CTBHHM In Which Debi Reveals Her Mandate

by Libby Anne

Created To Be His Help Meet, pp. 51-53 

Remember that Debi has just poisoned the well against trusting one’s feelings, listening to mainstream society, or giving a hearing to the arguments of Christian feminists. She continues with this:

Can we, ordinary housewives and mothers, jump into the arena and compete with these “scholars,” deciding which verses in the Bible should be believed and which ones should be dismissed for various reasons? That is not for me.

But I do have a solution. There is one verse that they have not yet contested: “The aged women … may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedience to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed” (Titus 2:3-5). It reads basically the same in all my English translations. And my husband says it reads the same in his four Greek Bibles as it does in the King James. According to the Word of God revealed to the apostle Paul (a man!), aged women are to teach the younger women to be obedient to their own husbands. It is clearly God’s plan.

Is it just my imagination or has Debi just revealed her mandate – the reason she believes she is qualified to write this book telling women to be perfectly obedient to their husbands? I should mention that this passage – Titus 2 – is a favorite among female leaders in conservative Christianity. This passage states that older women are allowed to teach, well, younger women, thus giving “mature” Christian women a ministry role to play in congregations that typically bar women from ever teaching men. (I once saw a woman have to go to her pastor to find out if she could teach a mixed group of teenagers, both girls and – gasp! – boys. The answer was yes, because as long as they were under 18 the guys counted as “children” rather than “men.”) So I’m not at all surprised that Debi would at some point invoke Titus 2, though perhaps slightly taken aback by the strength with which she claims it.

Debi next prints a letter from a woman who explains that, after reading the works of a certain Bible teacher, she has become convinced that “The women obeying and not teaching their husbands passages are wrongly translated and received.” Weirdly, Debi removes the name of the Bible teacher the writer is citing, replacing it with “H___.” Yes, really. It’s almost like she doesn’t want someone to go look up his books and read them for themselves! Debi’s response is all over the map, but I want to highlight a few points.

Dear Kristin,

If you were trying to convince me of the truth of your argument by telling me the “full gospel” crowd encourages women to take positions of leadership, you used the wrong argument. Check out their divorce rate, and you will understand my amazement in your choice of arguments. Statistics reveal that modern Christians have a higher divorce rate than does the general population.

…what? First of all, “full gospel” Christians are Pentecostals, and last I looked, Pentecostals are generally considered traditional Christians, not “modern Christians.” Second, if Debi is going to use the “Christians have higher divorce rates” argument, she has to realize that her own sect of Christianity, whatever exactly that is, is also included in this statistic. If she would rather break it down and look at the statistic for each type of Christians, well, she’ll have to do that for the full gospel people as well as for her own group. But she doesn’t do that. As a result, her argument makes no sense.

She goes on to argue that there is a “huge amount of scripture” supporting her view on women’s role, including “500 verses, found in twenty-five different books of the Bible.” (Of course, she doesn’t actually site a single verse.)

And then she says this:

I believe God has given and preserved his words so that the average woman can know what he means without having to go to a man who claims to be smarter to the words of God.

Given how much Debi emphasizes that women must submit to their husbands, I actually find her argument that the average woman can understand the Bible without having to go to a man rather odd. Growing up in a home where the Pearls were idolized and embraced, I was actually told that I should take my theological questions to my father and then accept what he said. I was taught that I would someday do the same with my husband. So this idea that suddenly women can figure out the Bible for themselves without any help from their husbands or any other man? Odd.

If God’s words are so misleading and difficult to translate that the fifteen English translations I have and the four Greek translation my husband has (all in agreement on these verses) are not able to speak the truth about women, then He is not the God I have worshiped these many years.

Given that Debi earlier came out as believing that the KJV was the only translation that accurately preserved the word of God, I find her sudden appeal to the Greek also, well, odd.

But the other part of her argument is something I’ve heard before many times. It’s fairly formulaic, actually: “If God _______, then He is not the God I have worshiped these many years.” If you think about it, it’s an appeal to personal experience. My experience of God is like this, therefore this must be so. But what of someone else whose experience is different? There are plenty of liberal Christians who believe that translating the Bible and discovering the actual original Greek words is a complicated and difficult process, but don’t see that as at all inconsistent with the God they have “worshiped these many years.” In other words, Debi’s assertion here is nothing more than an attempt to universalize her own personal experience.

Would you have me believe that only in these last decades, as the world shifted to a “women’s liberation” philosophy, that suddenly a few preachers who “studied Greek” in college for three years should discover that the world is right after all?

I grew up hearing this as well. But you’ll find that most Christians have made this same “discovery” with regards to slavery as well – in other words, Most Christians used to believe that slavery was totally okay according to the Bible, and today most Christians believe that the Bible condemns slavery. In other words, religion changes all the time. That a view is the oldest or the longest-held does not mean it is either “right” or universal or that it will continue unchanged in every cultural context. How do we figure out which view is correct and which is incorrect? Not by completely rejecting Biblical scholarship as flawed and refusing to examine the arguments on each side, surely. And surely not by simply declaring that your side is right!

You will have to go to a “pop” TV evangelist or conference speaker, who depends on monetary gifts from women, to get the modern view that you say is taught by men like H___.

I’m sorry, what? Seriously, two pages ago Debi was talking about “Bible scholars” who argue that the Bible endorses gender equality, and now she’s saying that only televangelists and conference speakers who depend on people’s money teach gender equality? I might think that this means that Debi thinks “Bible scholar” is synonymous with “TV evangelist” and “conference speaker who depends on monetary gifts,” but given her husband’s views on the deceptive nature Biblical scholarship coming out of seminaries, I know this isn’t the case. Debi’s contradicting herself here.

There is a reason why those people attempt to appeal to the modern woman. Nine out of ten gifts to these ministries, and nine out of ten purchases of books and tapes, are by women.

And now Debi is making up statistics.

Women who can’t be close to their husbands have a propensity to develop a self-absorbing, spiritual intimacy with spiritual leaders – be they men or women.

Look in the mirror, Debi. No, really. Even with all of the adoring letters receives, she never stops to consider that she might be one of the spiritual leaders she describes. She’s also making some pretty wild accusations here – that the only pastors or scholars preaching gender equality are those who are looking to take money from women’s purses and get in their spiritual pants. Also, what is this “spiritual intimacy” she describes, and why hasn’t she talked about developing it between husbands and wives? Perhaps that’s still coming.

My husband started studying Greek forty years ago. (He daily uses three different Greek Bibles in order to correct the teachers who attempt to correct the Bible with the Greek.) When my husband, who is a Bible scholar and, for many years, also a student of Greek, wants to know what God says, he always opens his KJV Bible first.

Again with the Greek. And using different Greek Bibles to correct teachers who attempt to use Greek to correct the Bible? What? I mean I think I know what Debi is trying to say, but honestly, she’s not saying it very clearly. And note that for all of her discussion of just how learned in Greek her husband is, she doesn’t use Greek when examining the passages she quotes in her book, nor does she discuss the reasons Biblical scholars have caveats regarding some of them. Instead, she sticks with the KJV and takes it at face value – just like her husband, who “always opens his KJV Bible first.” I honestly think she keeps mentioning how very learned her husband is in Greek just so that she can claim to know better than those Greek-quoting Bible scholars, and all without ever having to actually address the Greek in her book. I mean, really, how does her continual touting of the Greek here jibe with what she said about the average woman being able to understand the Bible by herself?

You are asking me to adopt a philosophy that is contrary to the Bible, has destroyed countless homes, has put thousands of woman on Prozac, and has driven men to pornography, in exchange for something that has worked perfectly for the past thirty-five years of my marriage.

Prozac? Really? In this section, Debi argues that the belief that men and women should be equal in the home and in the church has destroyed homes, put women on Prozac (again, really? really?), and resulted in men watching porn. I hate to break it to Debi, but there’s been lots written about the large number of women who were addicted to alcoholic “tonics” in the 1800s, and while the technology we have today may be different, pornography is not new. And finally, while families may have stayed together more often in the past that does not mean they were not broken.

I am supremely happy and content woman, in submission to my husband  but I am not altogether gullible.

While this statement may appear to some to be the epitome of irony, it’s actually a bit of a staple in Debi’s circles as women insist that their belief that women must submit to their husbands does not mean that they don’t have brains are are some sort of dupes. It’s almost like there is some huge psychological need bound up in this insistence, as though making sure others know that they’re not just gullible dupes soothes their need to assert their selfhood.

Also, when someone has to spend a great deal of time insisting that they really are “supremely” happy, well, that’s frequently a tip off that they’re not.

I suggest you believe God, and let the snake deceive some other dumb lady (just like he deceived Eve in the garden).

Did I mention that Debi’s really not very nice? Well, just in case you missed it, Debi’s really not very nice. I’m not sure if she thinks that calling women “dumb” makes her sound hip or something, but honestly, to me it just makes her sound like a misogynist.

So let me sum up. After explaining that the Bible says that older women are to teach younger women, and thus claiming a mandate for teaching, Debi sets out to do just that as she responds to a letter from a woman who believes that God is okay with women preaching and teaching. This would seem to be a contradiction except that the letter writer makes it clear that she’s talking about women’s ability to teach men, and Debi makes it clear that she’s only talking about older women’s ability to teach younger women. Regardless, Debi spends all of her time talking about (a) how there are “hundreds” of verses that teach that women are to be subservient to men, (b) how very well her husband knows Greek, (c) how those who preach that women can teach men are just out there to take women’s money, and (d) how a belief that men and women are equal has led to women taking prozac and men watching porn. And in all of this, Debi doesn’t even quote a single Bible verse, whether in English or in Greek. I suppose that now that she’s got her Biblical mandate to teach, that’s all she needs.

Comments open below

Spiritual Abuse Survivor Blogs Network member, Libby Anne blogs at Love, Joy, Feminism
The Beautiful Girlhood Doll by Libby Anne

Libby Anne grew up in a large evangelical homeschool family highly involved in the religious right. College turned her world upside down, and she is today an atheist, a feminist, and a progressive. She blogs about leaving fundamentalist and evangelical religion, her experience with the Christian Patriarchy and Quiverfull movements, the problems with the “purity culture,” the intricacies of conservative and religious right politics, and the importance of feminism. Her blog is Love, Joy, Femini

NLQ Recommended Reading …

Breaking Their Will: Shedding Light on Religious Child Maltreatment‘ by Janet Heimlich

Quivering Daughters‘ by Hillary McFarland

Quiverfull: Inside the Christian Patriarchy Movement‘ by Kathryn Joyce

 

About Suzanne Calulu
  • http://www.eaandfaith.blogspot.com Hannah Thomas

    Can I say as an ‘older Christian woman’ – so I qualify right? Debi is full of you know what.

    Sadly, it seems she wouldn’t know ‘proper Christian manners’ if it came up and bit her on the nose.

    I guess she didn’t get the memo from the ‘older Christian women’s club’…that’s a huge red FLAG!

  • http://biblicalpersonhood.wordpress.com Retha

    People from these groups never see the face value meaning of Titus 2:5.
    It does not say: Younger women should be sober, should love their husbands, love their children, be discreet, chaste, should be fulltime keepers at home, good, should always be subject to their own husbands.
    It says: Older women may teach younger ones to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, subject to their own husbands.
    The difference is like the difference between: a) “Learn how to swim” and b) “I command you to swim every day, to let your life revolve round swimming.”
    By this text women (who don’t know how to do certain things) could be taught to do them. Women are not commanded in this texts to make a life of being keepers at home, or being subject. I believe this was said in the context of this letter being written to the pastor in the bad neighborhood, with the newly converted congregation of liars and gluttons (Tit 1:12). It was so bad that older women had to learn not to drink too much(2:3), and mothers to love their children(2:4). Those women needed to learn about being subject to their husbands (as opposed to, perhaps, sleeping around).

  • Nickelini

    > And now Debi is making up statistics.
    ——–
    But of course you know that 97.423% of statistics are made up on the spot.

  • Meggie

    Thankyou Retha. My mother taught me that if anyone used one or two verses to make their point, I should come home and read the passages around it to make sure I understood the context. Reading the history books helps too.
    I am never sure whether Debi Pearl (1) just regurgitates things she has been told by Michael without doing her own research, (2) ignores things she doesn’t like or (3) goes looking for verses to back up her own ideas rather than trying to understand the bible as it is. Maybe it is a combination of all three.

  • http://krwordgazer.blogspot.com krwordgazer

    I just finished a blog post called “silencing techniques,” and it is interesting to note how almost everything Debi says in her answer to this supposed letter, falls into one of the silencing categories.
    http://krwordgazer.blogspot.com/2013/04/silencing-techniques.html
    The techniques that are immediately obvious are: questioning motives, “othering,” privileging her position, and appealing to authority.

  • Aviatrix

    The joys of circular logic. “If God is not xyz, he is not God” is a tender trap. Or an attempt to trap God – just squeeze that critter down so it’s small enough to fit in a particular doctrinal box. Folks who use that “argument” don’t realize this dog will turn and bite them back – when the xyz portion of the equation is seriously and honestly thrown into question it throws the existence of God (or their all-important personal conception of God) into question as well. That, of course, just leads to more entrenchment, sticking fingers in ears while going “lalalalalala I can’t hear you”, stating the doctrinal position more loudly, and mental gyrations designed to bolster the squishy foundation of a “faith” in something that is suddenly very fragile.

    So much brittle posturing! When someone is not willing to accept the ramifications of their pronouncements concerning doctrine and practice and – in their estimation – its effect on the very existence of God, they’re doing nothing more than spouting hyperbole in an attempt to cow their audience. In that case, calling “bullshit” is the kindest thing to do for those who would fall prey to those kinds of coercive tactics.

    “Teachers” like Debi don’t take themselves seriously or give anyone else reason to take them seriously when they so glibly toss out phony challenges they would never honestly face themselves.

  • Pingback: Created to be His Slave | The Way Forward

  • Pingback: Created To Be His Slave

  • ssohara

    Thankfully the Christians I hang with are mostly NOT fundamentalists. At my last church, I taught an adult Sunday School class with both men and women. I enjoyed doing it. My husband often made copies of the hand-outs for me. Yet I still consider ours to be a Biblical marriage. What people often forget – in Ephesians, right before it talks about wives submitting to their husbands, it says “submit to each other”. We’re supposed to serve each other. Sometimes that means I run errands for my husband or iron his clothes or help him with his computer (I’m better at debugging it than he is!). Sometimes it means he gets take-out for us or cleans the bathroom or makes copies for me. The problem with insisting that women be “submissive” the way Debi does – not all men WANT a wife like that. And not all of us were created by God to be home-makers, etc. I hate how legalism puts the chains right back on people, when Christ came to set us free.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X