Friday, March 07, 2008

Captain Sensible Does It Again

I really cannot believe that people still take Captain Sensible seriously, after she has posted so much nastiness, and desires to silent any opposition to her movement. I mean, her version of the Mandatory Marriage Movement is downright cultic, and it is obvious that Captain Sensible knows she is loosing this debate, since she has to silence everyone who disagrees with her.

I have been going around to various looking at posts about a recent Boundless article about Martin Luther. I was posting about it over on the Boundless Blog, and I was wondering what others were saying about it. Of course, Captain Sensible could not resist posting about it. In the course of the discussion, she even spoke of yours truly. Here, amazingly, is what she said:

And a regular comment poster, who seems to have far too much time on his hands for the devil to make work for, decides that marriage is like "medicine for a cold".

Ok, I would love to see Captain Sensible take Egyptian Hieroglyphics and Sumerian. I would also love to see her be able to even get half way through Dr. VanGemeren's class on the poetic and prophetic books. Trust me, I have more than enough material on my plate. It is amazing that these people seem to know every little detail of my life even though they have never met me.

And, not only that, Captain Sensible is misrepresenting me. I was not talking about the nature of marriage, but the relationship marriage has to sanctification. Does sanctifying grace come through marriage? If it does, then you are either going to have to believe that every married person ends up sanctified, or you are going to have to deny the fourth point of Calvinism, Irresistible Grace. Hence, my comments have to do with the role marriage plays in relation to our sanctification, and have nothing whatsoever to do with the nature of marriage itself.

Of course, she also couldn't resist taking a cheap shot at Ted Slater for not trying to silence all opposition. I mean, I don't agree with Boundless on several issues, but they are our brothers and sisters in Christ, and they do not deserve the treatment that Captain Sensible is giving them, for no other reason than they don't run an entire blog on this issue. Want proof? Apparently, Captain Sensible said the following about Ted Slater on her blog:

Captain Sensible writes: When is Boundless going to get an editor that actually cares about the problem single Christian women face with regard to singleness?
Wouldn't Ted Slater be much happier, and better suited, to editing a blog on global warming?
Does he think it doesn't matter, or that no one will notice, that he really couldn't care less about singleness?
Does anyone have faith in the integrity of what is laughingly called their "comment moderation policy"?
Such a pity.

Notice, unless Ted Slater always addresses this issue, and turns the Boundless blog into a blog like hers, he doesn't care about the issue of singleness. Wow, I mean, how irrational can you get. Boundless has an entire section on their homepage of articles about singleness, and blog posts galore about them. Apparently, that is not enough for Captain Sensible. Unless you address it in almost every post, and censor yourself from criticism, you somehow don't care.

Of course, no one can hold this woman accountable, because she refuses to accept correction. She only displays comments favorable to her position on her blog so she doesn't have to answer for this stuff, and also, she is trying to get everyone she has to have the same mindset that she does, namely, that Debbie Maken must be right, and anyone who disagrees with her must be of the devil.

This is not the way Christians should behave. We should be willing to have a rational dialogue on the issues where we go back and forth and discuss these things. Expecially if we are so stupid, and Captain Semsible is so brilliant, you would think that she would be leaping for joy to show how silly we are in a dialogue. Of course, that is not going to happen any time soon.

12 comments:

Dan said...

I agree with you! Of course, I see that she just put one of my comments on her blog without my permission! She made fun of my sincere and encouraging comment, and of the older womans life and testimony. And, she TOTALLY ignored my comment about how Boundless has encouraged me to "step up to the plate" and be "proactive" in finding a spouse. She totally misrepresents Ted Slater and Boundless. I cannot believe anyone comes away from her blog encouraged; most likely the come away angry.

Of course, she (whoever she is, apparently is too cowardly to admit her identity to the point she will no longer comment on Boundless) will probably use this on her "blog" without my permission.

Dan

Dan said...

And another thing:

I just attempted to leave this post on the Captains blog:

"How can you totally misrepresent Ted's and Justin's intention for the Luther article on Boundless? He was ENCOURAGING those who are older that there is still hope. He was in NO WAY encouraging men to wait longer (I didn't read anything of the sort in his blog or in Justin's original article. My intention in relating the story of the 70yr old woman who was recently engaged was to encourage those who are beyond some undefined "reasonable age to marry" that they shouldn't give up hope.

Beside, I believe that my statement of lightning the fire under me to pursue a wife and be proactive would SUPPORT much of your blog's posts, but apparently you chose to ignore the positive and twist my Boundless posting into something negative.

I do hope that this post (if you dare post it) will infuriate you."

Dan

Dan said...

And another thing:

I just attempted to leave this post on the Captains blog:

"How can you totally misrepresent Ted's and Justin's intention for the Luther article on Boundless? He was ENCOURAGING those who are older that there is still hope. He was in NO WAY encouraging men to wait longer (I didn't read anything of the sort in his blog or in Justin's original article. My intention in relating the story of the 70yr old woman who was recently engaged was to encourage those who are beyond some undefined "reasonable age to marry" that they shouldn't give up hope.

Beside, I believe that my statement of lightning the fire under me to pursue a wife and be proactive would SUPPORT much of your blog's posts, but apparently you chose to ignore the positive and twist my Boundless posting into something negative.

I do hope that this post (if you dare post it) will infuriate you."

Dan

PuritanCalvinist said...

Hey, Dan!

I don't know if you saw, but Captain Sensible both posted and responded to you. And, again, I am just left shaking my head at how someone could say that men in their fourties who want to marry do not need encouragement that there is still hope for them to marry. Oh, no, if they just get up and do something, it must happen because God is obligated to grant marriage to anyone who asks for it. I mean, I cannot help but be left shaking my head.

I guarentee you, if you try to pursue it with her, she will cut you off eventually, if she hasn't made up her mind to do so already.

And, of course, Captain Sensible refuses to respond to anything that has been offered in rebuttal of Debbie Maken's attempt to prove that "delay of marriage" is a sin.

What's worse is that Captain Sensible has again gone after Boundless by saying that they are encouraging people to marry late. She has posted an article from Psychology Today that is about genetics. How Captain Sensible things that psychology is relevant to the issue of genetics is beyond me. Again, anything in service to Debbie Maken I guess.

Anyway, I am just amazed. As I said, she has the final plug, so, who is going to hold her accountable? I can only say that she will have a lot for which to answer to God.

God Bless,
Adam

Paul said...

Adam, in your first comment on that Boundless blog, you said:

Luther is allowing people to willfully refrain from marriage if they so desire, but is arguing that they cannot make any determination for tomorrow by a rash vow of celebacy. The moment that a person desires to get married, then he is obligated to pursue it.

...

It is the job of each individual to test themselves to see if they need the help of marriage to remain pure. If they do not need that help, then they are free to do either [although celebacy is better]. However, if you need the help of marriage, it is there for you, and you should take it.


Adam, in stating that a man is free to "pursue" and "take" a wife, you should have included the proviso, "if God lets him get married." Because, of course, God has ordained for some men to desire, pursue, and even need marriage, but then He withholds it from them according to His sovereign will. Right?

;)

PuritanCalvinist said...

Paul,

He can, indeed, withhold it in those instances [I should have made that more clear]. My only requirement in that instance is that he be seeking the remedy. Ultimately, even in that instance, our trust is to be in God, not in marriage.

Let me go back to my cold medicine analogy. Let us say that there is someone who lives in the jungles of Africa, and has a bad case of the cold. Now, in such an instance, he should be looking for the cold medicine even though none is avalable. However, obviously, if he hears of a missionary who has brought some cold medicine over, then he should get it.

Yes, many times God can withold marriage even in those instances. However, the key is that we are seeking the cold medicine so that we can have relief from the symptoms of what is really wrong with is, deep, indwelling sin.

Thanks for pointing out the ambiguity!

God Bless,
Adam

Dan said...

Thanks gang. I submitted the following on Captains website (warning it is a bit lengthy), and I may post it on my blog for my friends to read if they so choose:

"I agree with you to a point that there has been some bad teaching in the church towards singles. And I do agree that MANY men need a gentle but firm PUSH to find a wife (if that is their desire). How many times I have heard about the "contentment nirvana" that must be attained, how you must have all your ducks in line, being treated like I am committing some kind of sin by wanting a wife, etc.

I have NEVER (and this is the TOTAL truth) heard, until I was in my late 30s, had someone personally tell me that it was not a sin to want and pursue a wife, and that it was OK to want and desire a wife to fulfill a relational and sexual need (and I am not talking about a selfish, pornographic "need"), and this was all told to me by an older gentleman who was married with 6 kids and was an itinerant pastor. It took THAT long!!!

However, you KEEP misinterpreting my 70yr old example and Ted Slater. Ted is NOT advocating men to wait longer to get married. If anything, I see Boundlessline as advocating people to get to the marriage altar, and get there sooner than later. Also, the 70yr old lady from my church wasn't given by the pastor as an example for younger singles to FOLLOW, but it was just part of the pastor's testimony after her death. He was in NO way advocating men to put off marriage and women to wait until they are in the 70s to get a husband. How would you know what the situation was anyway? I was there and you were not!

It SEEMS that from reading your blog from time to time, as well as gortexgrrl/ChristianCamille/Jennifer/whoever she is nowadays comments on various websites that you and her and some others are jumping to conclusions about any testimony/book/article on the web that talks about people marrying later, that such writing is encouraging believers to put off marriage until they are older. I just don't see that, especially on Boundless. Your frequent attacks on Ted Slater and Boundless, as well as your unprovoked attack ("satire sketch" as you say) on my POSITIVE TESTIMONY post on the Luther/Boundless blog seem to come off to me AND OTHERS that you are just plain immature, angry, and have a personal axe to grind. Sorry to be blunt, but that is how it looks.

Now as to why I have been single all this time is between the LORD AND ME, and it is not for you or anyone else to judge. I indeed have made mistakes in my life, but I also believe that the Lord has been patient with me and is my chief coach, my cheerleader, watches my back, and isn't as condemming to me as other people who don't know me or have NEVER met me. Most importantly, I do NOT believe that me being single all these years has been a total waste or a sin; I believe the Lord has been working in me because of my extended singleness, and that He will use it, regardless of others might say.

I will indeed continue to pray for and ACTIVELY pursue (although we all must take some time in life to sit back and let God do his work), a wife. There are no guarantees in life, but it is a RISK well worth taking, and that includes welcoming children into the family. And I also have to admit that I am flattered by the idea of me as a 40yr old man looking for a wife is so offputting and creepy to some individuals (not necessarily talking about you despite your post of Saturday, March 8th), that they will feel the need to refer to and post scientific articles that speak negatively about the health aspects of "older" men wanting and having kids (as if that was the ONLY reason that God gave us marraige). I have had plenty of discouragement in my life from some friends, the church, and the enemy in regards to my desire for a mate, and I am certain that you can agree that the believers need more people and influences in their lives to ENCOURAGE them towards marriage (if that is their desire)."

I know that some people reading this may disagree with some of the things I believe or my tone, but this is what I needed to write.

April said...

In response to your first comment, there are very few who do take Captain Sensible seriously. But there are many who feel sorry for her and pray for her. Perhaps that would be better than perpetuating any more arguments at this point?

gortexgrrl said...

Dan, you wrote...

"It SEEMS that from reading your blog from time to time, as well as gortexgrrl/ChristianCamille/Jennifer/whoever she is nowadays comments on various websites that you and her and some others are jumping to conclusions about any testimony/book/article on the web that talks about people marrying later, that such writing is encouraging believers to put off marriage until they are older. I just don't see that, especially on Boundless. Your frequent attacks on Ted Slater and Boundless, as well as your unprovoked attack ("satire sketch" as you say) on my POSITIVE TESTIMONY post on the Luther/Boundless blog seem to come off to me AND OTHERS that you are just plain immature, angry, and have a personal axe to grind. Sorry to be blunt, but that is how it looks."

...and in doing so, you've kind of called me out. So here's my response to you:

However, well-intentioned you may have been with your 70 years old's love story, it's not helpful, not inspiring to put that kind of thing on a blog for young adults. Having to wait until they are in their 70's to marry is the last thing a surplus 30-something wants to hear, even if it does happen sometimes. It would be like saying to you, "it's OK, Dan, maybe you can marry some wrinkly older gal". Would you find that encouraging? Somehow I doubt it. OK? So perhaps you might want to leave the gramma's wedding stories for the elderly widow's blogs instead, 'kay? : )

I really appreciate it that you acknowledge that there have been bad teachings to Christian singles, and your story about not hearing any encouragement until your late 30's that it's OK to pursue marriage is VERY poignant. And something, I might add, that could serve as text book example of why we need to keep thinking critically about how we are ministering to singles in the church. So good on ya, for getting out there, and taking on a more active pursuit of a wife!

Please understand that my opposition to Ted's recent post about men marrying younger, has nothing to do with my disapproval of that -- a man can marry whomever he wants, among those who want to marry him. My problem was with his omission of his chances of being able to do so. I think it's good to encourage older men to marry, but that doesn't have to include "go younger" messages that are insensitive to the surplus single female readers, in addition to reinforcing some unrealistic expectations on the part of many of the older guys (not necessarily you) who have already wasted years chasing after unattainably young/attractive girls. And for the shy/homely/wounded guys who have hardly dated at all, "encouraging" them with big dreams of younger women, so they can recapitulate and compound their sense of rejection just doesn't seem wise.

Boundless is at its best when it encourages singles to use their senses to prayerfully make realistic (as opposed to pie-in-the-sky, hyper-spiritual) appraisals of their situation and use scriptural wisdom to make godly choices towards marriage.

wombatty said...

Captain Clueless behaves like a troll. The fact that she condemns Slater for censoring some comments when she engages in exactly the same behavior speaks volumes. To paraphrase Paul in Romans:

You, then, who teach others, do you not teach yourself? You who preach against censoring comments, do you censor comments?

In replying to a commenter on her latest post she writes:

Frankly, I can't imagine that would worry them, Lucie.
Care and consideration for women seems to be in very short supply amongst Christian men, sadly.
Many have been spoilt by having so many available women surrounding them, and so take women for granted, to be used for their own selfish needs.
Single Christian women mostly have very bad testimonies regarding church-going men.
Most non church-going believers, however, treat women very well.
This is based on anecdotal evidence, admittedly -- but quite a lot of it...


First, nearly all of these observations could easily be made by Christian men (my little brother, for instance) of many Christian women.

Second, for Captain Clueless to lament that '[c]are and consideration for women seems to be in very short supply amongst Christian men' while habitually writing of Christian men with open contempt (unless they join her Makenite crusade, of course) is rich.

The only way it seems that a man can legitmately express '[c]are and consideration for women' (in her opinion) is to doggedly pursue marriage - and cheerfully endure such treatment as she and Maken seem to enjoy dishing out to men (gotta keep 'em in their proper place, you know).

Then she bemoans that 'Christian men...have been spoilt by having so many available women surrounding them, and so take women for granted, to be used for their own selfish needs.' Speaking of spoiled - women like Maken and her little minion Captain Clueless have an entitlement mentality that would make a welfare queen blush. Us single men owe women our undying attention and dogged pursuit - apparently regardless of their own conduct (What kind of eunuch are you?, for example).

Perhaps they are bitter that a man has yet to 'step up to the plate' to spoil them - they're entitled to it you know; luxury vacations at swanky hotels and all. It's a man's responsibility after all...

It never seems to occur to some (men or women) that their own attitudes and behavior might be their biggest obstacles to finding a mate. Of course that would require a bit of personal responsibility and humility - something that seems in short supply amongst Maken's acolytes.

Paul said...

Adam,
This is totally off-topic but I just thought you might enjoy reading this article:
"A Christian Answer to Euthyphro's Dilemma"

RedKnight said...

To quote from the topic post, "Does sanctifying grace come through marriage? If it does, then you are either going to have to believe that every married person ends up sanctified, or you are going to have to deny the fourth point of Calvinism, Irresistible Grace." What then do you have to say in response to the scriptural passage? http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/7-14.htm "For the unbelieving husband is sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified through her believing husband; for otherwise your children are unclean, but now they are holy."