Tag Archives: Attitudes

•

Come on, ladies...You all know how we can get.  All of us...we're sinners.  There's a reason for the saying, "If mama ain't happy, ain't nobody happy."

A very wise, very wonderful pastor's wife - Linda - once told a group of us, "a woman is the barometer of the home."  If we are content, the home is content.  If we are not content, the house will most likely be discontented.  What a privilege and responsibility - the way that we are (good or not) has an effect on everybody around us...such is the way of human beings.

We are affected by those around us.  If we have a child who is whining, it affects us.  If we have a spouse who refuses to take out the garbage, that affects us.  If we (women) are selfish and controlling...that affects those around us.  If you don't get like that sometimes...you are a perfect saint and I most likely don't want to hang out with you because you would make me look bad...  😉

Now...those of us who are married...our "one-flesh" partners - our heads - can be especially effected by our attitudes (good or bad).  If we are selfish and controlling, he can be angry and cranky...sometimes downright abusive.  Or he can shut down and become a couch potato.  Both are sin...but just as we are sinners...so are men.

It's the way of this lost and fallen world.  We are sinners...and we are affected by those around us, just as we affect those around us.   It's reciprocal - human beings react to each other.  Sometimes good, sometimes bad.

The way of the Spirit is the right way.  We submit to our husbands as the church submits to Christ...we follow his good leading (but not into sin).  He loves us as Christ loves the church.  We don't interact identically, but reciprocally.  We each have our jobs and when we do them to the best of our ability, the entire home runs smoothly.

•

CASE ONE:
Tim Challies is reviewing "The Radical Reformission". I really liked the book and Mark Driscoll has a lot of good things to say. One of my biggest problems (there are two) is his use of denigrating language toward groups of people. Not theology - people.

In the book (copyright 2004) Driscoll gives his list of people that "I used to not like". In that list, he admits that he was prejudiced against (among others) most of the deep south and that he has had to repent of sinful attitudes against these groups of people.

Since that time, I've listened to a lot of Driscoll's sermons (available on line). They are good sermons, yet (for me at least) they were lowered a notch by the use of certain terms that refer to a general group of people in a negative way.

My flesh says that it's fun to make fun of people - God says not.

The bottom line is - it's easy to get sucked into things that make us look good at the expense of others. If I wouldn't want my kids to use (insert term here) in a negative way, I shouldn't use it - and if I shouldn't use it - well, I want to be able to point to this man as a good example - even as a good example of how to respect other groups of people.

Words mean things... the words you use and how you use them...

AND ON A RELATED TOPIC:

A couple of posts ago I made a statement about a "senseless and meaningless debate". Yes - those words mean something and I meant them then and I mean them now. Take the situation - two women who are convinced that their position is correct - and one has stated so publically; for the record, I believe that my many hours, weeks, month and even years of study of this issue have led me to a "verdict" that no person will sway me from. God - yes. He's done it before and I'm sure that on other issues, He'll do it again.

Back to my "senseless and meaningless debate" (or we could call them "strife and disputes") statement.

Two people convinced that they are right, going over the same material for a third time, without much real hope of either side changing their mind. If this is not a fine example of "senseless", I could find a better one, but...(Remember the "definition" of insanity? Doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.)

I stand by that statement - the debate is (for these two people, at this time) senseless. Are either of the debaters senseless? I never said that. Was it implied? I didn't mean that - I am weary of this debate. Did I name the person that wished for me to address the points? Absolutely!

But - words do mean things - what I did say (although my intent was to express my weariness at covering the same ground again) is that Elena has no desire to listen, only to argue. Elena is convinced in her own mind that she is right. So am I. I might as well be cutting and pasting the same thing over and over - as might she. If Elena made that statement about me on her blog, it would be a true statement. That is what makes the debate senseless.

What this does mean is that I should be more careful of how my words are used. Even though I stand convinced that my words were true - my wording left an impression of disrespect. For that I am sorry.