The Paradox of a Woman’s Role in Marriage

Marriage is awesome. I've been married only three years, but I can say Brandie and my marriage is better, stronger and more awesome now than when we first married. We've discussed before we even got married the interesting fact that God formed marriage so that the man is to be the leader and the wife the helper, however, the sinful tendency of men is to be passive, silent, and a wimp in general while the sinful tendency of brides is to be boisterous and desperately covet the leadership position. The sin of the bride is that she looks at man's decisions with arrogance and self-righteousness in her heart. The man's sin is his lack of, how you say?...balls, and his constant surrender to his fears. The man denies his responsibility and the bride wants control of what she has no business controlling. What's so interesting about this is the paradox of how much control a woman actually has in her marriage if she will just relinquish leadership to her husband.

My wife recently read an awesome book called 'Created to be His Help Meet.' It's available on Amazon.com for super-cheap, so check it out ladies…you are sure to hate it. At least at first you will. However, I have the privilege of being married to a woman who is very open to God's voice and what He communicates to her and she actually really loved the book. I could tell because she started to apply what she read immediately. Let me be clear; my wife does not worship me. How could I respect a woman that worshiped me rather than God? What she did was start to honor me as leader of the family.

At this point any women reading this (other than my wife and my mother) are disgusted and any men reading it are like, "Yeah, get in the kitchen where you belong woman, haha!" Here's the catch; 1) How can a woman better place herself in a position of honor than fulfilling her God-given purpose in marriage? And 2) Men must realize the responsibility they are under when a woman actually does yield to his leadership! When a bride carries out her role as her husband's helper what happens is all of the responsibility that she would absorb in coveting the leader position is now put where it's supposed to be…on the man. Men, the future of your family then rests on your shoulders! Every decision you make matters. I can assure you, men and women, that a man's desire to be the best man he can be, to serve his wife, and to undertake responsibility with conviction is directly proportional to how much his bride honors him as leader. That's the paradox. In a bride's decision to yield or to attempt to control she indirectly holds the direction of her family in her grasp. And that, my friends, is control. It is the type of control that a woman was created for and purposed for…not the type that is facilitated by taking, but by giving. Amazing. It truly astonishes me. Now, we just have to actually do it…continuously.

The following is an excerpt from C.S.Lewis' "That Hideous Strength." To attempt to put things in context; Jane is married to Mark and Mark, in an attempt to further his career has joined the antagonist society N.I.C.E. Jane is in the presence of and being interviewed by The Director who is the leader of the protagonists. The Director is a man who has an intimate relationship with his Master's who are angel's. …that's probably as clear as mud. Hopefully it will make sense anyway.

"I don't think I look on marriage quite as you do. It seems to me extraordinary that everything should hang on what Mark says…about something he doesn't understand.

"Child," said the Director, "it is not a question of how you or I look on marriage but how my Masters look on it."

"Someone said they were very old fashioned. But-"

"That was a joke. They are not old fashioned; but they are very, very old."

"They would never think of finding out first whether Mark and I believed in their ideas of marriage?"

"Well – no," said the Director with a curious smile. "No. Quite definitely they wouldn't think of doing that."

"And would it make a difference to them what a marriage was actually like – whether it was a success? Whether the woman loved her husband?"

 

Jane had not exactly intended to say this: much less to say it in the cheaply pathetic tone which, it now seemed to her, she had used. Hating herself, and fearing the Director's silence, she added, "But I suppose you will say I oughtn't to have told you that."

"My dear child," said the Director, "you have been telling me that ever since your husband was mentioned"

"Does it make no difference?"

"I suppose," said the Director, "it would depend on how he lost your love."

 

Jane was silent. Though she could not tell the Director the truth, and indeed did not know it herself, yet when she tried to explore her inarticulate grievance against Mark, a novel sense of her own injustice and even pity for her husband, arose in her mind. And her heart sank, for now it seemed to her that this conversation, to which she had vaguely looked for some sort of deliverance from all problems was in fact involving her in new ones.

 

"It was not his fault," she said at last. "I suppose our marriage was just a mistake."
The Director said nothing.
"What would you - what the people you are talking of - say about a case like that?"
"I will tell you if you really want to know," said the Director.
"Please," said Jane reluctantly.
"They would say," he answered, "that you do not fall in obedience through lack of love, but have lost love because you never attempted obedience."

Something in Jane that would normally have reacted to such a remark with anger or laughter was banished to a remote distance (where she could still, but only just, hear its voice) by the fact that the word Obedience-but certainly not obedience to Mark - came over her, in that room and in that presence, like a strange oriental perfume, perilous, seductive, ambiguous..

"Stop it!" said the Director, sharply.
Jane stared at him, open mouthed. There were a few moments of silence during which the exotic fragrance faded away.
"You were saying, my dear?" resumed the Director.
"I thought love meant equality," she said, "and free companionship."

"Ah, equality!" said the Director. "We must talk some other time. Yes, we must all be guarded by equal right's from one another's greed, because we are fallen. Just as we must all wear clothes for the same reason. But the naked body should be there underneath the clothes, ripening for the day when we shall need them no longer. Equality is not the deepest thing, you know."
"I always thought that was just what it was. I thought that it was in their souls that people were equal."
"You were mistaken," he said gravely. "That is the last place where they are equal. Equality before law, equality of incomes--that is very well. Equality guards life; it doesn't make it. It is medicine, not food. You might as well try to warm yourself with a blue-book."
"But surely in marriage...?"
"Worse and worse," said the Director. "Courtship knows nothing of it; nor does fruition. What has free companionship to do with that? Those who are enjoying something, or suffering something together, are companions. Those who enjoy or suffer one another, are not Do you not know how bashful friendship is? Friends – comrades - do not look at each other. Friendship would be ashamed..."
"I thought," said Jane and stopped.
"I see," said the Director. "It is not your fault. They never warned you. No one has ever told you that obedience – humility - is an erotic necessity. You are putting equality where it ought not to be."

Natural Tempo & Beat Count

I don't know if it's just me...it probably is, but I have what I call a natural tempo and natural beat count. As a drummer a maker of electronic music I always have a song or a beat going through my head. Sometimes it's someone else's song, sometimes it's something original. About 95% of the time if it is something original it's in a tempo between 180-200bpm. That's my 'natural' tempo range. I have no idea why, but when I get on my drums and play or when I'm at work doing random sciencey tasks I have a beat in that range in my head. I also have a natural beat count. On rare occasions I have a beat that's in 4:4 in my head. Most of the time, however, it's a beat with a count of 3 or 6...at a tempo between 180-200bpm. Seriously. I love songs and beats in 3:4 or mathematical variations thereof. Just check out my music page. Three of the songs on there are have a count of 3 or 6. (check out 'Prime' with a count of 23...oh yeah) Hard Jazz is the one that has beats closest to what's in my head. The first song that I heard that I can remember that was in 3:4, and that I realized had this count was the song 'Atlanta' by Stone Temple Pilots. The next one was Herbalisers remix of B Line by Lamb. These two songs were just the beginning of my natural swing towards 3/6 count music. So, I'm going give some links to my favorite tracks with this count or that includes it somewhere in the song (at least according to my ears). I say last part b/c I might post a Mastodon song and there are usually like 3 different beat counts in their songs...which is part of why they are awesome and have influenced not only my music production but also my drum playing immensely. ok, here we go:

edit: this turned out just to be a list of some of my favorite songs...the first five are in 3 or 6, but the rest are just awesome.

Stone Temple Pilots - Atlanta (an awesome live performance)
Lamb - B-Line(Herbaliser remix) (this is one the greatest songs ever)
Benea Reach - Sentiment (careful, this is Norwegian metal)
Flobots - Mayday!!! (has cuss words)
Mastodon - Mother Puncher (live)

Soundgarden - Never The Machine Forever (I'm adding this b/c it's Soundgarden and it's in 9:8)
Zao - Lies of Serpents A River of Tears
Zao - Kingdom of Thieves (this riff will eat you alive)
Switchfoot - Dirty Second Hands
Foo Fighters - Come Alive
Sevendust - Redefine
Sevendust - Rumble Fish
Midnight Juggeranuts - Into the Galaxy (love the bassline)
Incubus - Pendulous Threads (gargantuan groove in this song)
Run the Red Light - Side (another good bass line)

That's all I got right now. Enjoi

Neil Blomkamp & 'District 9'

I love movies. We do not get TV broadcasting of any type in my house (by choice), so get DVD's frmo Netflix and we 'rent' DVD's from the public library which has a large and always increasing catalogue of movie's and TV shows as well. I really love film. I love that it is a very complex form of communication. A director needs to be wary of the images and how things are filmed, of course, but also what music is used, what colors are used, how fast/slow the story proceeds. There is a lot to film, and teh more I watch the more I get into it. I say this because there is a movie coming out on August 14th that I am super-excited about, and the more I hear/read the more I want to see it.

District 9 is a movie written & directed by Neill Blomkamp who is the guy that almost made the Halo movie. I'm not giong to tell you what it's about. Just watch the trailers at Apple Trailers. Blomkamp has also directed some short films (District 9 is based on one of them). And that's why I posted, because I want to share a couple of them with you. I like Yellow more than Tempbot, but they're both pretty cool.

"Yellow"

"Tempbot"

Neill Blomkamp - Tempbot
by firat

New Toy!

So, we got one of our tax checks and we were due cell phone updates.  Well I got a new super-awesome-uber-cool-9000 Samsung Eternity.

It is freakin awesome.  This phone has a Wikipedia application for looking up stuff on wikipedia, and it's got (drumroll please!)...Monopoly.  Oh yeah, it has a monopoly game that is totally awesome.  And it takes awesome pictures. Check out this pic I took of Jude.

Yep, good stuff.  I can get on the web, check scores on ESPN, or WATCH highlights (as in video).  And it does well with phone calls too. :)

J.C. Ryle is Hardcore

So, thanks to Chuck our pastor and friend I have a new copy of J.C. Ryle's book Holiness. I'm hardly out of the introduction and it's pretty much blowing my mind. Because, you know, holiness seems to something I'm lacking...who knew. Anyway, here are some of my favorite parts of the introduction. One of the quotes made it to the top of the blog as you'll see.

"That faith in Christ is the root of all holiness--that the first step towards a holy life is to believe on Christ--that until we believe we have not a jot of holiness--that union with Christ by faith is the secret of both beginning to be holy and continuing holy--that the life that we live in the flesh we must live by the faith of the Son of God--that faith purifies the heart-- that faith is the victory that overcomes the world--that by faith the elders obtained a good report--all these are truths which no well-instructed Christian will ever think of denying."

"True holiness does not consist merely of believing and feeling, but of doing and bearing, and a practical exhibition of active and passive grace. Our tongues, our tempers, our natural passions and inclinations-- our conduct as parents and children, masters and servants, husbands and wives, rulers and subjects--our dress, our employment of time, our behavior in business, our demeanor in sickness and health, in riches and poverty--all, all these are matters which are fully treated by inspired writers."

"True holiness, we surely ought to remember, does not consist merely of inward sensations and impressions. It is much more then tears, and sighs, and bodily excitement, and a quickened pulse, and a passionate feeling of attachment to our favorite preachers and our own religious party, and a readiness to quarrel with everyone who does not agree with us. It is something of "the image of Christ." which can be seen and observed by others in our private life, and habits, and character, and doings. ( Romans 8:29.)"

"When a man can talk coolly of the possibility of "living without sin" while in the body, and can actually say that he has "never had an evil thought for three months," I can only say that in my opinion he is a very ignorant Christian! I protest against such teaching as this. It not only does no good, but does immense harm. It disgusts and alienates from religion far-seeing men of the world, who know it is incorrect and untrue. It depresses some of the best of God's children, who feel they never can attain to "perfection" of this kind. It puffs up many weak brethren, who fancy they are something when they are nothing. In short, it is a dangerous delusion."

"That "Christ dwells in our hearts by faith," and carries on His inward work by His Spirit, is clear and plain. But if we mean to say that beside, and over, and above this there is some mysterious indwelling of Christ in a believer, we must be careful what we are about. Unless we take care, we shall find ourselves ignoring the work of the Holy Spirit. We shall be forgetting that in the Divine economy of man's salvation election is the special work of God the Father--atonement, mediation, and intercession, the special work of God the Son--and sanctification, the special work of God the Holy Spirit."

"Let us never forget that truth, distorted and exaggerated, can become the mother of the most dangerous heresies."

"A holy violence, a conflict, a warfare, a fight, a soldier's life, a wrestling, are spoken of as characteristic of the true Christian."

"Inability to distinguish differences in doctrine is spreading far and wide, and so long as the preacher is "clever" and "earnest," hundreds seem to think it must be all right, and call you dreadfully "narrow and uncharitable" if you hint that he is unsound!"

"Finally, I must deprecate, and I do it in love, the use of uncouth and new-fangled terms and phrases in teaching sanctification. I plead that a movement in favor of holiness cannot be advanced by new-coined phraseology, or by disproportioned and one-sided statements--or by overstraining and isolating particular texts--or by exalting one truth at the expense of another--or by allegorizing and accommodating texts, and squeezing out of them meanings which the Holy Spirit never put in them--or by speaking contemptuously and bitterly of those who do not entirely see things with our eyes, and do not work exactly in our ways. These things do not make for peace: they rather repel many and keep them at a distance. The cause of true sanctification is not helped, but hindered, by such weapons as these. A movement in aid of holiness which produces strife and dispute among God's children is somewhat suspicious. For Christ's sake, and in the name of truth and charity, let us endeavor to follow after peace as well as holiness. "What God has joined together let not man put asunder.""


...goooood stuff.

Which of these things is not like the others?

"You Know My Name" Chris Cornell

Chris Cornell - Scream (New)
by Henrietta-Aime-Fumer_Tv

WHAT WERE YOU THINKING CHRIS!?

Logic & Understanding vs. God's Omnipotence

I read something really interesting today. Check it out some quotes.

"The truths of mathematics. . .were established by God and entirely depend on Him, as much, as do all the rest of His creatures. Actually, it would be to speak of God as a Jupiter or Saturn and to subject Him to the Styx and to the Fates, to say that these truths are independent of Him. . .You will be told that if God established these truth He would be able to change them, as a king does his laws; to which it is necessary to reply that this is correct. . . In general we can be quite certain that God can do whatever we are able to understand, but not that He cannot do what we are unable to understand. For it would be presumptuous to think that our imagination extends as far as His power."

--Descartes

"Suppose, then, that God's omnipotence enables Him to do even what is logically impossible and that He actually creates a stone too heavy for Him to lift. The critic of the notion of divine omnipotence is quite mistaken if he thinks that this supposition plays into his hands. What the critic wishes to claim, of course, is that when God has created a stone which He cannot lift He is then faced with a task beyond His ability and is therefore seen to be limited in power. But this claim is not justified.

For why should God not be able to perform the task in question? To be sure, it is a task - the task of lifting a stone which He cannot lift - whose description is self-contradictory. But if God is supposed capable of performing one task whose description is self-contradictory - that of creating the problematic stone in the first place - why should He not be supposed capable of performing another - that of lifting the stone? After all, is there any greater trick in performing two logically impossible tasks than there is in performing one?

If an omnipotent being can do what is logically impossible, then he can not onlt create situtations which He cannot handle but also, since he is not bound by the limits of consistency, he can handle situations which he cannot handle."

--Harry G. Frankfurt; 'The Logic of Omnipotence'