How much should Christians be willing to suffer for Christ?

Do you smell something burning or is it just me

Joan of Arc, Born: January 6, 1412, Died: May 30, 1431, Age 19 

I would rather die than do something which I know to be a sin, or to be against God’s will. ~ Joan of Arc

In response to:
The following story of three Christian women was compiled from ‘Foxe’s Book of Martyrs’ & ‘Christian Martyrology’:

As this godly martyr [Robert Samuel] was going to the fire, there came a certain maid to him, which took him about the neck, and kissed him, who, being marked by them that were present, was sought for the next day after, to be had to prison and burned, as the very party herself informed me: howbeit, as God of His goodness would have it, she escaped their fiery hands, keeping herself secret in the town a good while after. 

But as this maid, called Rose Nottingham, was marvelously preserved by the providence of God, so there were other two honest women who did fall into the rage and fury of that time. The one was a brewer’s wife, the other was a shoemaker’s wife, but both together now espoused to a new husband, Christ. 

With these two was this maid aforesaid very familiar and well acquainted, who, on a time giving counsel to the one of them, that she should convey herself away while she had time and space, had this answer at her hand again: “I know well,” saith she, “that it is lawful enough to fly away; which remedy you may use, if you list. But my case standeth otherwise. I am tied to a husband, and have besides young children at home; and then I know not how my husband, being a carnal man, will take my departure from him; therefore I am minded, for the love of Christ and His truth, to stand to the extremity of the matter.” 

And so the next day after Samuel suffered, these two godly wives, the one called Anne Potten, the other called Joan Trunchfield, the wife of Michael Trunchfield, shoemaker, of Ipswich, were apprehended, and had both into one prison together. As they were both by sex and nature somewhat tender, so were they at first less able to endure the straitness of the prison; and especially the brewer’s wife was cast into marvelous great agonies and troubles of mind thereby. But Christ, beholding the weak infirmity of His servant, did not fail to help her when she was in this necessity; so at the length they both suffered after Samuel, in 1556, February 19.

When Agnes Bongeor saw herself separated from her prison-fellows, what piteous moan that good woman made, how bitterly she wept, what strange thoughts came into her mind, how naked and desolate she esteemed herself, and into what plunge of despair and care her poor soul was brought, it was piteous and wonderful to see; which all came because she went not with them to give her life in the defense of her Christ; for of all things in the world, life was least looked for at her hands. 

For that morning in which she was kept back from burning, had she put on a smock, that she had prepared only for that purpose. And also having a child, a little young infant sucking on her, whom she kept with her tenderly all the time that she was in prison, against that day likewise did she send away to another nurse, and prepared herself presently to give herself for the testimony of the glorious Gospel of Jesus Christ. So little did she look for life, and so greatly did God’s gifts work in her above nature, that death seemed a great deal better welcome than life. After which, she began a little to stay herself, and gave her whole exercise to reading and prayer, wherein she found no little comfort. 

In a short time came a writ from London for the burning, which according to the effect thereof, was executed. 

Max Lucado ~ gone squishy


Recently I read a post by Max Lucado on Fox News teaching moral tolerance:

Max says: You love your husband and she lives with her wife. …

How do we respond? Ignore them? Share a meal with them? Leave the room when they enter? Ask them to leave so we can stay? Discuss our differences? Dismiss our differences? Argue?

I wonder if the best answer might be found in this short admonition from the Bible: “Accept one another, then, just as Christ accepted you, in order to bring praise to God” (Rom.15:7). This verb for “accept” means more than tolerate or coexist. It means to welcome into one’s fellowship and heart. The word implies the warmth and kindness of genuine love. …

Reserve judgment. Let every person you meet be a new person in your mind. None of this labeling or preconceived notions. Pigeonholes work for pigeons, not for people.

Is Max right to welcome homosexuals into his heart and fellowship with such warmth?  The Bible verse that Max builds his doctrine of tolerance from is:

Romans 15:7 Wherefore receive ye one another, as Christ also received us to the glory of God.

Those received by Christ are saved, believers, Followers of God.  Look with me to see if God receives homosexual men, as Max seems to be encouraging us to:

1 Corinthians 6:9 Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals,

Leviticus 20:13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

That doesn’t sound like Max’s stated warmth and kindness of Genuine love, that doesn’t sound like God accepts men who make an abomination out of God’s image, by buggering it.

(FYI: God is not female, and we are never told that women are in God’s image, so likewise we are not told that two women lying together is an abomination, but that lesbianism is an “unnatural” act.  Lesbians defile each other, but can’t tarnish the image of God by their unnatural usage.)

So are we to accept the abominable and their bodily acts of desecrating sacrilege?  Or do we assume God’s clear judgement against them, should be mirrored in our own judgement?   I contend we should not be trying to warmly accept God’s enemies, but to condemn their abominable acts and call for their repentance, as Jesus so often called for His adversaries to repent.

Be discriminating.

An online dictionary sample usage of the word “discriminating” says: “A discriminating person can pick up on the small differences between things and use those differences to make better choices.”

You don’t have the underpinning of the “seven pillars of wisdom”(Proverbs 9:1) if you don’t have any discernment or discrimination.  We should come to any situation with as much solid prejudicial understanding and wisdom as we can, but then be open minded enough to continually reevaluate the situation as we learn more about the actual facts.  Instead of approaching people and situations as an empty headed fool, we should pre-judge things for our own protection based upon our learned prejudices, while remaining willing to rapidly adapt our thinking if our prejudices prove to be unmerited in the particular circumstance or involving particular individuals.

We all constantly prejudge people and situations based upon past experiences and acquired knowledge, for our own benefit and protection.  Would you wander alone at night on foot and unarmed in a high crime area of urban decay?  Probably not, because you are wise enough to prejudge the danger of doing so.  How do you know it is a high crime area, or an area of urban decay?  Because of your prejudice, that is how you have prejudged that.  What more solid of a foundation for a prejudice could we have, than God’s own eternal judgement?

James 4:4 Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.

If some man is a homosexual, and God says that is an abomination, can we not accept God’s judgement in the matter?  I think a refusal to accept their sin, and a clear call for their repentance is a far more caring and Christ like response than the permissive welcome into one’s fellowship and heart and warm acceptance that Max Lucado is advocating.

Are You Covered?

Veiled Humility

1 Corinthians 11:1-16

1 Be imitators of me, just as I also am of Christ. 2 Now I praise you because you remember me in everything and hold firmly to the traditions, just as I delivered them to you. 3 But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ. 4 Every man who has something on his head while praying or prophesying disgraces his head. 5 But every woman who has her head uncovered while praying or prophesying disgraces her head, for she is one and the same as the woman whose head is shaved. 6 For if a woman does not cover her head, let her also have her hair cut off; but if it is disgraceful for a woman to have her hair cut off or her head shaved, let her cover her head. 7 For a man ought not to have his head covered, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man. 8 For man does not originate from woman, but woman from man; 9 for indeed man was not created for the woman’s sake, but woman for the man’s sake. 10 Therefore the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels. 11 However, in the Lord, neither is woman independent of man, nor is man independent of woman. 12 For as the woman originates from the man, so also the man has his birth through the woman; and all things originate from God. 13 Judge for yourselves: is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? 14 Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him, 15 but if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her? For her hair is given to her for a covering. 16 But if one is inclined to be contentious, we have no other practice, nor have the churches of God.

What worldly sin has the “church” of this age not joined into?

Why did our parent’s “Christianity” fail to slow our culture’s decline?

True Christianity did not fail.  We as a generation of people have just failed to follow God.  The reason, that every day our perpetually losing church leaders are in retreat against the evil advance of our godless culture, is because they’re not actually fighting for God.  The power of God is not on their side.  They preach for money and to build their earthly kingdoms.  They will not preach what is not acceptable to their congregation from God’s word.

God says:  Mark 8:38 Whosoever therefore shall be ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation; of him also shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he cometh in the glory of his Father with the holy angels.

God asks women to pray with their heads covered.  Do they?  Why not?  Why are church leaders not demanding that over half of their congregation obey God in that way?  Because they worship Feminism above God.  Feminism is a supremacist ideology.  Our loving God set up Patriarchy for all humanity, especially for His own people who claim to follow Him.  Abandoning God’s design for the family out of rebellion towards God and adopting the female supremacist ideology of Feminism, has destroyed families and led to a divorce epidemic and loosed all kinds of evil and degraded society.  The Church traditionally was the force for God in this world, but the churches we now have are fully corrupted and in open rebellion to God.  Husbands are told from pulpits to become servants to their wives by hirelings who instead of ministering God’s word, administer still more female supremacism.  Church discipline as prescribed in the Bible, is now just a thing of the past.  Isaiah 53:6 All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.  Every man or woman does as they please.  With the least accountability placed on women.   Women, I ask you today to show humility.  Fear God and boldly show your submission to God instead of our self-destructing Feminist culture.  Show that you want to obey God by getting and wearing a head covering when you pray and worship God.  The head covering is a symbol of being covered and under man’s authority whether it is your earthly father’s or husband’s authority, or whether you have no man but Christ Jesus, you honor God and them by having a symbol of submission placed over your head.

What should this be?  How should it look?  When should you be wearing it?  The Bible does not specify what should be used to cover the head, but it is clear that it is a symbol that is in addition to your own hair which should not be shaved short, for that is a shame.  But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her.  Whether you and the man who is your authority choose a veil, a kerchief, a bonnet, or a hat, or some other type of head covering for yourself, the important part is that you wear it for the right reason.  And you should select one in keeping with that reason.  Wearing the veil is an act of obedience to God’s command, and an outward symbol of subjection to your earthly head, a man, whether a father, a husband, or Jesus.  The symbol itself does not have any power of its own to change you, but it is a symbol of the change that has already taken place within, that causes you to unashamedly choose holy obedience to God.

Sanity is Vanity

Be not weary in welldoing

There is an overused and misattributed cliché that I continually encounter that states:

“Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.”

The quote is often attributed to Albert Einstein, Benjamin Franklin, or Mark Twain.  The earliest known occurrence, and probable origin, is in a 1981 text from Narcotics Anonymous: “Insanity is repeating the same mistakes and expecting different results.”

My  opinion is closer to that of Nobel physics laureate Frank Wilczek, who addresses the quote, so questionably attributed to Albert Einstein, by countering it with: “Naïveté is doing the same thing over and over, and always expecting the same result.”

Here is what Jesus taught us in ‘The Parable of the Unjust Judge’:

Luke 18:1 Now He was telling them a parable to show that at all times they ought to pray and not to lose heart, 2 saying, “In a certain city there was a judge who did not fear God and did not respect man. 3 There was a widow in that city, and she kept coming to him, saying, ‘Give me legal protection from my opponent.’ 4 For a while he was unwilling; but afterward he said to himself, ‘Even though I do not fear God nor respect man, 5 yet because this widow bothers me, I will give her legal protection, otherwise by continually coming she will wear me out.’” 6 And the Lord said, “Hear what the unrighteous judge said; 7 now, will not God bring about justice for His elect who cry to Him day and night, and will He delay long over them? 8 I tell you that He will bring about justice for them quickly. However, when the Son of Man comes, will He find faith on the earth?”

Christians are to live by faith, and not by sight.( 2 Corinthians 5:7)   We should be willing to be seen as “fools” for Christ’s sake.(1 Corinthians 4:9-16)  We are instructed to do the right thing even if we repeatedly get results we don’t like.   If we turn the other cheek we may get smacked again.  If we continue to speak the truth we may be despised or persecuted for it again.    Should we stop asking people to follow the command of God, if the whole world thinks God’s command is unloving?

Romans 3:4 By no means! Let God be true though every one were a liar, as it is written, “That you may be justified in your words, and prevail when you are judged.”

When did Feminism Start?


Strangling a Feminist

Commenter ‘Ace’ recently commented: “This is an attitude from the 1700s, so well before feminism took hold.”

Upon reading that I knew I wanted to respond with a post, but I had to go to work and I am now finally able to quickly address this.  However, in the intervening time, commenter ‘ikr’ gave the following reply: “To borrow recently-coined terminology, you further commit a strawwoman argument in arguing feminism, when the issue is gynocentrism. It was known as chivalry before that. The terms belong to eras, but the concept is the same: woman as the central figure in the concern of man.”

Commenter ‘ikr’ largely stole my thunder, by getting my main point across in a nutshell, but I’ll make the argument that “Feminism” goes all the way back to Eve, and that coveting equality with your superior, usurping, and rebellion, that are key features of Feminism, can be traced back to the fall of Lucifer.

 Isaiah 14:12 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!  13 For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:  14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the Most High.

Genesis 3:4  And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely dieFor God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

Genesis 3:17 And unto Adam He said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life;  18 Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field;  19 In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.

A while prior to Ace’s assertion of the 1700s being well before Feminism, commenter ‘ray’ had remarked: “I mean there’s no such thing as equality, in heaven or upon Earth, amongst man or woman or angel. Within these ranks there is Created order, each different and having a place or station.   Equality is an abstraction, a construction or artifice, created by Lucifer. The parallel between what happened in the Garden (Eve and quest for Equality) and today’s spiritual and political landscapes isn’t accidental.”

I previously explained a bit about how the Roman state church wrongly added women to the image of God around the end of the fourth century AD in another post:

It wasn’t until the fourth century around 380 AD that Mary began to be called Mother of God, or “Theotokos” This was said as part of the controversy over the nature of Jesus. Some said he was born human but became God later. Others said Jesus was divine from the moment of inception. Those who believed that Jesus was divine at birth used the slogan: Mary the Mother of God. Actually, the phrase was more like Mary: God-bearer. Saint Ambrose, who lived in Rome before going to Milan as its bishop, venerated Mary as an example of Christian life and is credited with starting a Marian cult of virginity in the 4th century.

In the 5th and 6th century, churches in Rome began to be dedicated to Mary, and from there the Great Whore seated on the seven mountains spoken of in Revelation 17 has continued to adopt features of preexisting pagan goddess worship and further deify Mary, growing in strength in the dark ages, eventually calling Mary the “Queen of heaven”, the same old name as Old Testament idol worshippers used when committing abominations in Jeremiah 7 & 44.  Somewhere early along our church age time line to accepting Satan’s counterfeit goddess worship, it was decided that women must also be in the image of God, because, how could Mary be a goddess, if she isn’t even able to be in the image of God?  So women were deceitfully added into the image of God to bolster the worldly reintroduction of preexisting Roman goddess worship back into the church under the guise of “honoring” Mary.  Satan’s minions deceitfully said, “You’re dishonoring the ‘Mother of God’ if you say she was a sinner and wasn’t even in God’s image”.

I think we would be unwise not to recognize that most all of the necessary components for todays ‘Feminism’ were conjured into place, by the Great Whore (Satan’s state church, of this world) even well before it was called ‘Chivalry’.

Please add your thoughts for discussion below.  🙂

Speaking up for silence

Red Brambles

I was quite pleasantly surprised by some comments I read recently that gave me a bit of hope, that there may still be some women who fear God and haven’t thrown in their lot with this world.

Over at Lori Alexander’s ‘The Transformed Wife’ regarding the topic of women being silent in church,(from 1 Corinthians 14:34)  commenter KR said:

June 27, 2019 at 11:23 am  KR says:

I left an earlier comment, but it wasn’t published. What I wanted to say was that for our family, this is extended to the dinner table. My husband likes to have a quiet dinner where he can discuss his day, etc. in a relaxed atmosphere without interruptions from people talking over him. I know many wives who just start talking and going on and on as soon as their husband walks through the door. This is not a peaceful environment.

So for our family, and as a sign of my submission to him, we have an unwritten rule that he is the only one allowed to talk at the dinner table, unless he addresses or asks me or one of the kids a direct question. This way he can talk uninterrupted and we can attentively listen. If I do talk too much on occasion, he will tell me gently “That’s it, end it” and I know that is my cue to be quiet and listen.

I know this is not a requirement because the Bible only directs women to be silent in churches/gatherings, but it has lead to peaceful quiet dinners and it’s what works for our family.

Lori Alexander then created another good post, regarding many women who tried to respond to KR’s comment:

MANY women commented under her comment telling her that her husband was wrong, she was being abused, and he was being cruel and unreasonable. They seemed determined to destroy her marriage and speak evil about her husband. I didn’t publish any of these comments since our goal, as Christian woman, should be to want to build marriages up, NOT tear them down.

To which commenter Mother Dearest gives the following great reply that I wanted to share with you.   Lori has a post with it also:    Not only do I think the comment below is correct,  But I also was greatly encouraged by her zeal and unabashed boldness to shine God’s light in this darkened generation.
July 6, 2019 at 8:12 am  Mother Dearest says:

Today’s unregenerate woman is a clamorous glory-hog that cannot imagine enduring a moment of only being seen and not heard. This busy body gads abroad on social media, by phone and in person, minding everything but what God has called her to. She’s quick to speak her mind always, rather than listening to other people’s perspectives and dare I say, perhaps even learning from them.

However, the thing that stirred up the opprobrium that you so graciously shielded us from is three fold: first, the original commenter acknowledged that her husband has a preference i.e. he would like to enjoy some silence when he gets home from work. Feminists do not allow men to have preferences. Only women can have preferences. If men are allowed preferences, soon they will start preferring debt free virgins who have no tattoos and who knows what else they will prefer next? A clean home, well behaved children, delicious and nutritious meals, a vibrant marriage bed??? God forbid!!! So NO PREFERENCES for men.

Secondly, the original commenter demonstrated that not only does she take zero issue with her husband’s preference, she endeavours to give him what he wants and all the feminists cry…booooo because their prideful hearts seethe at the thought of a wife looking to please her husband. Why, she’s letting team woman down. What about all the feminists of old who laid down their dignity, their fertility and their eternal life so that wives today can defy their husbands? She’s being ungrateful by obeying God and her husband.

Thirdly and most egregious is that the husband in question gently prompts his wife to be quiet when she talks more than he deems appropriate. How dare he tell her what to do? Feminists are a law unto themselves and they answer to no one, least of all a husband. That is abusive in their books because women know better than men from a feminist perspective. They prefer a cowering passive husband who prefers nothing, and puts up with their selfishness. They are quick to point out that husbands are called to love their wives as Christ loves the church, but don’t let husbands wash their wives with the water of the Word, that is out of order!!! (See also 1 Peter 3:4-5 Your adornment must not be merely external–braiding the hair, and wearing gold jewelry, or putting on dresses; but let it be the hidden person of the heart, with the imperishable quality of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is precious in the sight of God.)

Thank you Lori for always encouraging every woman to submit to her OWN husband. Naturally, whereas every wife’s heart attitude ought to be the same i.e. submissive, it’s obvious that the practical outworking of submission for every wife will be as diverse as there are husbands. Just because one woman’s husband requires something different from her compared to another, is not tantamount to abuse. For example I am not on Facebook, Twitter or other forms of social media because my husband is of the view that my day is too busy. My husband also likes to know which blogs and books I read and often recommends books for me to read because he takes responsibility for my spiritual growth and likes to protect me from spiritual falsehoods. I am definitely a much better Christian for being married to my husband because he takes the time to point out areas in my life that need amendment and no I am not abused. Also, my husband grew up in a broken and unhappy home that was largely silent/quarrelsome with a distant unapproachable father so he longed for a cheerful home and a close relationship with his children. He purposed to marry a “happy” girl. I know how much this means to him so I don’t have mood swings, raise my voice at him or give him the silent treatment ever. I quell tantrums in the children and teach them Proverbs 15:1. I speak highly of my husband to our children and everyone else and make provision in the week for family bonding activities. My husband and children are very close which makes him so glad. We pray and sing together in our home and even in times of trial, I do my best to cheer everyone up because my husband prefers a happy atmosphere in the home. He calls me his MVP because I delight in doing what he wants which is my God given calling.

Let me urge all wives to be lifelong students of their husbands. Get to know what he wants and what his likes and dislikes are and don’t listen to detractors because you will give an account to God for your submission to your own husband.

Weddings: a Rite of the Patriarchy?

I came across the following post warning about the “sexist” history of many aspects of contemporary wedding ceremonies:

I found the authors alarm to be amusing.  Who knew history was so politically incorrect?

If only the white dress was the lone part of the bride’s wardrobe steeped in the patriarchy. Unfortunately, the veil is just as guilty.