Doug Phillips- Vision Forum- opinions

[TravelingChris]

SO for the last five years we have been getting VF catalogs. I am not sure why since I don't think we ever ordered anything but I could be wrong. My dh may have ordered or bought at a home school convention some collection of early American original documents but I am not really sure it was from them. In the thread on Doug Wilson, there were a lot of mentions about Doug Phillips and his strange or disturbing views. I know nothing of these- all I know about them is they sell dolls and I think have some American themed books or story collections they sell. Anyone willing to inform me?

[Mommy22alyns]

:lurk5: This is gonna be good.

[justamouse]

Here

 

http://www.thatmom.com/?s=Doug+Phillips+Vision+Forum&search=Search

[kiana]

One of the things that bugs me the most about Doug Phillips is his stance on ectopic pregnancies.

 

http://www.visionforumministries.org/issues/life/a_declaration_of_life.aspx

 

Quoting from the site:

 

"...those theories which justify the killing of the unborn child on the basis of the circumstances of conception (as in the case of rape and incest), or even the life of the mother (ectopic pregnancies) are completely false because they are based on unbiblical and humanistic ethics, unbiblical definitions of “self defense†theory, and a rejection of the personhood of the child..."

 

This bothers me immensely, as a tubally implanted ectopic pregnancy has absolutely no chance of life. You are only postponing the inevitable death of the child for a few extra weeks and then quite possibly adding the life of the mother into it.

[mommaduck]

One of the things that bugs me the most about Doug Phillips is his stance on ectopic pregnancies.

 

http://www.visionforumministries.org/issues/life/a_declaration_of_life.aspx

 

Quoting from the site:

 

"...those theories which justify the killing of the unborn child on the basis of the circumstances of conception (as in the case of rape and incest), or even the life of the mother (ectopic pregnancies) are completely false because they are based on unbiblical and humanistic ethics, unbiblical definitions of “self defense†theory, and a rejection of the personhood of the child..."

 

This bothers me immensely, as a tubally implanted ectopic pregnancy has absolutely no chance of life. You are only postponing the inevitable death of the child for a few extra weeks and then quite possibly adding the life of the mother into it.

 

And I'd bet he'd sing another tune, behind closed doors, if it were his wife. Many of these types of men say one thing and practice another.

[sunflowerlady]

Well, I get the Vision Forum catalogs and browse their booth at conventions. I have listened to and learned from several of their Cd's. As far as their products I enjoy some things.

 

I enjoy the recordings or books that encourage me in my role as woman, wife , mother homemaker and homeschooler.

 

I ignore the teachings or products that promote quiverful type of teachings. We are a small family with an only child, so they just don't apply to us.

[SonshineLearner]

One of the things that bugs me the most about Doug Phillips is his stance on ectopic pregnancies.

 

http://www.visionforumministries.org/issues/life/a_declaration_of_life.aspx

 

Quoting from the site:

 

"...those theories which justify the killing of the unborn child on the basis of the circumstances of conception (as in the case of rape and incest), or even the life of the mother (ectopic pregnancies) are completely false because they are based on unbiblical and humanistic ethics, unbiblical definitions of “self defense†theory, and a rejection of the personhood of the child..."

 

This bothers me immensely, as a tubally implanted ectopic pregnancy has absolutely no chance of life. You are only postponing the inevitable death of the child for a few extra weeks and then quite possibly adding the life of the mother into it.

 

Again, I hope this is somehow wrong, but am too sad to look. I met him, years ago. And his wife was someone we chatted with on more than one occasion. (before they married) I totally believe that ending a pregnancy through removing a baby before it's viable is wrong. BUT, a child who is in a tube will not grow to full term, regardless of if the mother was willing to die. And, a mother who has 8 other children, who died for naught would not be making a wise choice, anyway! Sometimes men need to insert their foot BEFORE they speak, :glare:

[eloquacious]

So in a bioethics discussion I heard recently that a woman elected to carry her ectopic pregnancy to term, if possible, and succeeded. I don't know here name or the circumstances, but I'll look into it. It made me a little uneasy. Does one exception prove the rule or force me to ask more probing questions? My mother had four ectopic pregnancies and I was always warned that they were likely for me, too. I can't think of a more heart wrenching situation and I pray that it never happens.

 

I' know if it did, I'd go the medically prescribed route, but that one case would always leave me wondering...what if?

[eloquacious]

Anywho, back to the topic... I always liked some of the toys advertised, so I was wondering the same thing. That being said, I played with He-Man and G.I. Joes as a girl, rather than Barbies. ;)

[kiana]

So in a bioethics discussion I heard recently that a woman elected to carry her ectopic pregnancy to term, if possible, and succeeded. I don't know here name or the circumstances, but I'll look into it. It made me a little uneasy. Does one exception prove the rule or force me to ask more probing questions? My mother had four ectopic pregnancies and I was always warned that they were likely for me, too. I can't think of a more heart wrenching situation and I pray that it never happens.

 

I' know if it did, I'd go the medically prescribed route, but that one case would always leave me wondering...what if?

 

It depends on where the fetus attaches.

 

Occasionally, if the fetus has attached somewhere in the abdomen, the pregnancy can be successful.

 

The survival rate of babies is not great (according to Wikipedia on abdominal pregnancies, the mortality rate could be 40-95%, which is an admittedly huge range), and birth defects are frequent because of not having the amniotic fluid buffer.

[Mosaicmind]

We get the VF catalog also and have for many years. My boys love all the "boy" toys and I have ordered many of them to play with. As with alot of people/curriculum/authors I agree with some of what they print and disagree with other stuff. Most of what they sell is from other authors and so i don't see the need to not order from them because of his wrong views on pertinent issues. I could do that with most if not all curriculum companies and authors.

[dangermom]

His thing about wifely and daughterly submission is what gets me most. He says that an unmarried daughter is always under the authority of her father and must submit to him (and he recommends some kinda creepy exercises for practice) and then if the father dies, she is subject to her brothers--no matter how young they are or how old she is.

 

Also, no college for girls. Also also, a lot more extreme submission stuff. And the ectopic thing. And the "200-year plan."

 

After I realized what he's promoting, I could no longer think about purchasing anything from VF. Some of their toys are cute and all, but I can't support that kind of philosophy at all.

[Ellie]

You could try working your way through this.

[justamouse]

His thing about wifely and daughterly submission is what gets me most. He says that an unmarried daughter is always under the authority of her father and must submit to him (and he recommends some kinda creepy exercises for practice) and then if the father dies, she is subject to her brothers--no matter how young they are or how old she is.

 

Also, no college for girls. Also also, a lot more extreme submission stuff. And the ectopic thing. And the "200-year plan."

 

After I realized what he's promoting, I could no longer think about purchasing anything from VF. Some of their toys are cute and all, but I can't support that kind of philosophy at all.

 

that's the way I felt. After getting the catalog and even Ordering Omnibus, I never could shake the feeling that something just wasn't quite right with what they were promoting. Then I bought SLEEPING BEAUTY AND THE FIVE QUESTIONS

 

In Sleeping Beauty and the Five Questions, Doug Phillips challenges fathers on the importance of guarding their daughters’ hearts at all costs, how to shield them from the pressures of a peer-oriented society and inappropriate romantic relationships, and how to prepare them as a bride — a godly young woman of purity for the young man of their dreams whom God is preparing. Approx. 1 hr. on Compact Disc.

 

 

The bad part is how to 'prepare them' as a bride. It was just what dangermom said.

[leeannpal]

Well, I now know I will certainly avoid anything by this guy.

 

My first pregnancy was ectopic. Because I had such strong views myself on ending my child's life even though I knew in my heart that he/she couldn't possibly survive, I waited until it was almost too late for me. My tube burst, and I had emergency surgery to save my life. I also lost my right ovary and fallopian tube.

 

This man has no idea what harm he might be doing to women who are faced with the heartbreaking news that their pregnancy is ectopic. At best, his words hurt the women who are trying to save their own lives, and, at worst, he may have contributed to the death of women who, because of jerks like this guy, feel so guilty about "killing" their baby.

[Word Nerd]

Should Christians Support a Woman for the Office of Civil Magistrate? reveals much about Vision Forum's views.

 

"To assert that God’s Word permits a woman to hold civil office and that Christians have the liberty to support a woman for the position of civil magistrate means that one has to deny the biblical teaching on the headship of man, reject the qualifications for civil rulers set down in the law of God, ignore the biblical picture of the virtuous woman, and close his or her ears to the biblical lament of women ruling over men."

 

The Tenets of Biblical Patriarchy is a must-read if you want to know where Vision Forum stands.

 

"While unmarried women may have more flexibility in applying the principle that women were created for a domestic calling, it is not the ordinary and fitting role of women to work alongside men as their functional equals in public spheres of dominion (industry, commerce, civil government, the military, etc.)."

Edited August 2, 2011 by WordGirl

[Retired]

I am a Christian and very pro life but seriously this guy does not have a medical degree and shouldn't advice regarding anything. I have not experienced a tubal pregnancy personally but as a medical professional I have seen many life/death ER episode with ectopic pregnancies.

 

This guy needs to keep his backward beliefs to himself:smash:

 

I use to get their catalog and the stuff looks neat when my sons were young but I never ordered from the company.

[Daisy]

I like many of Vision Forum's resources. I don't always agree with every single thing but I think most of what they offer is balanced. We love the Jonathon Park series and the science and history resources especially. I don't agree with the idea that a daughter is under her father's authority until she marries. I like to hope she is under her father's protection, but willingly.

 

Listening to Doug Phillips, you really get an understanding that his heart is not to lord over his wife and children but rather to cherish them. I don't think you can doubt the guy's motives after listening to his audios. Just my two cents. I also think that the patriarchal movement has, at times, gone to far, but that there is a need for men to step up and be involved fathers. And I'm glad men like Doug Phillips are showing fathers how to pass on their values to their kids.

 

I imagine that is going to be a slightly unpopular response here. LOL. Oh well. :001_smile:

[Kathleen in VA]

Doug and Beall are friends of mine. They went to my church about 20 years ago. My pastor was a teacher of Doug's at Fairfax Christian School when Doug was in high school. I must say that both Doug and Beall are two of the sweetest, dearest people I've ever known.

 

That said, I will have to also say that Doug has strayed from what he learned at my church. My pastor occasionally asks us to pray for him because he is worried about the direction Doug has taken. I've noticed that much of what is on Doug's website (his blog, articles - stuff he writes himself) rarely mentions Jesus Christ. There is too much emphasis on changing culture, influencing culture, etc. He focuses on this present world to a fault, imo.

 

As a conservative Christian, I am surprised at this. My belief is that if Christians put their eyes on Christ, follow Him, and obey Him, culture will change as a matter of course - one does not need to force the issue. Culture is downstream from religion - if hearts have been changed by the Gospel of Jesus Christ that will be reflected in the culture. It doesn't work the other way - you can't make the culture Christian. It must be an outflow of changed hearts and minds and only God can do that. He doesn't do it through Christian movies or Father/Daughter retreats or honoring WWII vets or trips to the Amazon - He does it through the preaching of His Word which exalts the Lord Jesus Christ.

 

Doug means well, I'm sure of that. He really is a sweet person. But I'm sad to say that I think he has gotten off track theologically (not sure if that's the correct term) - he seems to have gotten caught up in the notion that Christians should focus on "taking dominion" in an effort to "take back the culture." I don't see that as a Biblical viewpoint.

 

I have worked my way through the link that Ellie provided. Since I know Doug personally, this lady's accusations were very important to me. I stumbled upon this whole mess several years ago and earnestly sought the truth. I read as much as I could find from both sides with as open a mind as I could. If what she says is true, then Doug is absolutely not the same person I knew all those years ago. The thing is - this seems to be a case of he said/she said - how can one really know if all the facts are out there or if one or the other or both parties has/have been mischaracterized. Since I know Doug and he's never acted in any other than a sweet, kind, gentlemanly manner (and I know Beall and she is as sweet as they come), I have to take this lady's attacks as perhaps sour grapes. Maybe I am wrong - but I just cannot see Doug or Beall in any other way.

Edited August 2, 2011 by Kathleen in VA

[SonshineLearner]

 

"While unmarried women may have more flexibility in applying the principle that women were created for a domestic calling, it is not the ordinary and fitting role of women to work alongside men as their functional equals in public spheres of dominion (industry, commerce, civil government, the military, etc.)."

 

Well, I kinda think that women in military is an issue. Perhaps if we had all male and all female units. (yes, I know that there are women in the military, just talking about what I think is best) But, that's not because of "working alongside men". I'd be one to vote for a Great Woman for President. And, I'd be fine with a woman being my husband's boss. I think that women and men working in business brings the best of 2 worlds together. Not just one perspective....

 

I understand what he's thinking, and how he wants his family to work. That's fine; I am sure that was an understanding they had before they were married. BUT!! That's not how I want it to be for my family, or my daughters... or actually... for my future daughter in law.

 

I believe that having a family, and a woman being a mommy including homeschooling... is a wonderful opportunity for women. But, mandating that women can't work alongside men is crazy! :glare:

[JenniferB]

I'll take a stab at this. A funny thing is, Doug Phillips and Vision Forum came up in the bathroom this morning between my husband and I as we were getting ready. I stopped going to homeschool conventions where he was speaking because of the pressure he puts on families, especially men, through the wife, via the convention key note speeches, to perform his specified version of family life. To sum up what I hear him saying is that a father should provide for his very large family on a single income which he should gain from his own entrepreneurial endeavors. He should lead the family in worship and devotions. He should not watch the big black box of death, nor should he allow one in the house, unless it is there to view videos put out by their company or other similar media. The wife of the family should have as many children as the Lord gives her. Large numbers of children are very important. The more children this generation has, the more children the next generation will have, and on and on until we take over the country. The wife/mother should give her husband cheerful obedience and dedication to his vision for the family. She should not work outside of the home, especially for another man. She should be sweet and loving and kind and decorate the home with Bible verses and Biblical scenes from the Victorian era. She should train her children to obey cheerfully, get along perfectly with their many siblings, and contribute significantly to the family and the father's vision and direction. The older children should not date, but court through a very specific way directed by the father. The courting couple should not kiss or have intimate physical contact before the wedding. The family should homeschool exclusively, of course. They should interact with others of their kind often, but not often with others who are not of their kind.

 

Did I leave anything out?

 

He lays it on thick at these conferences. In my experience, I came away feeling like I had to change my husband and my whole family to meet with these criteria. It took me a couple of years to snap out of it after listening to him. Actually this forum was a big help in me snapping out of it. I started to look at things more critically after a while of engaging in this forum. Thanks WTMF peeps!

[Donna A.]

I'll take a stab at this. A funny thing is, Doug Phillips and Vision Forum came up in the bathroom this morning between my husband and I as we were getting ready. I stopped going to homeschool conventions where he was speaking because of the pressure he puts on families, especially men, through the wife, via the convention key note speeches, to perform his specified version of family life. To sum up what I hear him saying is that a father should provide for his very large family on a single income which he should gain from his own entrepreneurial endeavors. He should lead the family in worship and devotions. He should not watch the big black box of death, nor should he allow one in the house, unless it is there to view videos put out by their company or other similar media. The wife of the family should have as many children as the Lord gives her. Large numbers of children are very important. The more children this generation has, the more children the next generation will have, and on and on until we take over the country. The wife/mother should give her husband cheerful obedience and dedication to his vision for the family. She should not work outside of the home, especially for another man. She should be sweet and loving and kind and decorate the home with Bible verses and Biblical scenes from the Victorian era. She should train her children to obey cheerfully, get along perfectly with their many siblings, and contribute significantly to the family and the father's vision and direction. The older children should not date, but court through a very specific way directed by the father. The courting couple should not kiss or have intimate physical contact before the wedding. The family should homeschool exclusively, of course. They should interact with others of their kind often, but not often with others who are not of their kind.

 

Did I leave anything out?

 

Sounds like utopia, doesn't it? We've BTDT with the VF crowd. Then reality struck when we witnessed the second VF family with whom we were somewhat close to IRL doing the exact same things the first one did.... the husband was angry about being "stuck" in a job where he wasn't his own boss, not to mention the fact that he couldn't be using his "gift of preaching" as the pastor of his own church, which is where he really belonged. Both of these families were VERY evangelistic for..... the Gospel? Not what we saw. As someone else said, it was more about changing the culture, and if those two men (who didn't even know each other, btw, but both were in the same VF "camp" of theology, i.e., Doug Phillips followers) couldn't be pastors of their own churches, then they were going to go into another church and change IT. And they tried.... went from church to church, trying to convince the leadership that their way was best, that those churches ought to drop Sunday School classes, that those men ought to be allowed to preach once in a while, or at least teach some classes to the men to try to get their families straightened out, etc. We eventually got away from both of those families because what we saw happening was that the VF way of doing things really usurps the BIBLICAL role of the church in family's lives. :sad: (Though I also understand that many churches have gotten away from biblical teaching in the first place, which is PART of what the Doug Phillips' of this country are hoping to correct. But I think they've gone too far.)

 

My dh just commented that when he read Family Man, Family Leader (which left him feeling like a failure, btw) his impression was that entrepreneurship is the ONLY way to be a truly Godly man and provide for his family the way God would want Him to. You must not be doing something right if you work for someone else.

 

Indeed. Just look at the business Doug has built there.

 

 

He lays it on thick at these conferences. In my experience, I came away feeling like I had to change my husband and my whole family to meet with these criteria.

Yep. And I'm one who appreciates SOME of the teaching on the family.... I think we (as a society) have gotten very far away from traditional family values, men stepping up and taking responsibility, appreciating children instead of just viewing them as inconveniences, and some other principles. But like I said, I think this group has gone too far in usurping the role of the church and instead expects the church to bend to the role of the family. Dangerous territory there.... :001_huh: Not to mention how inadequate and sad their teachings have made so many of us feel, both husbands and wives, because we don't have that utopia described above. It can really make a wife OR husband look down on their spouse in ways that they perhaps never did before.

[Donna A.]

Doug and Beall are friends of mine. They went to my church about 20 years ago. My pastor was a teacher of Doug's at Fairfax Christian School when Doug was in high school. I must say that both Doug and Beall are two of the sweetest, dearest people I've ever known.

 

That said, I will have to also say that Doug has strayed from what he learned at my church. My pastor occasionally asks us to pray for him because he is worried about the direction Doug has taken. I've noticed that much of what is on Doug's website (his blog, articles - stuff he writes himself) rarely mentions Jesus Christ. There is too much emphasis on changing culture, influencing culture, etc. He focuses on this present world to a fault, imo.

 

As a conservative Christian, I am surprised at this. My belief is that if Christians put their eyes on Christ, follow Him, and obey Him, culture will change as a matter of course - one does not need to force the issue. Culture is downstream from religion - if hearts have been changed by the Gospel of Jesus Christ that will be reflected in the culture. It doesn't work the other way - you can't make the culture Christian. It must be an outflow of changed hearts and minds and only God can do that. He doesn't do it through Christian movies or Father/Daughter retreats or honoring WWII vets or trips to the Amazon - He does it through the preaching of His Word which exalts the Lord Jesus Christ.

 

Doug means well, I'm sure of that. He really is a sweet person. But I'm sad to say that I think he has gotten off track theologically (not sure if that's the correct term) - he seems to have gotten caught up in the notion that Christians should focus on "taking dominion" in an effort to "take back the culture." I don't see that as a Biblical viewpoint.

 

I have worked my way through the link that Ellie provided. Since I know Doug personally, this lady's accusations were very important to me. I stumbled upon this whole mess several years ago and earnestly sought the truth. I read as much as I could find from both sides with as open a mind as I could. If what she says is true, then Doug is absolutely not the same person I knew all those years ago. The thing is - this seems to be a case of he said/she said - how can one really know if all the facts are out there or if one or the other or both parties has/have been mischaracterized. Since I know Doug and he's never acted in any other than a sweet, kind, gentlemanly manner (and I know Beall and she is as sweet as they come), I have to take this lady's attacks as perhaps sour grapes. Maybe I am wrong - but I just cannot see Doug or Beall in any other way.

 

Beautiful post, Kathleen. Dh and I agree with you wholeheartedly about the culture change vs. the Gospel. That's exactly what we've witnessed with friends IRL... of which we're no longer friends because WE just wouldn't conform "enough". We also wouldn't follow them from church to church as they attempted to find the perfect one (or start one of their own). :sad:

[justamouse]

You could try working your way through this.

 

 

That was scary. I can't even imagine what that was like to live through.

[juelle]

I stopped reading/ordering VF stuff because I realised it was feeding envy in my heart. I would love for my family to look that perfect. We don't. I would love to have more kids, but I simply can't. I would love for my husband to lead our family in all the ways Mr Phillips and Mr Wilson set forth. He doesn't. So I became dissatisfied with him. NOT good. There is so much at VF that I find extremely attractive. But I have to recognise that desire to have all my ducks in a row as idolatry in my own heart. I try not to feed it, as it is plenty strong on its own.

[Ellie]

That was scary. I can't even imagine what that was like to live through.

I know, right?

 

I can't imagine having a theological mindset that would require me to stay at a church under those circumstances, though. :blink:

[justamouse]

I know, right?

 

I can't imagine having a theological mindset that would require me to stay at a church under those circumstances, though. :blink:

 

Yeah, that's what I thought, too. At what point did the eject button get pushed, you know? They took a lot of spiritual abuse.

[obsidian]

You could try working your way through this.

 

That was absolutely heartbreaking.:crying: Oh my goodness, I cannot imagine.

[Ellie]

Did I leave anything out?

Yes. You left out the part where daughters are supposed to live at home, serving their fathers, unless and until they get married and start serving their husbands. :glare:

 

Otherwise, you got it all.:ack2:

[TravelingChris]

Okay, okay- way too strict (and weird) for my idea of a Christian ideal. No help for ectopic pregnancies- that seems insane to me. I am pro-life but allowing both mom and fetus to die versus removing a fetus that will die in a few weeks but letting mom lives seems like the right thing to do. I also think it is both non Biblical and overly optimistic to expect all females to go right from home to marriage with no college or additional training. What if the husband becomes disabled or dies?

[kiana]

Okay, okay- way too strict (and weird) for my idea of a Christian ideal. No help for ectopic pregnancies- that seems insane to me. I am pro-life but allowing both mom and fetus to die versus removing a fetus that will die in a few weeks but letting mom lives seems like the right thing to do. I also think it is both non Biblical and overly optimistic to expect all females to go right from home to marriage with no college or additional training. What if the husband becomes disabled or dies?

 

Then I think she's supposed to rely on her brothers/father/church for support and male headship and/or remarry as quickly as possible.

[LisaKinVA]

Okay, okay- way too strict (and weird) for my idea of a Christian ideal. No help for ectopic pregnancies- that seems insane to me. I am pro-life but allowing both mom and fetus to die versus removing a fetus that will die in a few weeks but letting mom lives seems like the right thing to do. I also think it is both non Biblical and overly optimistic to expect all females to go right from home to marriage with no college or additional training. What if the husband becomes disabled or dies?

 

If you "worry" about the "what if's" you "don't have enough faith." At least, that's what I read in a book written by someone else who espouses these same beliefs (and is a friend of Doug).

[G5052]

The lifestyle they present is not one that our family will ever achieve due to circumstances beyond our control.

 

And we are far more grace-based, and don't agree with their view of "right" living.

 

The person I talked to stammered quite a bit when I called, but was indeed willing to remove my name.

 

And that was that!

[tntgoodwin]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ectopic_pregnancy

 

Interestingly, there have been at least 4 babies born alive that were the result of ectopic pregnancy.

 

Those are extremely low odds.

 

I don't know anything about Doug Phillips, except what I have read in this thread. Not a fan.

Edited August 3, 2011 by tntgoodwin

[kiana]

Tnt, check the wikipedia article on Abdominal Pregnancies as well. It adds a bit more detail to the ectopic pregnancies.

[eloquacious]

Wow. Just wow. There are n words.

You could try working your way through this.

[FiveOaksAcademy]

Here

 

http://www.thatmom.com/?s=Doug+Phillips+Vision+Forum&search=Search

 

I think I've become a thatmom groupie!! I've read many of her articles, and her podcasts make housecleaning so much easier!! :) It has been a few months since I read them/listened to them, but her stuff on the patriocenticity movement were really quite enlightening!!

 

To me, much of it seems to be someone teaching "another gospel" that Christ warns us about. To embrace those ideas, it leads to focus on something other than Christ. :sad: "Taking dominion" of our culture, imo, is not the goal. Being salt and light in the world and winning our culture to Christ as savior and Lord IS the goal. The US vs. THEM mentality I see through much of this mindset is just a distraction, a side road that will take someone off of The Way.

[Elinor Everywhere]

I know, right?

 

I can't imagine having a theological mindset that would require me to stay at a church under those circumstances, though. :blink:

 

That's exactly what I was thinking as I read through the blog posts. I would have been gone long before, and not looked back. But I'm not very conservative, so I guess I would never have been there in the first place. What a story - what amazing faith and commitment to Christ! I'm so glad they didn't lose their faith.

[Elinor Everywhere]

To sum up what I hear him saying is that a father should provide for his very large family on a single income which he should gain from his own entrepreneurial endeavors. He should lead the family in worship and devotions. He should not watch the big black box of death, nor should he allow one in the house, unless it is there to view videos put out by their company or other similar media. The wife of the family should have as many children as the Lord gives her. Large numbers of children are very important. The more children this generation has, the more children the next generation will have, and on and on until we take over the country. The wife/mother should give her husband cheerful obedience and dedication to his vision for the family. She should not work outside of the home, especially for another man. She should be sweet and loving and kind and decorate the home with Bible verses and Biblical scenes from the Victorian era. She should train her children to obey cheerfully, get along perfectly with their many siblings, and contribute significantly to the family and the father's vision and direction. The older children should not date, but court through a very specific way directed by the father. The courting couple should not kiss or have intimate physical contact before the wedding. The family should homeschool exclusively, of course. They should interact with others of their kind often, but not often with others who are not of their kind.

 

I just keep thinking about the movie "Stepford Wives". Creepy.