play defense against women trying to push me too far physically when I was not satisfied with them from a Christian point of view. Just say NO.

Please see this post for questions you can ask a woman to verify whether a woman is an authentic Christian. And the most important thing to do is to give her books to read and tasks to perform to see if she is willing to follow your lead. Science apologetics and fiscal conservativism are key. If the person is not talking about the Big Bang, the fine-tuning and biological information, you cannot even be sure she is a Christian – it could all just be emotions and youth. Some women I know just give the name “Christianity” to their feelings of happiness and goodness and pacifism and postmodernism and relativism and socialism and universalism. They do not actually KNOW that there is a Creator and Designer of the universe who raised Jesus from the dead independent of their feelings of happiness and goodness and pacifism and postmodernism and relativism and socialism and universalism. They just think that the world is a place where people feel good and only good things ever happen and they agree with everyone else’s religion so that more people will like them. The thing about Christian women that you need to fear most is this emotional happy-clappy intuition they have that the world is a happy, safe place and that people can do whatever they want and that God’s job, (and later government, as they drift into atheism), is to make everyone happy and prosperous. That is completely incompatible with a marriage designed to serve God.

Note: for those who think I am too critical of Christian women, Michele Bachmann has none of these flaws and I am backing her to be President. So there are Christian women who do know what they are doing, and I would like them to run for President and win. There is nothing in what I wrote that opposes smart, strong women being in control at the very top.

Related posts

98 thoughts on “Where are all the Christian women? Are Christian women ready for marriage?”

  1. Well, I have to admit, were I on a date with you and you threw all that at me, I’d run the other way! Based on what you wrote, you read like a control freak. It appears as if you expect your future wife to be subservient to you and your decisions, based solely on your gender and your interpretation of not only *your* role as a husband, but your potential wive’s role, too. I would hope your in-person discussions are considerably less judgemental!

    The first part you address, regarding children, would be set off all sorts of alarm bells for me. You have not only already decided on how many children you want your future wife to bear for you, but you have decided on the career paths of those future children, and even the focus of those careers. You also write, “I would rather use the fortune I have to make donations to individual events than to be married and have those resources wasted on ballet dancers and poets.” Wasted? Really?

    The problem I have with what you wrote (and perhaps it’s a matter of phrasing) is that you are making decisions about things you don’t really have much control over, and making judgements on things you are not in a position to judge; they are in God’s control. From your past writing, I’m pretty sure you and your future wife won’t be using birth control, which means you have no way of knowing how many children you will have. It may be four, as you’d like, it may be a dozen or it may be none. You won’t have much say in the matter.

    As for career paths, who are you to judge and determine how your future children will serve God through their work? If any future child of yours does go into ballet or writes poetry (or any other career you think is a “waste”), how are you to know it is not the path God wants for that child? A child of yours may indeed have God given gifts and talents that are nothing at all like what you want. It sounds like you would oppose any career that does not meet your approval, and would use your authority as husband and father to steer them away from paths you disagree with. To me, this would be an abuse of your authority, and counter to God’s will.

    As an aside, we home school our children and my oldest – now 18 – has chosen art for her career. She is also a capitalist and loathes the “arts community.” She has her goals set and a plan to reach them, and my husband and I are both quite pleased with her. She fully intends to be self-supporting financially based on her own hard work, and hard work it is! I have every confidence that she can accomplish her goals, and she certainly has the skills and talent to do it with.

    As for the rest or your observations, I actually don’t see a lot of what you write among Christian women I know. In fact, I see it more among atheist and secular humanist women I know. Especially the ignorance about the military, socialism and a complete lack of interesting in learning about things they have an emotional attatchment to. Don’t even get me started on economics!

    I think it has more to do with being products of our very liberal/leftist public education system. It’s a cultural indoctrination, from my own observations. I should admit I don’t actually know a lot of women well, and few of them are Christians. I’ve never got on well with my own gender. *L*

    Like

    1. I disagree with you about the fatalism and having no control over things. Do you remember that woman who was debating with Jim Wallace who said that you can’t really know about how facts will change so arguing is pointless? That’s the analog to this fatalism that many people are espousing in the comments.

      I think that people who believe things like this believe for a particular reason:
      – the world is completely unpredictable
      – facts can change at any minute
      – you can’t plan anything because anything can happen

      They believe those premises so they can conclude this:
      THEREFORE, I can do whatever makes me feel good and never be blamed for failure, and if things don’t work out, then it’s not my fault, just give me your money.

      That’s where this view comes from. I want to do what I want, and you pay for it because how could I know that my decisions would blow up in my face? I thought that smoking pot WOULD result in me becoming a medical doctor, but’s not my fault that I’m a bum. It could have happened to anyone.

      Read “The Knife Went In” out of Theodore Dalrymple’s book:
      http://www.city-journal.org/article01.php?aid=1371

      This is the view that is behind the therapeutic, moral relativism that has resulted in the welfare state. If we have no control over the future, then we are not responsible for anything we do.

      Like

      1. But do you deny that there *are* things in this world that are out of your control? Kunoichi gave a perfect example with the number of children. How do you intend to control that (assuming that you are not using birth control, of course — or even if you are, assuming that nothing unexpected happens, which sometimes it does.) Thinking that you can seems like the epitome of hubris.

        So too, illness, injury, disaster, etc., are all out of your control, and can strike anyone, no matter how prepared he or she may be. It is essential that a family have the malleability to “roll with the punches” — husband and wife “for better or worse”. The way you set out many of these restrictions begins to feel less like a well thought out plan, with high hopes and the ability to adjust as the unexpected comes your way, and more like a rigid structure that will fail if anything unexpected hits it. This will frighten any woman who wants to know that she can depend on you no matter what unexpected calamity may strike.

        Your plan is having the exact opposite effect of what you hope it does (display your ability to provide, protect and care for her and your family). It in fact undermines her trust in that very ability, because no where do you demonstrate how you will handle things that are outside of your control. And when pressed on that very question, you respond by turning the argument back on the questioner, claiming that in fact you are in total control of the plan and thinking that you aren’t is “fatalism”. Of course she knows that a human being can never be in *total* control (once again, weather, disease, death, etc.), so you have simply dodged the question, and by doing so, reinforced that you do not have the ability to adapt.

        Like

        1. No, no. Think of the quote I gave from Napoleon. When you make a plan to do something, you have to study the terrain, the opposing forces, and all kinds of things. The minute you set foot outside the castle, the plan is shot to heck. But all the work you did MAKING THE PLAN is what allows you to improvise intelligently and hit 80% success with a completely ad hoc plan. However, what you don’t want is someone who thinks that Christianity is fun and no planning is needed. You don’t want someone who thinks that dancing and singing is the correct response to Darwinism and abortion.

          Like

          1. I did see that response later on down. That’s a better response to the potential wife who is asking, “yes, but what will you do with the unexpected, which is sure to happen in some form or another,” than “I disagree with your fatalism”.

            One dodges a legitimate concern, the other begins a conversation about it. What you are seeing in all of these comments is a concern that you don’t seem aware that you will have to adapt your plan in one way or another. That the plan, at some time or in some way will inevitably be spoiled if not even “shot to heck”.

            People are simply reminding you of that fact, and asking for a more thoughtful response to demonstrate you adaptability for those circumstances. You might have the perfect way worked out to raise your four kids in exactly the fields you have planned. But, like others have mentioned, what if it turns out you two cannot conceive. You don’t want to give her the impression that then you’ll then quit on her because she failed to meet all the specifications you set up up front. Which is sort of the perception you give in this post.

            Like

          2. Oh, no no no, would not quit on her. I make long-term commitments to people, pets and possessions even when things are not perfect. In fact I have a reputation for making long term mentoring commitments to women who are in rough situations, e.g. – post-abortive women. The main thing is that there is a commitment to stick together and work towards the goals intelligently, As you can see, many people don’t even agree on the goals. I don’t really have to achieve specific outcomes. The list of careers is strictly to provide guidelines for discussion.

            Like

          3. That is very strange… in any case, I think I am wrong about who said it. I just searched and found this:

            It’s actually Moltke who said it:
            “No plan of operations extends with certainty beyond the first encounter with the enemy’s main strength” (or “no plan survives contact with the enemy”)

            And then Eisenhower:
            In preparing for battle, I have always found that plans are useless but planning is indispensable.

            That’s what I am aiming for.

            Like

      2. Actually, fatalism is that last thing I was implying, and I don’t know how you went in the direction you did in your response. At what point did I suggest that facts or arguing is pointless? How did you get from what I wrote to “I’ll just do what feels good, I’m not responsible, give me money.” In fact, I find your response complete confusing as, instead of responding to what I wrote, you imposed your own interpretation of what I wrote, then told me why that was wrong, when it was never what I said in the first place. That’s what my liberal/socialist friends do all the time.

        There are quite a number of assumptions you seem to be making, but I’ll try and keep it to the children/careers topic.

        You seem to be making assumptions that there only certain ways to minister and spread the word of God, and that your future children’s careers need to do that within those defined ways. “…answering Darwin and abortion” are not the only ways to minister. Yes, it’s good to have those answers, but one doesn’t need to stake their careers or those of their children on it.

        Let me give a personal example. Many years ago, after leaving the military, my husband went to college for new career training. While there, some of his fellow students started taking ninjitsu and encouraged him to join. After some hemming and hawing, he finally gave it a try. He turned out to be a natural at martial arts and after a few years was ranked high enough to begin teaching.

        His teacher was atheistic with Buddhist leanings, which were somewhat part of the training. My husband was one of several Christian students. Every now and then, discussions on faith would come up, and my husband and the other Christian students openly answered questions and discussed what they believed and why. He even lived with us for a while, and I was part of some religious conversations as well. It was never, ever, argumentative and apologetics was something we’d never even heard of at the time.

        After several years, the instructor moved on to another province, but we kept in touch. That’s how we found out that, thanks to the open and respectful conversations we’d had in the past, he was inspired to convert to Christianity and went on to become a Baptist minister.

        Now, just think… if my husband hadn’t taken pushed to get into a course after the registration deadline was passed, he wouldn’t have met these classmates, he wouldn’t have started training in martial arts, would never have met this instructor, and would never have had the conversations that lead to him converting to Christianity.

        None of this was planned, but fine threads (going back even further into his military career) lead us to that point. We can make all the plans and goal setting we want, as we should, but there is no way to predict how things will turn out, and sometimes God’s plans for us take paths we can’t see until after we’ve travelled them.

        Like

        1. Sorry that I misinterpreted what you said.

          Regarding what the challenges are, everyone has to decide for themselves what to work on. There are other people smarter than I am who will have better ideas of what is interesting. I do the best I can. I already try to guide my friends towards interesting problems, and they seem to have no problem with being led. I don’t see why my children should be any different. Obviously I am open to them finding better problems to solve that I haven’t even thought about, but they would have to be better problems and not basket-weaving problems.

          Like

    2. I can’t believe this was said: “You have not only already decided on how many children you want your future wife to bear for you….” My nine year old DAUGHTER knows how many children she wants to have. My MOM wanted me to have 12 kids. She also wanted me to be a doctor and my brother to be a lawyer. The mother of my children wanted 2. Every woman I have ever spoken with knows how many she would LIKE to have – and many of them know what sort of careers they would like for their children and what they want their children to avoid.

      If its OK for women to have these ideas, why not men?

      Like

      1. Yeah, and I think people realize that this is a goal, I’m not going to just do nothing at all if I have none or 10.

        What I think is interesting is that most of the people disagreeing with me, and lot of the comments from people who just attack me, are not suggesting any better goals or better ways to reach my goals. What the critical people are basically saying is 1) I feel that WK is mean, and 2) I want to do whatever I want to do and have God approve of that.

        I think everyone has to decide how best to be effective. If having no plan is most effective, then do that. I think having a plan is more effective. I am pretty sure that having no plan doesn’t work in any area of life, except maybe vacations. But I don’t think that the Christian life is a vacation. And I don’t think that God thinks that the Christian life is a vacation, either.

        Like

  2. WK,

    Couple of minor points/questions/concerns.

    What if God’s will for your children is different than your will? You may have a plan that is not inherently wrong, but it might just not be God’s plan.

    Further, I’m surprised that you see poetry or ballet as a waste. That seems overstated to me. Are these not legitimate vocations that God may gift a person for? Frankly, I think people are more likely to be drawn to God through the experience of beauty than apologetic argumentation. Maybe the beauty of poetry or dance is a more powerful apologetic than you imagine.

    Like

    1. Well, I think that you should try poetry and dance, then in areas that really matter to you, like at your job or when doing your taxes or when studying for tests. If dance and poetry are so effective, then they should be usable everywhere. Perhaps you could argue in court by performing dance and poetry in order to sway judges one way or another. Perhaps you have DNA evidence overturned if the dance and poetry was particularly good? I don’t see anyone using dance and poetry to persuade in Acts 2 or Acts 17 though, and to my knowledge, Jesus didn’t use dance or poetry either – he used evidence. I understand that dance and poetry are easier, but I want to use what works.

      Please also see the linked post on finding the will of God.

      Like

      1. “If dance and poetry are so effective, then you should be able to use them everywhere.”

        The efficacy of a thing isn’t determined by it’s usefulness in any possible context, it is determined by contexts appropriate to that thing. So I see no reason to be persuaded by this point. A court is a place for reason, logic and evidence, of course. Reason serves its purpose in appropriate contexts, and the beautiful and aesthetic serves its purpose in appropriate contexts. Do you deny the power of the beautiful? Do you think it is wrong for a human being to be moved by beauty?

        “To my knowledge, Jesus didn’t use dance or poetry either – he used evidence.”

        Parables? Extensive quotations of the psalms? It seems to me that Jesus used all manner of aesthetic devices quite effectively in his discipleship. Poetry and dance are also vehicles for Truth, and I think God made us in such a way that he intends for us to know the Truth, at times, through the experience of beauty. A person may be moved to belief in God through the argument from design, but I think a big piece of what moves that argument along will be the experience of the beauty of the creation and the aesthetic of God’s infinitely wise design. The aesthetic and the rational work together, and both are enriched as a result.

        “I understand that dance and poetry are easier, but I want to use what works.”

        I don’t think you understand dance or poetry very well if you think those things are easy. And if you don’t think dance and poetry “work”, then I don’t think you are very attentive to the human experience. They may not “work” in a courtroom, but a courtroom is just one context for the kingdom of God to advance. There are a lot of other contexts where the road of discipleship is well served by things like dance and poetry.

        And you never did answer my question. Do you really think that God will never call a Christian to be a poet or dancer? Do you think he never gives people those gifts?

        If God does gift people thus, then it follows that he expects them to use those gifts. Not everyone is called to be a lawyer or a politician.

        If God gifts someone with a certain capacity and calls them to use it, then whether lawyer or poet, to fail to fulfill either calling is a waste.

        WK, I think you tend to view humans as Vulcans – only governed by reason and logic. This is to me a biblically incomplete and stunted anthropology. I’m trying to argue here for a more balanced view.

        A woman may be attracted to you because of your thoughtful planning, but she will also be attracted to you if you give her experiences of beautiful things (flowers, poetry you have written, etc.). Contained in those experiences of beauty will be a truth – that you love and care for her. Don’t count out the power of beauty to lead people to Christ and to the Truth.

        Like

  3. I think there are valid points to this post, but there are two chief ways in which it concerns me:

    1) You claim that a person cannot be a Christian and harbour socialist views. This is not true. They can be. Christians get wrong ideas all the time and non-socialism isn’t a core tenet of the faith. I agree that socialism is inconsistent with Christianity and that those who hold the view need to be made aware of this and change their views. But it’s going too far to say that someone who holds the incorrect view on economic matters CANNOT be a Christian.

    2) According to your first point, C.S. Lewis should have been an economist instead of a novelist and English prof. I think there are legitimate concerns with jobs that may not be marketable unless one is superlatively talented. But I think you place too narrow a limit on the ways in which God can (and does) work to make an impact on the world.

    Like

  4. Interesting post, WK. I generally speaking agree with the gist of your arguments, and think that there are many lukewarm Christian women out there. I certainly believe that it is important for a Christian man to be very selective and discerning as he picks a mate, and not just base his decision on how the woman looks or how nicely she treats him at the time.

    I guess the only advice I can really give you is to pray for a wife. If you are truly seeking marriage and family, ask God to provide you with the woman that he has in mind for you. God knows things about you and your future wife that you don’t know about yourselves. He will provide you with the wife that would make the best match for you (and you the best match for her) as well as give you the best shot at raising a Godly family.

    In my particular situation, God has given me a very spiritually mature wife who is well suited for my personality. I have certain personality weaknesses (for example, discipline issues like showing up on time, etc) and she shores these areas up extremely well. And she has an entirely different set of personality weaknesses that I shore up extremely well. So we help each other grow as individuals and in our relationship with the Lord.

    Since we have married, I have gotten more much serious about tithing (which I always do now and didn’t always do before), church attendance, being careful to avoid certain types of movies, and being more diligent in my prayer life. I can give her partial credit for most of these improvements.

    She has gotten much more interested in apologetics and has learned many of the standard arguments for Christian theism. She has also been inspired by me to do things like run in long distance races and acquiring an advanced degree. She also supports me when I engage non-Christians with arguments for Christianity and wants me to pass on all of my knowledge to our children.

    She is also 100% conservative. She has never voted for any liberal politician and never will. She is not fooled by any of the emotional arguments that liberals usually make. She is 100% pro-life and pro-marriage and believes that the husband should be the leader of the family. She sometimes gets frustrated with me when I refuse to act in a more decisive manner.

    I’m not saying all of this to brag (well maybe I am just a little) but instead to say that a) there are Godly Christian women out there who would make great spouses, and b) I believe that God brought this particular woman into my life as a result of answered prayer.

    On the other hand, I can see why many women would be a little gunshy about you coming across as sort of a micro-manager by saying how many children you want to have and what they are all going to do when they grow up. Unless you feel like God has really laid this on your heart that this is the way things must be, I would advise rethinking this approach.

    The reason is that you never know what will happen in the future. You or your wife might not be able to have children for biological reasons. (Believe it or not, that is the case with my wife. The doctors told us she couldn’t have children after a couple of years went by with no children. We planned to adopt, and then just when the adoption was getting ready to happen she became pregnant anyway. She would have been just fine with adopting, but having a baby of our own has turned out to be a real blessing.)

    Or perhaps you will have children, but not the exact number you want. Perhaps you would have more or less. Perhaps God will give different gifts to your children than you want them to have. What if one of them wants to be become a medical missionary to a third world country? Who is to say that your plants for that child are better than what God has in mind? And ultimately your children would have free will to decide whether or not they even want to follow God.

    You have to have faith that God will take care of you whatever happens down the road. Entering into any relationship, including as a spouse or as a father, is always risky because we are all infected with the sin nature and hurt each other. But that is what God has done with humanity. He took a risk when He made humanity that they might rebel against Him, and sure enough, that is what happened.

    Like

    1. Yeah, I’d like to second what WGButler said.

      Just a quick scriptural thought – 1 Peter 3:7. Honoring the weaker vessel means considering their abilities and thoughts. What if your boat is strong enough to go through the treacherous waters while the weaker vessel can’t handle it? If you say “it’s my way or the highway” you’re likely to get that ship sunk. That’s not good leadership. Leadership means listening to the needs and desires of the other vessel and making plans from there. You plan the trip together.

      Marriage is a partnership (as 1 Peter 3:7 points out). If you expect to be the dictator (and it sounds an awful lot like that’s what you want to be), you’re not going to have a very good marriage. You both have to be willing to change and give things up.

      And as many others have pointed out, it’s just plain common sense – you can’t micro manage your entire life. Trying to demand that your kids do stuff like that is going to result in a lot of bitterness between all parties involved. Not only that, but it may be an insult to God, and the gifts he has chosen to give them.

      Like

      1. Well, I think there are two points of view here. One treats God as real and wants to sacrifice and be disciplined in order to serve him, and the other thinks that God is not really expecting us to do anything useful in this life, so we just sort of do whatever we want. I think we should do what works, not what feels good.

        I think it would be an enormous loss if I were to make my resources available to a wife whose plan for marriage and family is “do whatever makes me feel good”. Why would I give up my savings for that? What is the value proposition for God in the “do whatever makes me feel good and don’t think too hard” approach? Where has this worked to produce great scholars like William Lane Craig? Or to produce great politicians like Michele Bachmann?

        See, my concern is to make good decisions that are likely to achieve a good outcome. God isn’t going to hold me accountable for outcomes, but only for effectiveness, efficiency and intelligent decision-making. I don’t think that people who study for two weeks for a test are as likely to get the same grade as people who goof off for two weeks playing video games and watching TV. Do you disagree?

        Like

        1. “I think it would be an enormous loss if I were to make my resources available to a wife whose plan for marriage and family is “do whatever makes me feel good”

          I think we’re all seeing the extremes in your statement. Of course a wife whose plan is to ‘do whatever makes me feel good’ will not make a very good one but both extremes are equally bad. That one should not put happiness on a pedestal does not mean that one should consider happiness at all. If you choose a career path that makes you miserable just because it is useful, let’s just say you might not be as useful as you hope. Seriously, God filled the world with beautiful things so we can learn to be happy *in Him*. Happiness is not wrong in itself. It just should not be pursued wrongly.

          Like

  5. Out of curiosity, what will you do when your children are grown and they decide they don’t want to be cosmologists or economists? What if they’d rather be millwrights or software developers or housewives or, heaven forbid, dancers and poets?

    And don’t underestimate the impact that a Christian can have on the world through the arts. Two counterexamples: Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, and C. S. Lewis.

    Like

    1. Well, I agree with Napoleon, who wrote that even though no battle ever goes according to plan, that it is impossible to win a battle without a plan.

      I notice a strong strain of fatalism in the comments, which I take to be an attempt to pre-fail to serve God by abdicating the responsibility to lead. God is our Boss, and our job is to deliver the goods. We use the fatalism excuse on God, but we would never dream of replying to work-related requests with “Well, Boss, what will you do if I don’t complete this assignment on time?” It’s amazing to me how we are so desperate to rebel against God that we use excuses that would never work anywhere else in life. The problem is that Christians just don’t want to put the time in. We don’t want to make plans and we don’t want to sacrifice to achieve them. We want Christianity to be about whatever makes us feel good, instead of what works. We don’t want to serve, we want to be served. We don’t want to be in the army, we want to be on vacation. We don’t have any great sympathy with God, we want to treat him as if he were just an object to serve our desires.

      One more point. I have a record of turning women around. In fact, the women in my story all made 180-degree turns in their lives. For example, the one who didn’t think that college mattered went back to college. The one who liked single-payer health care and didn’t know any economics is in 4th year of an economics degree right now. The one who didn’t like the US military and guns is now a hawk on foreign policy. We have to stop treating women as if they are not willing to help. They just need love and a little persuasion. Give them attention, care and affection and something to read, and the next thing you know they will be President, like Michele Bachmann. I don’t think women get enough love and leadership from their fathers because their mothers are not choosing men with a record of leading. I have that record with the women I’ve known. I make women better. And that is exactly what women who want their children to achieve great things for God should be looking for.

      You don’t pre-plan for failure, you plan for victory. Victory! Aim for the stars, land on the mountain top. If you aim at nothing, you will surely achieve it.

      Like

      1. Your problem, WK, is that you assume to know too much of the mind of God. You assume that God would consider poetry, ballet, etc to be failure and would never work through those means just because they’re not your favourites. You forget who inspired the Psalms…

        Like

        1. Do you think that a poet is having as much of an impact for Christ as William Lane Craig is? Keep in mind that most poets study poetry for four years and then work in a field that is completely unrelated to poetry. E.g. – “do you want fries with that?” And then they turn to the government and vote for handouts and bailouts, expanding the size of a secular government that is anti-marriage and anti-life. Do you think that this poetry-fries career is equal to what Michele Bachmann does?

          My job is to use my brain to think about what God wants. And fortunately, he has left us a nice book to explain what he wants, so that I can read it and make plans to achieve some of those goals. There are plenty of ways to achieve those goals at a high level. Each Christian must pick one or more of those and then pursue them. The criteria is not choosing the one that makes me feel good, though. The criteria is choosing the one that will solve a problem. Michele Bachmann might feel very bad about being President because she never has time for baking, but frankly God won’t care about her feelings. He doesn’t want her baking as much as he wants her introducing common sense restrictions on abortion.

          Like

          1. Yeah, those blokes who wrote psalms in that “nice book”… Nah, not much impact. Those people who wrote powerful hymns 100s of years ago that we still sing today, that have moved countless people to feel and understand the beauty of God and His Gospel, even if they were illiterate and couldn’t read… Nah, not much impact.

            Like

          2. Please explain to me what impact that Psalms have today on atheism in the university and abortion law and same-sex marriage law. Tell me how Christian academics are using the Psalms and the hymns to counter Darwinism, and how Christian politicians use the Psalms and the hymns to argue against abortion and same-sex marriage on the floor of the legislatures of the world’s nations. Please explain how Psalms and hymns can be used in formal arguments and published in peer-reviewed journals. I’ll wait here.

            Like

          3. Wait a minute… Are you seriously saying you think the Psalms didn’t have much impact? You do know that’s heretical, right? You do know that shows huge disrespect for God’s Word, right?

            Psalm 139 is a very powerful psalm which actually speaks strongly on the issue of abortion. God has used it powerfully to change hearts and minds for millennia. No impact?

            So many psalms speak of God’s creation. You’re trying to tell me nobody has been impacted to see how “(t)he heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands”? (Psalm 19)

            Has it completely passed over you that William Lane Craig would be encouraged and motivated by such psalms?

            And what of Song of Songs as it gives us a picture of marital love, done God’s way. This has never inspired anyone working for the protection of marriage?

            Open your eyes, WK…

            Like

          4. Not to intrude in yours and Mary’s conversation, but the Psalms and convincing poetry could make an impact on emotional atheists. Not all atheists are atheists because of an intellectual wall between them and God, some have an emotional wall between them and God so the Psalms and/or apologetic poetry could be what wipes the scales from their eyes. Richard Morgan is an example of an atheist converted to Christianity through ways other than science and philosophy.

            Like

  6. Hi there! This post is certainly interesting. I also see so many people forming opinions based on one piece of emotionally-charged information. When we hear that U.S. Troops are using excessive force, it’s normal to think “how horrible!” But it is unfair and unwise to automatically believe it without finding more sources, or even understanding the first source. Most people stop at “how horrible” because it’s easy and humans are lazy.

    I think automatically forming opinions like the woman in the article did is lazy and shows a lack of discerning. And yes, lazy undiscerning people might not make the best spouses/parents.

    On the first point, though, I think I have to agree with other commentors. It is wonderful to have dreams and plans for your children. Every parent does it and it’s good to have a starting point. But it is important not to let your plans get in the way of God’s.

    Proverbs 22:6 says: “Train a child in the way he should go and when he is old he will not turn from it.” I heard a Focus on the Family lecture on this that emphasized that the verse did NOT say, ‘train a child in the way you think he should go.’ According to the lecture the verse applied to both faith and vocation. The same lecture said that part of parenting is noticing a child’s gifts and tendencies and encouraging those. If you fight the child on the ways that God made him, he will either rebel or become defeated.

    Like

    1. What is your method for understand what God’s plans are? My method is to read the Bible and then make plans to achieve some of the things that I think God wants according to the Bible. Please be explicit because I notice a lot of people who think they can use their feelings to sense “God’s will for their lives”. I want to be careful about priojecting my desires onto God and then calling my emotions and intuitions “God’s will for my life”. I would prefer to read the Bible, find out what God likes in general and then try to give it to him in the most effective way, using all the knowledge and skill I can muster. What is your alternative to that? You are disagreeing with my view of God’s general will, and saying that there is another will that is different. I want to know how you know that and what you think that mysterious other will that is not in the Bible is.

      Here’s a good post on this “will of God” problem:
      https://winteryknight.wordpress.com/2011/02/18/do-all-the-decisions-a-christian-makes-have-to-be-divinely-directed/

      I think you want to be careful about the will of God. There is no mysterious specific will of God that we sense by feelings. There is the Bible, and from the Bible we make our plans. And if we intend to achieve those plans, then we gather knowledge, study the world as it is and work hard to achieve the things that God really wants – because he’s said what he wants, and our job is to be effective at achieving that, whether it makes us feel good or not.

      Like

      1. I like the will of God post a lot. That’s a really logical and helpful process. I think that where I was finding a difference with you is in step 2, what is wise. I see what you are saying that work that yields a tangible policy change is obviously beneficial, whereas you can’t really quantify the impact of the arts. Perhaps I do have a lot of bias towards the arts and their importance to God because I was raised by a (highly successful, debt-free, able to support his family so mom could homeschool) classical musician. But I do see the impact of both the art and the impact that the Christian musician is able to have personally.

        As my husband and I are preparing for children, we’ve been seeking advice from church elders and pastors and most of what we’ve been hearing is that God gifts people differently and that they are most effective where they are gifted. To discern what they are gifted in, you have to pay attention to the individual kid and get to really know how God made them. They have said that exposing kids to and encouraging them in the vocation choices you hope they will make is good and may impact them, but sometimes God designed that kid differently. But if they follow their God-given talents, they will be effective. At least, this is the advice we have been given by people we find trustworthy.

        Like

        1. More and more I am understanding that you intend to “aim” for particular career fields for your children and that this will be accomplished through directed education. I think I had misunderstood your original post, so my apologies for that.

          I had never thought to plan a career for a child before and It’s something I talked with my husband about it last night (as we are currently collecting ideas for homeschooling). Thanks for giving us more to talk about.

          Like

          1. It’s my fault, I wasn’t clear enough. Yes, I am going to do something like show them debates and lectures over a wide range of topics, so that they will know all kinds of interesting problems. And not just in the fields I mentioned in that short example list, but in other areas too, like marriage and pro-life and parenting so they can see what research is being used as evidence by both sides.

            Basically, the idea is to show them the overall big picture so that when they are doing their arithmetic and programming and grammar, that they have an idea of why this is all important. So it’s not picking a career for a child, it’s trying to show them what careers are relevant to the overall Christian worldview. I would steer them away from even boring good-paying fields like dentist, for example. We want something that is fairly safe, pays well, and will allow them to make a difference, while not neglecting their family and children. It’s just important to show them WHY they have to read and WHY they have to count. Because these little things lead to big things later on.

            If my child wanted to be a dentist though, and had shown strength in organizing and sponsoring debates and conferences, as well as teaching Sunday school classes on biological issues, then I would be OK with that, because money is important for funding things, and becoming a dentist is going to give them good skills in many areas. I just want them to please God, and that means making them strong and capable in the use of evidence and money and influence. A very good book about this is Hugh Hewitt’s “In, But not Of”. Highly recommended.

            And you would be surprised how I would accomplish all this. It would be like how I work on my friends. You don’t do it by ordering them around then running away from them. You do it by spending time showing them things, doing things with them, and talking to them. You go with them and do it together. It’s not being bossy. I don’t boss my friends around. I buy them things, then I write to them and talk to them about those things. I can make even horrible socialist feminist women learn about interesting things. “Money, Greed and God” is a very complicated book, but I have given it to feminist, socialist liberal post-abortive women and gotten back the favorable review from them. You can lead people where you want without being bossy about it. I am good at it. I make Christian soldiers. I have even blogged about one person I helped to build up from college days. He is in the news now all the time. Whenever I get interested in a young lady, he writes me a reference letter. He’s a big celebrity now, so that counts for a lot. It shows what I would do as a Dad.

            Like

  7. The Scottish politician Andrew Fletcher once said, “Let me write the songs of a nation, I don’t care who writes its laws.” I would ask you to look at the Psalms – the longest book in the Bible is a poetic book. God himself provides a central place for poetry.

    Three points:
    1) Consider the fact that you have no power to finally direct the desire of your child. Doing so in an overbearing manner could actually leave them utilizing less than the potential God had for them.
    2) God’s plan for you in marriage may perhaps not include biological children. It may also perhaps include a child with special needs. If you are so rigid in what you expect of your progeny, I’m afraid you will be a frustrated and angry father.
    3) Where in the world are you looking for Christian women (based on points 2 and following)? Do you minister among parents of marriage-age women so that they take notice of you? It is an often ignored way, albeit an excellent and Biblical way.

    Like

    1. Well, I’m going to leave it to you to decide whether Andrew Fletcher has had as much of an impact for Christ as William Lane Craig. I wonder if Fletcher could pack university auditoriums full of thousands of atheists so that they would hear an intelligent, fact-based case for the Christian worldview? I wonder if Andrew Fletcher was the deciding vote on Supreme Court decisions regarding abortion and marriage policy?

      I’m going to quote Psalms to you since you seem to like Psalms. “Train up a child in the way he should go, and when he is old he will not depart from it”. That contradicts your view, doesn’t it?

      Like

      1. Andrew Fletcher’s statement is often quoted by Ravi Zacharias who makes the point that art (and media) have an enormous sway on culture. The lack of Christian artists then is perhaps one reason why our culture so languishes without Christian influence. And in quoting Andrew Fletcher, I’m only trying to underscore a point. The illustration would perhaps be to set as an example John Newton, author of Amazing Grace. I know you are a Bill Craig fan-boy, but I think John Newton held his own. His influence on William Wilbeforce and the end of slavery is recorded history.

        I also find it puzzling that you want your children in fields free of persecution. If you are working to impact for Christ and want to face no persecution, remember, Christ himself said he was persecuted and no student is above the master.

        Finally, err the quote you have shows up under Proverbs in my Bible. Prov 22:6. Gosh! Do I need to get a new Bible :) ?

        Like

  8. WK,

    As always, I enjoy reading your posts and the arguments that you make.

    I gave great respect for your convictions and your earnest desire to please God.

    I agree with many things that you say in your post, such as christian women claiming to be ready for marriage, but really wanting the Step-ford husband. I also think that women have difficulty in submitting to a husband and understanding the fact that the husband is the head of the house (this goes back to the garden of eden and God’s prophecy/punishment for both Adam and Eve).

    What I do wish to point out in your post with all sincerity, from a woman’s point of view is that I do not hear much in your post about what your future christian wife’s role will be in your new family, aside from giving birth to 4 children and submitting to you as both husband and leader. While I agree with you that as the father and husband, you have a duty to instruct your children in the Lord, your wife also has an important role in your children’s lives with regard to Godly instruction.

    Lastly, as a former single mother, take care not judge on appearances only, but by a person’s actions. I was on the brunt end of severe judgement from “christians” because I was a single mother, not by choice, but due to circumstances and because I choose in the end to do what was right. I gave myself over to God’s judgement just as David did in the Scriptures, because only God could truly and justly judge my actions and search my heart to understand my intentions. At least I knew that God would show mercy if I deserved it, which was more than I could say for other people.

    Thank you for letting me share my point of view.

    Like

    1. My wife’s role is to do all the studying, investigating of taxes, investments, education options, marriage research, parenting research, economics research, law research, politics, current events and so on. She will have to be aware of all the cultural trends and threats, and be constantly motivating the children to learn and questioning them about what they are hearing from others outside the home. She will be in charge of making sure that all their apologetics questions are answered, that they are enrolled in courses and forming the right character and skills to be responsible, that they are on the right path to go to school and get jobs. So she is the one who reads all the William Lane Craig, the Thomas Sowell, the Dr. Laura, the Michael Licona, the Jay Richards and the Stephen Meyer. My job is just to go to work and do stuff for money so that she can be a full-time researcher and be full-time making sure the children learn right and wrong and achieve academically. In other words, she has all the interesting work – the meaningful work. She will in control of the most important objective – the children. She will be making the next Stephen Harper or Maurice Vellacott or Pierre Poilevre.

      My job is to love her and to discuss her plans with her and make sure she is doing all the research needed to present me with the options for making decisions at a very high-level. Basically that means me rubber-stamping whatever her research indicates is the best option.

      Her: “I have evaluated homeschooling (points to stack of books) and public schools (points to stack of books) and private schools (points to stacks of books) and I think that we should go with option X because it is better on criteria A,B, and C and worse on criteria D and E. And I have a plan to mitigate D and E. I wrote about my findings and it was published in the local newspaper.”

      Me: “Duh. Me like X! And husband plan must be followed, Duh!”

      Her: “X it is, here’s your dinner”

      Me: “Me like pork chops!”

      Like

  9. Good points, as usual, though I disagree on the career thing. Pitting a Supreme Court justice vs. a ballet dancer is a false dichotomy. How about looking at it this way: People have gifts and talents and can serve the Lord many ways. You know, the Colossians 3:23 thing.

    Of course some jobs expose you to more responsibility or more people, but I reject reasoning that says Christians should only be in certain fields. Art is incredibly influential on culture. Do you really want all Christians to abandon the arts, or any other field?

    Like

      1. Seems like another false dichotomy. Do you really want to completely hand over literature, movies, TV, etc. to the pagans? Don’t all those fields make direct and indirect truth claims?

        Like

  10. I am quite confused about the way everyone has read in their own biases into this post. Is it not obvious that this is an honest post from the heart, of a clear precise plan and description of what Wintery Knight wants in a wife? Why on earth is it wrong for him to want any of this? I think there is some unspoken assumption that all women are focused on the arts, or no woman will ever guide a child into astrophysics or economics and that these plans are unrealistic. I beg to disagree and I think that Wintery Knight is correct when he says that it is harmful to leave children to an interpretation of the ‘Will of God.’ A Christian parents obligation to guide their children is a matter which is punishable by the millstone around the neck. Although he agrees that the primary educator would necessarily be the wife, one wouldn’t expect him to just idle by without offering advice or guidance. We’re talking about Wintery Knight! Anyone who has read these blogs regularly must be able to understand the wealth of knowledge and research that this man has acquired and would most obviously want to impart on his children in order to see them achieve great victories for God. Of course musicians want to raise musicians and dancers want to raise dancers, but this man wants to raise Christian apologists in the areas of study that he is interested in. With an equally dedicated wife at his side he will be a most useful tool for the kingdom of God in impacting the next generation. This is a blog, this is not a dinner-table conversation. This is a discussion on serious issues and it is obvious that he takes them quite seriously. The role of the woman and how he would respond to his wife on a daily basis isn’t addressed in the article because it isn’t the point of the article. This is a man with a ministry that needs and deserves a wife that would support him in his ministry and share his visions and goals. The proper wife, a wife like the one he is currently seeking would be a blessing and grace to his ministry and his life. Read the post for what it is. It is not derogatory it is not demeaning, it doesn’t discuss changing a person or controlling another life. It is a beautiful post about leadership and dedication to duty. May we all be so dedicated!

    Like

    1. Forgive me, but the title of WK post mentions Christian Women twice, I therefore assumed that they were the subject of his post, hence why I asked my question with regard to what he envisions as the role for his future wife. A logical conclusion on my part.

      Like

  11. If we had more ballet dancers, poets, authors, musicians and filmmakers, we would need fewer judges. The creative arts have an incredible power to shape individuals and nations.

    William Cowper was a great poet who shaped William Wilberforce. The Inklings have influenced countless people. And God saw fit to include a large amount of poetry in His work to shape us.

    The goal should not be to raise kids who grow up to be known and have power, the goal should be to discover how God has gifted them to use as He pleases in His kingdom–even if that means in the background. You need to discover which part of the body He created them to be–an ear, an eye, a foot, etc. God help you if you take God’s foot and make him act as an eye, causing him to miss out on the pleasure of using his God-given gifts to serve God as He intended.

    (And that’s coming from someone who doesn’t have any credit card debt.)

    Like

  12. And to avoid any misunderstandings, when I talk about the pleasure of serving God in the way He created us to serve, I’m not talking about comfort, or selfishness, or me-centeredness. I’m talking about the kind of flourishing life and joy that comes from serving God well–usually with accompanying sufferings, but always with the knowledge that you’re using the gifts God gave you for a purpose, and doing well because of His enabling grace–instead of failing at doing something you considered to be more important, even though you weren’t gifted to do it.

    When God gives us gifts, He gives us joy in using them, and He intends for us to use them. Paul has very strong words in 1 Corinthians for those who would want to turn the whole body into one member of that body, or those who would say that one member is less a part of the body, or that we don’t need that other part at all.

    The areas you mentioned are definitely some needs in this world, but there are many others that God is concerned about. For example, the Great Commission. You have no preacher or missionary in your list, and yet this goal of creating disciples of Christ is the main goal Christ actually commands of us.

    Like

    1. I think that my job is to do what I do with my friends, which is to expose them to lots of interesting problems and opponents, and then let them choose what to work on. I would do the same with my children. Explain all the interesting problems that Christians face that I am aware of and then work with them on one they find interesting and that is suited to their talents. However, I would strongly push them towards real problems and away from comfort, or selfishness, or me-centeredness, like you said.

      I think the most interesting about the responses to this post is how so many people resent the idea of having a plan and of having to put any work into a plan, or make any tough decisions to implement a plan. Is that the right attitude? Can we succeed at anything in life without taking it seriously? Is it good for us to not worry too much about teaching our children about difficult things? Do we have to do anything that we don’t want to do if we think that it’s too hard? Can we just do things that we like and that are easy?

      Since we are quoting Eisenhower today, here’s another Eisenhower quote:
      “We succeed only as we identify in life, or in war, or in anything else, a single overriding objective, and make all other considerations bend to that one objective.”

      Like

  13. When all is said and done, if one of your children decides to become a dancer, a novelist, or something else of which you disapprove, you will not be able to stop him/her; you will only be able to alienate him/her. Your children, like all other human beings, will have minds of their own and wills of their own. And they might not have any aptitude for, or interest in, the fields you have chosen for them. Will you then force them into the position of having either to pursue a career they hate just to gain your approval, or pursue the career they desire and in so doing sacrifice their relationship with you?

    I know whereof I speak. My father tried to choose my career for me, and the career he chose was one for which I had no aptitude, one in fact that I would have hated. He never forgave me for not following his advice, and eventually I had to sever the relationship, as I could no longer tolerate his criticism and negativity. My husband had the same experience with his father. For that reason, we have never tried to dictate to our kids the careers they should pursue. It’s one parenting decision that we have never, ever regretted.

    Like

    1. No I would just allocate funds according to the desire to please God. One children reach the age of 18, they don’t really have a right to funding. They can ask and then I’ll decide, just the same way I do today when other people ask.

      Like

      1. This makes a lot of sense and is really smart. It is difficult to make a living in a creative field, so cutting financial strings for creative field children will help kids build up the skills needed to succeed without expecting handouts or an easy life. It worked this way for all the creative people in my family and with no hard feelings. It also might make a person who doesn’t ‘really’ want to be a poet (and is just wanting a ‘softer’ career) think twice about it.

        It doesn’t mean the kid isn’t supported or valued. There are other ways to show support than money.

        Like

  14. 1. Why not support a child studying two subjects – a subject of interest to him or her and a subject which will provide a reasonable source of income? Say music and computer science. Double majoring is quite possible. It doesn’t take additional time either. I have plenty of friends who have majored in an arts subject as well as a science subject.

    Or even if one majors in something with poor economic prospects, one can correct it later. For example, someone could study art history but then attend law school.

    Or someone could study say English literature but then simultaneously make sure to take all the premed courses and later attend med school. One simply needs to take the prerequisite courses for admission to medical school but major in any other field.

    2. Likewise there are plenty of scholarships available for people in need or people who are academically accomplished. Being academically accomplished doesn’t necessarily mean being intelligent. I know people who aren’t necessarily intellectually gifted but who know how to keep a good paper trail of their accomplishments, present themselves well on paper and in person, connect with the right people to help them write helpful letters of recommendation, and thus obtain good scholarships. For example, the Mustard Seed Foundation has the Harvey Fellows Program which is a great aid for Christians.

    BTW, true, racial minorities get a lot of scholarships. But there are racial minorities who are often discriminated against as well (e.g. Asian-Americans). And plus plenty of white Americans do win scholarships. One needs to know where to look and how to look. But it takes a lot of effort which most people don’t want to do. If you’re willing to do the spadework, though, there are scholarships available.

    3. I should say cosmology and astrophysics aren’t exactly easy to get jobs in these days. A PhD is all but required. Then who knows how many postdoc fellowships and the like. And even still it’s quite difficult to obtain a job. Not to mention the salaries are quite low. Bang for buck, it’d be better to study computer science and then work for a research institute or observatory or the like.

    Astrophysics requires so much computer knowledge these days anyway. As for cosmology, it’s so theoretical and the mathemtics is so sophisticated and the job market (such as it is) so tight that I sometimes think one would have better luck trying to become a pro baseball player. At least you get a decent salary even though you only make it to the minors…

    4. Biochemistry and bioinformatics are quite different fields and require a different set of skills, although the knowledge can overlap. I think biochemistry is possible, but a PhD is required for the nice jobs. Otherwise you can end up working in a lab on the ground floor so to speak. Lab work pays well enough in most places, but if you want to advance you need a PhD. It’s good though because you can work in academia or go private (e.g. pharmaceuticals). However my take is if you’re going to get a PhD then it’d be better to go to med school since there are a lot more jobs, the pay is much better, the time it takes is at least the same if not shorter, and if research and publishing are what you want to do then having an MD after your name is just as good if not better than a PhD. For example, a PhD can do trials on animals, but an MD is the one who runs clinical trials. MDs (e.g. pathologists) can be in charge of labs too whereas PhDs would be scientists working alongside the physicians.

    Bioinformatics is more tied in with medical science and computer science. A bachelor’s degree is all that’s required at this stage for most jobs. This is an attractive field for many reasons. You’d be working in the health care sector predominantly. At least that’s where all the most financially lucrative jobs are. Anyway I could say a lot more about this one since I’m quite familiar with it. But I’ll stop now since all this is probably boring people.

    I should say though grad school and academia have its own worries and woes. For a humorous take, I recommend PhD Comics.

    Like

    1. I found your post really fascinating. I’m glad you posted.

      You’re points about 1 and 2 reminded me of something. I got into a prestigious college, and I entirely credit a huge portion of why I got in, to the dedication and commitment I took in elementary, middle and high school in acting. It was my passion and I excelled in it. Of course I also took all the honors courses, got straight A’s, good SAT scores and was ranked near the top of my class, but so did many of my friends (the one’s that were ranked above me in my class) and they didn’t get into one of those schools. I believe I got a “bump up” because of my dedication to theater.

      On the flip side, I wound up majoring in CS. But that’s because theater was a joy to me, and not a job. I love my job, and I’m good at it. And I still regularly participate in theater in my community.

      Like

      1. OK I’m totally OK with this. I would let my children do anything they wanted if they were the absolute best at it and invested enormous amounts of time in it. But I would push them to have a back up plan like CS. All my children would be programmers as a backup plan.

        Like

        1. Hm, I guess that’s cool if that’s what you want to do. And not that I’m a parent (far from it!) so what the heck do I know? But I wouldn’t necessarily limit myself to CS alone.

          Of course, I would think it’d depend at least in part on your child’s proclivities and aptitude.

          But more than that I’d think there are other ways into CS or related fields without majoring in CS. I have friends who work for or have worked big computer companies like Google and Microsoft, but who didn’t get there because they were CS majors. It’s quite possible to be a molecular cell biologist and work in computing, for example. In fact, for some things, it might be better to have a biological or chemical background and then to also learn how to program.

          Or one could major in another field like electrical engineering which can be closely tied to CS.

          Or one could minor in CS as a backup plan.

          Plus, if one wants to move into management, then one can do business and then computing.

          I even know of philosophy majors who ended up learning programming on their own and now are programmers. I think Mark Pilgrim over at Dive into Mark is an example.

          I believe Tim Challies studied history but now he’s a web designer.

          Anyway, this all just the tip of the iceberg. There’s so much out there.

          Like

        2. I should add I don’t think college or university is necessarily necessary for someone who wants to be a programmer or network admin or the like. If I recall, one of the best programmers is Jamie Zawinski. He doesn’t have a college degree (at least as far as I remember). I believe Peter Norvig has said the same about Zawinski. BTW, if you haven’t already read Norvig’s short article “How to be a programmer in 10 years” (I think it’s called) it’s well worth reading.

          Of course, give your goal is to have the most impact possible for Christ, if you define impact in terms of things like college degrees, graduate degrees, university reputation, and the like, then, well, that’s another story.

          Like

      2. That’s a nice testimony! Thanks for sharing.

        I agree and think a lot of the prestigious colleges and universities have so many competitive applicants with 4.0 (or higher!) GPAs in honors or AP classes, great SAT scores, great LORs, volunteer work, president of the NHS, president of this or that club, and so on and so forth, that it’s hard to differentiate between applicants. So anything unique can stand out. Although it has to be well-crafted into one of those “life” stories that liberals tend to like since it seems to me liberal-minded people tend to run these admissions committees at the prestigious universities.

        I studied abroad in the UK for a year and so am a little bit familiar with the UK system. Also I have dual citizenship. But another option is to go overseas in the UK and study at a prestigious university like Oxford or Cambridge or one of the University of London (if I recall, UCL is usually tops for London, but it depends on what field you wish to get into). It could arguably be a bit easier for an American citizen without EU citizenship to get into Oxford or Cambridge since we’d be paying a much higher tuition. Also if you’re intent on studying something like medicine or law, I believe Oxford and Cambridge allow direct entry from high school into medicine. Unlike here where we need a bachelor’s degree first.

        Or at least if one has the numbers and smarts to get into an Ivy League, one might instead consider a top notch public university (especially if one is in-state and paying in-state tuition) because the price tag is far better. For example, I have friends who are from California and got into Stanford University but elected to go to UC Berkeley for computer science and/or EECS because it’s a public university with a much better tuition. Although obviously Berkeley is extremely liberal. But there are a lot of evangelical Christian groups on campus. Or other public universities like the University of Michigan are very solid and reputable. But cold, at least for people used to warmer weather.

        Of course, there are plenty of fine conservative Christian universities or simply conservative universities. Although they might not have the reputation in the secular world, practically speaking, they arguably give a student a much fuller and deeper education than a lot of Ivy League universities and the like. People like Thomas Sowell and Victor Davis Hanson have written about this. I believe there’s also a book called Choosing the Right College that elaborates on all this.

        Of course, it’s quite possible for Christians to win scholarships at many of these places. In that case, it might be worth applying to a private university like Stanford over Berkeley because Stanford is still profitable unlike Berkeley which is at least in part dependent on the state for some of its finances. Private universities tend to be able to offer bigger scholarships if not necessarily better ones.

        Anyway, so much more could be said. But suffice it to say there are a lot of choices and possibilities for Christians.

        Like

  15. I’d like to add one other thing. Certain careers might not be ideal for some Christians.

    For example, if some Christians prioritize having children over career. It’s already hard enough to have children when one is relatively young (say mid-20s). But it only becomes more and more difficult as one gets older. Not impossible, just more difficult. And there are increasing health risks for mother and baby too. For instance, certain genetic disorders for the baby are more likely at older ages (e.g. Down syndrome; original article ).

    Let’s say someone wants to be an astrophysicist in order to best have a positive impact for the Lord and his kingdom. It’d be ideal to get a PhD. Say you have a daughter who wants to become an astrophysicist. After she graduates from high school at say the age of 18, then she’d have to apply to college or university. After she graduates from college or university at the age of 22, then she’d have to apply to graduate school.

    Say she doesn’t decide to do other things with her physics bachelor’s degree like work for a tech start-up or work for NASA/JPL for a year or two to see what it’s like working in the private sector or for a major government agency before heading off to grad school. She doesn’t dilly dally but goes straight for grad school.

    Say she gets in right away too. She doesn’t get rejected and has to try again next year. Also say she doesn’t have to do a masters first. Say she gets into a good, solid program for a PhD right after graduating from college. That’d be at least 4-6 years. Let’s call it 5 years. She’ll be 27 when she’s done with her PhD. (Although if she attends a UK university then it’s possible she can be done in 3 years since places like Cambridge and Oxford offer 3 year PhDs. But I think the financial aid and thus funding are different and far more costly for international or overseas students too. Less scholarship opportunities too unless one is an EU citizen.)

    Next she’d have to do a postdoc for at least a year or two. So at least 28-29 years old.

    Then she can start seeking a tenure track job. Given how difficult it is to obtain such a job in astrophysics, she could be adjuncting for a couple more years here and there until she hopefully finds a place that likes her and offers her a position.

    On top of her teaching duties, she’d also hopefully try and research and publish at this time. Plus she’d have to learn programming and related skills since so much of astrophysics research is bound with the computer. Also if she’s in astrophysics she’d most likely want time at an observatory of some sort (e.g. ground-based observatories with optical telescopes, radio observatories). But given that there are only a limited number of observatories around the world and a lot of grad students in astrophysics, she’d have to share her time with other grad students from other university astrophysics departments. It’s not like biochemistry where there are a lot of labs. That’s precisely what a friend I know has had to do.

    Anyway best case scenario I think we’re looking at around 30 years old before she can truly settle down somewhere and start raising a family somewhere.

    Of course, she could get married before she gets a job as a professor somewhere (assuming she gets a job somewhere). But then her husband would have to be willing to bear with all the difficulties during this time. I would think that’d be a pretty tough call for most guys. If she can marry a fellow astrophysicist, then he’d understand the difficulties. But it’d be tough on them financially as starving grad students.

    It’d be less tough on a guy, perhaps, because the biological clock isn’t ticking quite as quickly. Although sperm likewise deteriorates with age, the prostate gland enlarges, etc.

    On the other hand, I know people and friends who are doing this or similar. I was in a PhD program myself albeit for only one term before I dropped out because of similar reasons as well as personal ones.

    Anyway it’s a long, tough road. I’m not saying don’t do it. Rather I’m just saying think long and hard about it if you haven’t already. Although it’s a noble goal to want to serve the Lord in these sorts of careers, other career choices besides grad school might be better suited for guys and girls looking to serve the Lord in apologetics.

    Like

  16. I’d like to add one other thing. Certain careers might not be ideal for some Christians.

    For example, if some Christians prioritize having children over career. It’s already hard enough to have children when one is relatively young (say mid-20s). But it only becomes more and more difficult as one gets older. Not impossible, just more difficult. And there are increasing health risks for mother and baby too. For instance, certain genetic disorders for the baby are more likely at older ages (e.g. Down syndrome; original article here).

    Let’s say someone wants to be an astrophysicist in order to best have a positive impact for the Lord and his kingdom. It’d be ideal to get a PhD. Say you have a daughter who wants to become an astrophysicist. After she graduates from high school at say the age of 18, then she’d have to apply to college or university. After she graduates from college or university at the age of 22, then she’d have to apply to graduate school.

    Say she doesn’t decide to do other things with her physics bachelor’s degree like work for a tech start-up or work for NASA/JPL for a year or two to see what it’s like working in the private sector or for a major government agency before heading off to grad school. She doesn’t dilly dally but goes straight for grad school.

    Say she gets in right away too. She doesn’t get rejected and has to try again next year. Also say she doesn’t have to do a masters first. Say she gets into a good, solid program for a PhD right after graduating from college. That’d be at least 4-6 years. Let’s call it 5 years. She’ll be 27 when she’s done with her PhD. (Although if she attends a UK university then it’s possible she can be done in 3 years since places like Cambridge and Oxford offer 3 year PhDs. But I think the financial aid and thus funding are different and far more costly for international or overseas students too. Less scholarship opportunities too unless one is an EU citizen.)

    Next she’d have to do a postdoc for at least a year or two. So at least 28-29 years old.

    Then she can start seeking a tenure track job. Given how difficult it is to obtain such a job in astrophysics, she could be adjuncting for a couple more years here and there until she hopefully finds a place that likes her and offers her a position.

    On top of her teaching duties, she’d also hopefully try and research and publish at this time. Plus she’d have to learn programming and related skills since so much of astrophysics research is bound with the computer. Also if she’s in astrophysics she’d most likely want time at an observatory of some sort (e.g. ground-based observatories with optical telescopes, radio observatories). But given that there are only a limited number of observatories around the world and a lot of grad students in astrophysics, she’d have to share her time with other grad students from other university astrophysics departments. It’s not like biochemistry where there are a lot of labs. That’s precisely what a friend I know has had to do.

    Anyway best case scenario I think we’re looking at around 30 years old before she can truly settle down somewhere and start raising a family somewhere.

    Of course, she could get married before she gets a job as a professor somewhere (assuming she gets a job somewhere). But then her husband would have to be willing to bear with all the difficulties during this time. I would think that’d be a pretty tough call for most guys. If she can marry a fellow astrophysicist, then he’d understand the difficulties. But it’d be tough on them financially as starving grad students.

    It’d be less tough on a guy, perhaps, because the biological clock isn’t ticking quite as quickly. Although sperm likewise deteriorates with age, the prostate gland enlarges, etc.

    On the other hand, I know people and friends who are doing this or similar. I was in a PhD program myself albeit for only one term before I dropped out because of similar reasons as well as personal ones.

    Anyway it’s a long, tough road. I’m not saying don’t do it. Rather I’m just saying think long and hard about it if you haven’t already. Although it’s a noble goal to want to serve the Lord in these sorts of careers, other career choices besides grad school might be better suited for guys and girls looking to serve the Lord in apologetics.

    Like

  17. I notice some individuals asking why someone can’t be effective as a poet or a writer, or a dancer (i.e. Psalms, C.S. Lewis etc.). I think what everyone keeps missing is that the writers of Psalms were not just Psalm writers… the writers of Hymns were not just hymn writers, C.S. Lewis was not just a novelist.

    All these individuals that used poetry, writing, dance, etc. in the scripture and Christian life did not do these things ONLY. They were parts (minor parts) of the whole (major part). They used these other interests and skills (poetry, dancing, writing etc.) as supplementary helps to their higher goal of learning, leading, teaching and living the Biblical understanding and lifestyle. They were studied in many areas, they were knowledgeable of many things… not just poetry, dancing, or singing.

    We live in an overly specialized world, where everyone takes it easy and thinks that they are to do ONE thing. There was a time where people were knowledgeable and capable in many fields of knowledge so that they could use their minor gifts (singing, dancing, writing) to convey the knowledge and impact of their major gifts (teaching, knowledge, science, apologetic, evangelism, etc.).

    One can dance, write poetry and sing… but they should also make a concerted effort to make an impact in other, stronger ways by understanding, teaching, and defending the hope that is within them. To defend the faith you need to know it, as well as the challenges leveled against it, and have the skill to destroy the arguments leveled against it… that takes much more than dancing, singing, and poetry.

    Like

  18. Harriet Beecher Stowe wrote “Uncle Tom’s Cabin” and it sold 300,000 copies during it’s first year in print as a complete book.
    It soon sold over a million copies back in the day when the population of this country was only 30 million. When she went to visit the White House President Lincoln said to her, “So you are the little woman who started this great war,” referring, of course, to the Civil war.

    Harper Lee wrote, “To Kill a Mocking Bird” which had a huge influence onf the Civil Rights movement.

    And John Bunyun wrote, “The Pilgrim’s Progress” over 300 years ago. It is still impacting lives today.

    Stories are powerful and can change the course of history. They should not be dimissed as unimportant, noninfluential, or impotent. To do so is to be ignorant of the forces that truly move the populance.

    Like

    1. Hear hear! Bunyan’s work is the second most read book in the world, after the Bible. Talk about influential…

      Like

    2. The opposition to Wk’s plan is very strange. It seems as if you all are saying that having a plan is arrogant. I think that NOT having a plan is stupid.

      What is the alternative? Wk should let MTV, television shows, public schools, the government, or other kids influence his kids’s futures? I received the same treatment when I announced my decision to homeschool my kids. All I heard was, “But they won’t be socialized!”. I looked at the pubic school kids with infected noses from piercings gone bad and big hoops in their ears and said, “Good!”

      Christians should be encouraging Wk with his plans and doing something similar themselves. If many Christians take this passive approach to child-rearing, then I see why Christianity is as impotent as it is.

      Besides, how do any of you know that God did not arrange for Wk to have the zeal for his children to serve Him and therefore be the orchestrator of the plan?

      Like

  19. This is a mish mash of people spouting off irrationally comparing apples oranges and rice. Rabbi Lapin said, “One of the most destructive things we tell our children is to follow their passion.” We need children to put passion into what they need to do instead. The idea that Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn was a novelist is a complete distortion of reality. Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn was a mathematician and a soldier and his writings were all autobiographical and historical essays. Paul Bunyan spent most of his life behind bars for his writing and his occupation was that of a minister. Where is the logical sense that would suggest Wintery Knight wouldn’t raise a Paul Bunyan! The reason he calls himself Wintery Knight is because HE IS A PAUL BUNYAN!

    Like

    1. Paul Bunyan was a giant logger with a giant blue ox named Babe in American tall tails. :)
      John Bunyan wrote Pilgrim’s Progress.
      Not being snarky, just making sure people know the difference.

      Like

  20. Something you all need to keep in mind as well. The world is a very different place than when Bunyan, Stowe, and even Lewis wrote. Everything is far more specialized. The writing and entertainment world is a lot bigger and a lot more specialized. People writing today can’t get by with the writing style of back in the day. It takes much training and learning to sharpen your craft in writing, in art, in music.
    And it is in the Arts that much of the populance is moved.

    Mariangelina, I’m not telling Wintery that apologetics or the other things he lists aren’t important. They are. What I’m telling him is what I have always told him. The body of Christ has many members. The whole body is not an eye or a hand or a foot. It takes many members to make up the whole. We need apologetics and the things Wintery talks about, for sure. But we also need the things he turns his nose up at and calls unimportant.

    I’m trying to bring balance the “left-brain rules, right brain drools” mentality that he has. I’m also trying to bring balance to his, “Because I believe apologetics is the most important, then everyone else, including God, should think it’s the most important.” I’m saying apologetics is vitally important and sorely neglected by the church. But it is not THE most important. And neither is story telling THE most important.
    I’m not comparing apples to oranges, I’m cautioning him to becareful about some of the value judgements he makes.

    Like

    1. Mara,

      Allow me to suggest reading Rev. 2 & 3. From there one will notice the following:

      1. The rewards are conditional (To him who overcomes…)
      2. There is a fraction of Christians in the United Sates that are would really understand Christian discipleship ( ie Thou hast a few names in Sardis).
      3. God has His finger on specific points of sin in a saints life
      4. It takes guts to hang in while Christ in being formed in the saint (II Thes 1:5 & Gal 4:19)

      In conclusion, there are very few Saints/Disciples let alone those who are compatible for marriage.

      Here are some thoughts that hit me:

      There is NO WAY for a person to find happiness as a individual.
      Men and women are incomplete as individuals.

      Marriage / happiness doesn’t work with two independent individuals.

      When women choose careers/competitiveness/self will it will destroy Marriage/Children/Family/ Happiness.
      There is VAST difference between a partnership and a union.
      Union is when two people separate their individuality/superiority but not their identity.
      In other words, united = unity = one being

      Women are designed to be in union with a man.
      Both have to surrender their individuality to form a union

      If union can not be made- then impotence, self centeredness,regression are the consequences.

      In conclusion, marriages based on incompatible bond of partnership (multiple independence/money/careers) will be broken.
      Happiness will be destroyed.

      Marriages that is based on a compatible bond of union (equally dependent) will succeed.
      Happiness will be achieved.

      It takes guts and integrity to be a disciple of Christ
      It takes MORE guts and integrity to lay aside your own interest and build a family and raise children and requires Gods intervention.

      Like

      1. I don’t see what you have said has anything to do with what I’ve said.

        In fact, I’m pretty sure you don’t understand what I’m saying because your response is so “out there” I keep wondering why you addressed this comment to me.

        Like

        1. It is called being “like minded” or “equally yoked” when it comes to parenting among other things.

          Btw, thanks for the compliment:) It is along the same response to Christ, the apostle Paul, and others.

          Like

  21. ‘No matter what a woman says, if her solution to poverty is the secular government taxing your family and your employer, and reducing the family’s earnings and destabilizing the family’s revenue stream, then she is NOT A CHRISTIAN’

    hey WK, I like a lot of your stuff. Even if someone has incorrect political/economic/social views, will you help me understand how you can pronounce them unsaved, ‘no matter what’ they say?

    Like

  22. @Mara Thank you for the correction on Paul vs John Bunyan and FYI. I’ve read both. The point is that people aren’t born with only half a brain. The left brain needs to be developed in everyone. To be an effective christian apologist, you need to be able to analyze and process arguments. Wintery Knight has a background in computer science which means he was able to develop his analytical skills by way of his education. I highly doubt that it might be possible for homeschooling parents or otherwise to develop this thought process outside of steering their children toward ‘left brain’ courses. Oh and it’s Mariangela, not Mariangelina, I’m a big girl now. Maybe WK should’ve added latin to the list :)

    Like

    1. I’m a left brained female that grew up in the home of a very, very lefted brained father.
      Logic was an easy class for me in College. And I had no fear of calculus.
      I totally know and get the need for left brained thinkers.
      However, I also see the dangers of the balance tipping too far to the left.
      Actually I have a fondness for Wintery because his leftbrainedness reminds me of my father when my father was young. So I am fully aware, from watching my father, what too much left brain without balance from right brain can do. It is just as destructive as too much right brain.
      My father has mellowed, as most men do, with age. The connection between left brain and right brain develops in men as they age. This is why the Bible cautions that leaders need to be older not young pup still developing that connection between left and right brain and balance between them.
      I get that Wintery decrys the “too much right brain” thing going on in many sectors of society including the church. But the answer is not to scarlet letter the right brain, but rather to bring IT into balance with the left brain.
      When people talk of balance, I’m right there with them.
      When they start tipping the other way, I’m right there to remind them that what we want is balance.
      Proverbs 11:1 A false balance is an abomination to the Lord, but a just weight is His delight.

      Like

  23. WK, Mara is sharing her heart-felt understanding out of concern for you and you think it’s funny for Jared to mock her? I would have said that was beneath you. I was wrong.

    Like

    1. I wasn’t intending to be a jerk or not understanding of balance in one’s life. I think text should be used in context and with correct meaning. I was simply making a joke.

      Like

      1. Just seeing all of this.
        FYI…
        Here is the context of Proverbs 11:1. It is not just about commerce at all. Did you even bother to read the context for yourself?
        It covers a lot of things. A false balance in anything is an abomination to the Lord. Commerce is one of many places. It is not the only place. This is the trouble with rigid, left brained thinking. It misses the forest by stumbling over one tree.

        Proverbs 12:28 In the way of righteousness is life,
        And in its pathway there is no death.
        11:1 A false balance is an abomination to the LORD,
        But a just weight is His delight.
        2 When pride comes, then comes dishonor,
        But with the humble is wisdom.
        3 The integrity of the upright will guide them,
        But the crookedness of the treacherous will destroy them.

        Not one of the verses either before or after vs one imply that this thread of thought only has to do with commerce.

        And just for good measure, let me give you another place that is not just about commerce.

        Proverbs 16:10 A divine decision is in the lips of the king;
        His mouth should not err in judgment.
        11 A just balance and scales belong to the LORD;
        All the weights of the bag are His concern.
        12 It is an abomination for kings to commit wicked acts,
        For a throne is established on righteousness.

        This is one of the reason justice is sometimes depicted with scales. Get it through your head. It not just about commerce.
        God is concerned with all the weights in every bad. He’s concerned with the whole picture, not one small, minute area.

        Like

        1. Proverbs 11:1 deals with a businessman’s actions: does he do the right thing? Or does he do the wrong thing? As Matthew Henry comments on this proverb, “However men may make light of giving short weight or measure, and however common such crimes may be, they are an abomination to the Lord” we can see what is in view. You’re right, this verse goes along with 2 and 3. How does the righteous man and the wicked man act? Further, what is the end result of a righteous life and what is the end result of a wicked life?

          Personally, I wouldn’t want to use Proverbs 11:1 as a reference to balance of left brain and right brain thinking and I don’t think that is the intent of the proverb. I think the intent is to act righteously in one’s business. Like Henry commented, no matter what the norm is in business, if it’s wrong, then don’t run your business that way. Charge people fairly. Don’t cheat them.

          Proverbs 16:10,11 and 12, you’re right, are not proverbs about commerce. In 11, we understand that justice, ultimately, belongs to God. He will do justly with what is done on earth. In 12, we understand that a king/president/etc. who uses his power and authority correctly (that is, not wickedly) will have a just reign as King.

          I understand scales are not always in reference to commerce, but Proverbs 11:1 is a reference to business.

          I found this other short commentary: “During these Old Testament times many merchants used two sets of stone weights when weighing merchandise. To increase their profits lighter stones were placed on the scales when selling and heavier ones were used when buying. It is this type of dishonesty in business that is condemned.”

          And then pride and honesty are dealt with the second and third proverbs of 11.

          Again, I didn’t mean to insult you. I apologize.

          Like

          1. Well thank you for the apology. I guess we will have to agree to disagree.

            You should not have used the term, “In context” because that means, with what other scripture it is placed with.

            Matthew Henry is an authority on a lot of things. But I disagree with him as well for the simple fact that balances and scales are used through out scripture concerning so many things, far and beyond commerce. And cutting off Proverbs 11:1 from all other scripture, immediate or distant, is NOT keeping it in context. It is doing the opposite. It is cutting it off from all other scripture to stand alone. This is a rather shallow and disjointed way to read the Bible.

            The Bible has many layers.
            Proverbs 11:1’s first layer would refer to commerce. But that is only the first layer. It is shortsighted to view the first layer as the only layer. Not when imbalance in so many other places is causing so much harm.

            Like

          2. Regarding left and right brain, I would say (without needing to get into this debate ;-P) that since God gave us two halves to our brains, we ought to use both of them! You can call it an argument from design. ;-)

            Like

  24. I have found this to be true and also aligns with the scriptures.

    THE LONELINESS OF THE CHRISTIAN

    BY: A. W. TOZER

    _____________

    The loneliness of the Christian results from his walk with God in an ungodly world, a walk that must often take him away from the fellowship of good Christians as well as from that of the unregenerate world.

    His God-given instincts cry out for companionship with others of his kind, others who can understand his longings, his aspirations, his absorptions in the love of Christ; and because with his circle of friends there are few who share his inner experiences, he’s forced to walk alone.

    The unsatisfied longings of the prophets for human understanding caused them to cry out in their complaint, and even our Lord himself suffered in the same way.

    The man (or woman) who has passed on into the divine Presence in actual inner experience will not find many who understand him. He finds few who care to talk about that which is the supreme object of his interest, so he is often silent and preoccupied in the midst of noisy religious shoptalk.

    For this he earns the reputation of being dull and over-serious, so he is avoided, and the gulf between him and society widens. He searches for the friends upon whose garments he can detect the smell of myrrh and aloes and cassia out of the ivory palaces, and finding few or none, he, like Mary of old, keeps these things in his heart.

    It is this very loneliness that throws him back upon God. His inability to find human companionship drives him to seek in God what he can find nowhere else.

    Like

    1. Thanks, I really like this. I normally don’t like Tozer at all, because he is not a rigorous apologist, but this is comforting to me. However, since I started writing this blog, I have met many wonderful people through comments, and some of those are very understanding and supportive. So, I’m no longer in this position – but I remember what it was like. Semper Fidelis.

      Like

  25. May I suggest the following. He and others like myself are looking for the real deal Christian disciple. What you have labeled as “perfection” is the typical disciple.

    The question is, what is a disciple; for it is the disciple who is the genuine Christian.

    The Lord Jesus described what He means by a disciple.

    And when he had called the people unto him with his disciples also, he said unto them, Whosoever will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. (Mark 8:34)

    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 14:26,27)

    How many “Christians” of our day have forsaken all in order to follow the Lord? Not very many, it appears. How many are following the Master, bearing their personal cross? Not very many!

    The Christian churches of today are filled with church-attenders. They call themselves “Christians” but they are not. They are not disciples of the Lord Jesus—not at all! They simply are not genuine Christians

    For any man/woman to move forward into a relationship that is not “equally yoked” to a real disciple is to invite disaster.

    Like

  26. I was reflecting over my life and the success and failures of my life.
    I regret to say the biggest mistake of my life was to get married to satisfy a glandular urge.
    While it was the noble thing to do and in line with the scriptures. Paul wrote to the Corinthians in 1 Corinthians
    “But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion”

    I would strongly strongly suggest to learn to get use “the burn” and learn how to deal with it. It won’t last forever, and God is more than willing and able through the Holy Spirit to overcome it. See what Paul said a little bit later in his letter – 1 Corinthians 10:13

    Really consider what I am suggesting- it is the 3rd option that will really bring about the best outcome. One will be a stronger person, better spouse, and have a better understanding of a extremely important decision.

    Marriage is much much more than what is portrayed in America and the decrepit Christian culture of the West.

    Thank you WK for your tremendous insight and blog- it is greatly greatly appreciated.

    Verum Veneratio Integritas

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s