Tim Bayly, on “dancing” with the Devil:
“Here’s a principle I’ve learned in living for God. If you think you can negotiate with the Devil…
giving him some territory in exchange for his leaving you alone to be godly elsewhere, keep in mind you’re negotiating with the Devil and lying is his native tongue. He’ll take what you give him and after promising to leave you alone elsewhere, he’ll come after the elsewhere and take it, too. The principle is seen in many battles.
As Lewis said, they’ll tell you that you can have your religion in private, then they’ll make sure you’re never alone. While the radical two-kingdom error prides itself on protecting the Church by ceding the public square to nakedness, two things are happening: Jesus’ “all authority in Heaven and on earth” has transmogrified into “some authority when the church assembles for corporate worship on the Lord’s Day;” and even that authority is in the process of being gagged by habits carefully cultivated the other six days and twenty-three hours a week when we must avoid hate speech and do our best to end teen suicides.
It’s the same with the “compromise (of) soft patriarchalism.” Telling our daughters to cultivate the feminine deference of a quiet and gentle spirit while pushing them into law school and promoting their candidacy for the presidency of These United States is to deceive ourselves into thinking if we give the Devil everywhere but the Church and the home, we’ll be able to hang onto our male perquisite of bossing our womenfolk where it really matters, where our private honor and comfort are most at stake. Thing is, Scripture never hints at sexuality being a perquisite at all, let alone a private matter for Christians in the Church and home, only. It says male leadership and authority is a duty. And it declares “Adam was created first, then Eve,” applying that order to man’s authority and woman’s submission with no explanation of where sexual origin and identity don’t matter and are not subject to God’s order.
We can defy it at work and in our courts and in our presidential elections while desperately trying to cling to it at home and in corporate worship behind the pulpit, but our uneasy compromise will never stand, in this life or the next. For all time we will be known as the soft patriarchalists who thought they could win the war with hard feminists and stone-cold egalitarians who are taking their orders from Satan.
They have won. We have lost. And the casualties are our consciences and children.”
Comments 24
Keep your religion of choice inside your church and home and away from our legislation; we don’t want anything to do with your creepy cult practices.
Author
Ma’am, you don’t have an intellectually coherent position. If you would like one, may I suggest Christianity (it’s the only one on the market).
I prefer evidence based positions to faith based positions, thanks
Author
Ma’am, why do you value evidence?
I suppose because it’s a basic cognitive function to seek reasons to believe what someone tells you
Author
So, ma’am, you believe it is good to be reasonable?
Sure why not
Author
Ma’am, why do you believe it is good to be reasonable?
Because the only alternative is unreasonable and that would be a silly choice don’t you think?
Author
Silly and bad. We agree. But why is it good to be reasonable, and bad to be unreasonable?
Well assuming the goal is to be less ignorant people, it’s good to use reason because it allows us to understand things deeper and ultimately eradicate ignorance bit by bit.
Author
I’m a fan of us being less ignorant people. But by what standard are claiming the goodness of reasonableness?
By the definition of reasonable and using the basic concept of critical thinking
Author
The definition of reasonable is not an answer to why it is good to be reasonable. Why is it good?
Because it allows us to achieve our goal of reducing ignorance
Author
And why is that good?
Because we seek pleasure and convenience, and avoid pain and inconvenience; this biological trait drives the urge to gain knowledge to benefit from. It’s quite selfish really however natural
Author
Are you saying it is just something that folks do, or something that folks ought to do, that it is good for them to do?
Being reasonable? Of course it’s something we should do.
Author
Why? By what standard?
On Wednesday, June 27, 2018, Creaturely Consideration wrote:
>
I already answered that; What are you getting at
Author
You didn’t answer. You asserted the point, but didn’t establish why it is objectively good to be reasonable.
On Wednesday, June 27, 2018, Creaturely Consideration wrote:
>
I love what you wrote about telling our daughters to have a quiet and gentle spirit and then turning around and pushing them into law school, etc. Why does the church go along with this and why doesn’t anyone ever say anything to the contrary?? Except you and a few others, of course.
Author
This is all just a Bayly quote. He pulls no punches.