Something my wife taught my children [Christian discussion]

[Before you can make things better, you have to stop making them worse...]

So... my wife taught them that "The Bible says once you have forgiven someone you are not allowed to ever mention the issue again.  If you do you are the one sinning."

I've heard that taught by some people at the church we attend and when I've challenged them... .really gotten no answer.  I wish I would have pushed it more.

I would agree you shouldn't "hold it against them" but never speaking of it again... .that seems about impossible for some things.

Thoughts?

I'm open that I may have missed something in the Bible... .but at the moment I can't think of anything that could even be twisted into what was taught.

FF

[formflier]

So... my wife taught them that "The Bible says once you have forgiven someone you are not allowed to ever mention the issue again.  If you do you are the one sinning."

I've heard that taught by some people at the church we attend and when I've challenged them... .really gotten no answer.  I wish I would have pushed it more.

I would agree you shouldn't "hold it against them" but never speaking of it again... .that seems about impossible for some things.

Thoughts?

I'm open that I may have missed something in the Bible... .but at the moment I can't think of anything that could even be twisted into what was taught.

FF

[empath]

It has to do with the idea of God removing our sins from us and not remembering our sins. If you speak of it again, you are remembering the sin.

Ps 103:12
Is 43:25
Jer 31:34
Heb 8:12
Heb 10:17

[I Am Redeemed]

Maybe the "love keeps no record of wrongs" in 1 Corinthians 13?

I have never heard of such a thing. Of course, I get the part about not using the past to shame or condemn someone when you supposedly forgave the person.

But "not allowed to mention it ever again"? Can anyone produce a Scripture that supports that?

The apostle Paul brought up his own past sins, though he had been forgiven. If the Bible says you can't ever mention past forgiven sin, wouldn't that apply to your own sins?

Seems like a really strict interpretation of Scripture to me.

[Fian]

I would say in general, if you forgave someone it is best to never bring it up again.  However, if you are seeing a trend, and they are repeating the same offense over and over, I see no reason why you can't point out the trend.  All in all, it is dangerous making rules that aren't specifically stated in the Bible.

You might have fun pointing out the hypocrisy of your wife when she remembers the sins of others.  That might show her that her rule doesn't make sense in all situations.

[formflier]

Thanks for the verses... .I'll do some study and reflection this morning.

Before I do... .it would seem the consensus is the "Bible doesn't say that"... .right?  I get it that you can infer from what the Bible says that you shouldn't... .but

I should probably hush and read first.

FF

[formflier]

Seems like a really strict interpretation of Scripture to me.

So... thanks for the verses.  I read through them and I don't see anything that can be reasonably interpreted (or even unreasonably) to suggest what she taught to our children.

I tend to be as literal as possible first and if there is clear meaning from scripture, leave it at that.  I'm struggling at the moment to think of a verse that doesn't have a plain meaning... .that I interpret otherwise.

Offhand some of the "prescriptions" in Pauls letters I believe were for specific situations in specific churches and not meant to be taken as "gospel" for everyone.  Such as how women can wear their hair, dress and those kinds of things.  When I read those I see churches with intractable problems or problem people and direction given "just do xyz and get back to the business of the gospel... .these problems you can't solve yourselves are a distraction."

FF

[40days_in_desert]

I think what your wife may have been trying to convey is that if one truly forgives someone that the one who forgives doesn't keep bringing that transgression up in the future. This could easily bring up negative emotions for both the "offender" and the "offended". It may not be specifically written in scripture to not speak of it again but I feel that this is part of the foundation of forgiveness as Christ meant it to be.
Forgiveness does not mean to forget though. Your wife may feel that forgiveness means to act like nothing ever happened after forgiveness. That nothing should change. Depending on the offense, that may be harmful. Someone gave me an example once to illustrate this point: If someone molested your child while in their trusted care, you might be able to forgive them but you surely wouldn't allow them to be around your child after something like that happened. In this example forgiveness was granted but boundaries would be put in place to protect your child.
 

[Skip]

Before I do... .it would seem the consensus is the "Bible doesn't say that"... .right?  

I don't necessarily read that to be the consensus, here.  

Let's take this out of the abstract... .

What is the context of what she said, what was going on?

What is the context of what you are thinking to do in this situation?

Leading the family in faith should be a nurturing process, not a technical or divisive one. I might question whether your reaction to your wife saying "you are Jesus, now" in frustration was that. Please don't be offended, I'm trying to help. Your reaction was extreme and you incorrectly labeled that blasphemy - is that how you want your children to act if someone makes a cutting remark on the playground at school? Is that God's purpose for them? Will that earn them respect and a recognition as a child of virtue? Might that action reach into the heart of a non-believer and inch them closer to the word?

They will learn far more from what you do than what you say.

Anyway, lets examine the context.

[formflier]

Anyway, lets examine the context.

Yes... let's do.  And let's examine it accurately before labeling people's behavior.

Wouldn't you agree? 

Seriously... .what good comes from selectively picking out "context" to labeling behavior as "extreme"

Was that the first time there was public labeling of me in front of my kids?

Was this instance worse or better than prior instances?  ( I understand that can be a debatable point)

FF

[formflier]

What is the context of what she said, what was going on?

What is the context of what you are thinking to do in this situation?
 

She was leading a Bible study, kids read some verses.  She got very animated and loud at the end apparently trying change subjects (I haven't discussed this with my wife yet).  She ended the lesson by saying that the Bible says you should ask for forgiveness, that you should forgive others and that once an issue is forgiven you aren't supposed to ever bring it up again.  In fact you will be the sinner if you bring it up again...

I chose not to intervene at the time and wanted to think about it.

I've asked her several times since then for time to talk and she is being obvious about not being able to talk.

My plan is to ask her privately to show me the scripture that informed her teaching to the children.

Then... .I'll consider her answer before proceeding.

There is context here... .lot of history.  Her teaching children things "that are in the Bible" that simply aren't there (but she wishes they are).

So... .this post is part of my effort to be thoughtful vice reactive.  To be open that there is something I missed.

Keep in mind that my wife and I (and the churches we have attended) generally eschew "interpreting" when a "plain reading" makes sense.

So... .a verse that says "God did xyz" should not be interpreted to say "therefor we must do xyz or else we are in sin"  That verse means "God did xyz... ."   

FF

[formflier]

   you incorrectly labeled that blasphemy

blas·phe·myDictionary result for blasphemy
/ˈblasfəmē/Submit
noun
the act or offense of speaking sacrilegiously about God or sacred things; profane talk.


What definition do you use?

FF

[I Am Redeemed]

OK,

I have been taught that "remembering sin no more" means that God does not exact the punishment for sin once that sin has been forgiven. In other words, Jesus paid that price for us and when we are forgiven of our sins God does not remember (or "chooses to forget") the debt we would have to pay for those sins. It does not mean there will be no consequences for sin on earth. One may be forgiven for using drugs yet still suffer health issues that result from drug use because that is one of the consequences that can result from that behavior.


In that context, we don't have the power to "remember sin no more" the same way that God does because we don't have the power to cancel debt for sin in the same way that He does.

I don't see anything in any of these verses that say "you are a sinner if you mention anyone's sin that has already been forgiven."

Redeemed

[Fian]

I have been taught that "remembering sin no more" means that God does not exact the punishment for sin once that sin has been forgiven. In other words, Jesus paid that price for us and when we are forgiven of our sins God does not remember (or "chooses to forget") the debt we would have to pay for those sins. It does not mean there will be no consequences for sin on earth.

I disagree that forgiveness means there is no punishment.  To take the example of David and his adultery/murder, God gave him very specific punishments for his sin.  That doesn't mean he wasn't forgiven, or we wouldn't be seeing him in heaven.  As a parent you will forgive your child, but that doesn't mean you won't punish them for doing wrong.  I see it more as a person in the role of judge meets out a fitting punishment for the crime, but on a personal level they choose to no longer hold it against the person.  Of course, this doesn't apply to husband/wife who aren't in the role of judge over the other.

[Skip]

FF, I'm going to be painfully frank in hopes of pushing you to step back and consider another point of view. I'm being an accountability partner and in that context, I'm not telling you what is right or to align your faith with mine - I'm asking you to open your heart to examine your prioritizes and your beliefs here. I am asking asking your to critically ask yourself if you are being a hypocrite (as per Matthew 7:5). It might suggest that you sit with your pastor and run some of these conflicting thoughts by him and ask the him to sort it out for you... .connect the dots. 

1. I explained my thoughts on blasphemy in your last thread. If it was me, I would be questioning whether vanity and ego played a significant role in my reaction.

Let's change the backdrop and the players but keep the act the same. Lets say my daughter (__ years from now) is at a party with her husband and an old friend walks into the party sporting new beard. Her husband say, wow, Keith, you look like Jesus. My daughter heres this, becomes visibly outraged, states to everyone that can hear "you are a sinner" and runs out of the party.  Later she wants her husband to repent to her for their to be peace in the home.

Does this sound right? Did I teach her this? Was I right?

Were the actors who called Jim Caviezel (in Gibson's 'Passion' ) "Jesus", blasphemous. Should the Christians in the audience walked out, demanded the theater owner repent to them?

Your wife insulted you (not Jesus). Sure you can split hairs and see that as blasphemous in a really strict strict determination. OK.

But would you have reacted the same way if she said, "hey Ted had a discernment and said God wants us to serve a special menu at the church dinner, sometimes I think he thinks he is Jesus". 

Would you be outraged, shut down, schedule a meeting, ask her to repent to you before there would be peace in the family?

Do you see my point?  It is very easy, very human, to let our ego intercede in these things and we need to be very careful not weaponize our beliefs. I'm suggesting you to ask yourself this question. But, "no Skip" I need not", is a fine answer.   

2. This is my personal belief (so you know my bias):

"Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain. ~ Exodus 20:7

Thou refers to me.  Lord refers to who will hold myself and others accountable. .

I have mentored many people in my life and some have been in a crisis of faith and cursed Jesus for the hardship in their life. I don't belief the Lord put me in that conversation to call them blasphemous and ask them to repent to me or to Jesus. I believe my purpose is to let them know that the Jesus was on earth and experienced the extreme pain men can suffer on earth and he knows how to walks beside us in times of crisis and give us strength. Open your heart. He will help you.

A thought, FF.

[I Am Redeemed]

Fian,

You are right, David lost his infant son as a result of his murder/adultery. That is what I meant by "consequences"- we may still see consequences in this life as a result of sin, but the "punishment" of that sin- eternity separated from God in hell- has been paid for by the blood of Jesus.

I guess I didn't communicate that very well. 

[Fian]

She was leading a Bible study, kids read some verses.  She got very animated and loud at the end apparently trying change subjects (I haven't discussed this with my wife yet).  She ended the lesson by saying that the Bible says you should ask for forgiveness, that you should forgive others and that once an issue is forgiven you aren't supposed to ever bring it up again.  In fact you will be the sinner if you bring it up again...

I chose not to intervene at the time and wanted to think about it.

Big picture question here.  If you come to the conclusion that she is wrong, do you really need to take it further?  We all make mistakes in what we say.  Isn't it ok to say mommy and daddy have different ideas on the topic instead of trying to come to a definitive decision?

[empath]

I have heard teaching of this type, myself, in various churches. If God "forgets" sin and doesn't remember it, we are supposed to do likewise. I think of the Lord's Prayer. Bringing up the sins means that one has not forgiven and "forgotten" them. It is an interpretation of the Bible that many in the "conservative evangelical" community hold.

At the same time, I don't think this is really about who has the correct interpretation. I also don't think we as believers should be pointing out others' sins without first reflecting on our lives and turning toward God in repentance.

TBH, I'm sensing defensiveness and an attempt to gain control over. It seems that y'all's interactions around religion are drama triangles, viewing yourselves as the victim and your spouse as the perpetrator, hoping to enlist God/Bible/Church as the rescuer.

As someone who was told on a regular basis that I was sinning - usually because h wanted to make me do something, it was not a good way to maintain or repair a relationship. It was destructive.

[formflier]

Let's change the backdrop and the players but keep the act the same.

Then keep the story the same... .the way I read it... it has significantly changed.

Details matter to some people... other people take broad brushes.   In this case, to me... the details matter.

There is another "motive" that might be a work here... other than vanity (which I'm still waiting for you to connect some dots for me... .I don't get that)

I'm going to be accountable for how I lead my household and the direction I give my family.  Part of that is clearly speaking and giving or removing my blessing about how I feel the Holy Spirit is leading me.  Once I give that blessing... or remove it, those that are called to follow it have a choice.  If they follow it then I'm responsible in God's eyes.  If they don't they are responsible.  I'm not called to force them, but I am called to give clear direction.

Skip... .perhaps you could consider that is the point of view I have and that there really is no hidden motive or unconscious bias that needs to be excavated.

So... .please clearly state what plank you believe I have in my eye?

FF

[formflier]

Look... perhaps the "lord's name in vain thing" hasn't ever been explained here.  It's a big deal to me.  Fine if it's not for others.

As you guys know... I'm a Sailor and the term "cuss like a Sailor" is out there for a reason.  In my commands the only time I would reprimand and cast side eye at my Sailors was if they used the Lord's name in vain. 

Perhaps it's a personal tic of mine and I get it some will think that's good or bad... .to each his own.

So... .I suppose I'm saying all this to say I wasn't picking on my wife in particular nor was my reaction to her out of character to how I would have reacted to others saying something similar. 

By the same token it would be really odd for me to treat the rest of the world a certain way and somehow modify that for my wife.  If anything... I should hold those in my home to a higher standard.

FF

[empath]

FF, I'm not sure how you are making the jump from what she said to "blasphemy" and "taking the Lord's name in vain".

In the context, she meant that Jesus was sinless and did not need forgiveness - that's in alignment with the Christian belief system. She also didn't use it as a swear word. She pointed out that you aren't asking forgiveness, so she made the connection with Jesus. At most, she might be accusing you of blasphemy - similar to the Pharisees accusing Jesus of blasphemy when he claimed to be God. You have even confirmed that you aren't asking forgiveness due to her inappropriate reaction.

 

[Skip]

So... .please clearly state what plank you believe I have in my eye?

I don't think there is more to say, FF.

[gotbushels]

formflier and others  

Thanks for the discussion, I learned a few things.

I hope this helps give you and the others some support.

formflier from this post,

"Oh... .there is FF... .he's Jesus Christ

Absolutely disgusts me that someone can claim

it seems like she's attacking you, you care deeply about that something, you then stepped in to engage on her terms, I don't know why--you probably had good reason for it.

So... my wife taught them that

Here, what I do know is that if people attempt to teach people I care about the 'wrong' thing, I may feel frustrated if I think the instruction isn't right. Of course, if you care a lot about your children, then it'll rile you even more. I understand how deep this may go. E.g., I was employed to teach for some time, it developed into my sense of identity, and I took pride in the gift. When people are adamant about doing things I know are ridiculous, wow it riles me. Then I think less nobly, well, not my class, not my issue. Point is that religion seems like this to you. It developed into your sense of identity, you take pride in the gift. Your kids could be like your class. If I were you--I'd surely get blown up. It feels like someone stepping in to do my job.

If scripture is being used in your relationship to undermine a given position, then it can feel--for the person whom is receiving the words--very much like weaponising the scripture. I think empath put how I would feel quite well,

As someone who was told [... .] I was sinning - usually because [some person] wanted to make me do something, it was not a good way to maintain or repair a relationship. It was destructive.

emphasis added. The point is not to guilt you or to incriminate your partner about using scripture effectively or etc. I simply want to communicate to you that I get what a back-and-forth may feel like. From that feeling, I feel that I would be under attack.



To bring it back to simple things; in the BPD context, when I'm attacked, I get a want to JADE. Anyway, as a peer of yours here--especially with your 13,000 posts (wow mackerel!)--I'm not here to tell you what JADE is etc. If I'm being attacked, the more I feel that want to JADE. Of course, if you're passionate about following the bible, and it's being used as a tool against your points to undermine whatever position you've taken, then how aggravating is that? It could even drive me up the wall.

From a bystander's perspective, it looks like something she did riled you up, and you're using some forms of JADE--albeit a quite complicated version and going to scripture--to enlist backing on your points. By the way going to scripture is of course is a fabulous thing.

Like Notwendy here, I felt a lot of this reading the discussion,

I agree with the others that religion is your Achilles heel. You've been able to be calm and collected with most things she says to you, but not with this. You react because it is meaningful to you.

On Detaching, this is more of a big deal because BP's may seem to latch on to our weaknesses, at least unconsciously--thereby driving us to keep inside the tangle.

This reminds me a lot about when people tried to push my buttons (nice noticing empath), but in a different situation. At work, people call it getting "hooked" into whatever the other person is going at.

So based on getting hooked, I'm interested in your response to this,

Our faith is not measured by our ability to defend against what people call us.

FF, can you think of a different way to react if this happens again?

<edit:content>

[formflier]

I don't think there is more to say, FF.

How is it helpful to someone that is obviously not getting it when you are not clearly spelling something out... .to not clearly spell something out?

I get it you are trying to help me or point something out... .but I'm not seeing it.

I tend to be a pretty straightforward guy and many times don't connect dots that others think I should connect.

FF

[formflier]

FF, I'm not sure how you are making the jump from what she said to "blasphemy" and "taking the Lord's name in vain".

In the context, she meant that Jesus was sinless and did not need forgiveness - that's in alignment with the Christian belief system. She also didn't use it as a swear word. She pointed out that you aren't asking forgiveness, so she made the connection with Jesus. At most, she might be accusing you of blasphemy - similar to the Pharisees accusing Jesus of blasphemy when he claimed to be God. You have even confirmed that you aren't asking forgiveness due to her inappropriate reaction.

So... .it seems to me insulting to Jesus to say he is me.  Also insulting to Jesus to use his name to mock someone.

to me

sac·ri·le·giousDictionary result for sacrilegious
/ˌsakrəˈlijəs/Submit
adjective
involving or committing sacrilege.
"a sacrilegious act"
synonyms:   profane, blasphemous, impious, sinful, irreverent, irreligious, godless, ungodly, unholy, disrespectful

All of those words see to me to be what she did.

It certainly was disrespectful... .and since there is a religious connotation... .that's where I get blasphemy as being the most accurate.


Several people apparently doubt this is/was blasphemy.  I recall even asking for a definition.

Please share how you define blashphemy and/or how this event does or doesn't fulfill that definition.


What is central to the Christian faith?  

IMO... .it is that Jesus is the son of God.  Well... .by saying that I'm Jesus... .it attacks the central tenant of the Christian faith.

My initial reaction was not based on what I "think" she meant upon further reflection... .it was an expression of my shock that she would say that in front of our family.

Now... .perhaps she "went there" because I stopped reacting to other shocking things she has said in the past.  That's a pretty strong likelihood.

And... .my guess is next time I hear this from her (anyone here not think I'll hear this again?) it won't have the same impact... plus... I'll have thought about a response for a while.

FF

[Skip]

There is one whose rash words are like sword thrusts, but the tongue of the wise brings healing. ~ Proverbs 12:18 ESV

FF, thought I'd ask what your thoughts are on this looking back. How did this end? How did you feel about it? How did you feel about the feedback you received here?

[formflier]

Sadly..like many things it sort of just faded away, vice any sort of resolution or understanding.

The few times it would come up she would vacillate between "I never said you were Jesus" or sometimes "you know what I meant" but any sort of acknowledgement that the content of her words was wrong or hurtful or inappropriate was never expressed.

She did and does often express that "she was too loud" or "shouldn't have said it that way" and then will sometimes backpedal that "I made her do it"

So...no real resolution. 

I feel like I got great feedback here.  I should probably read the entire thread again.  Many supported and some challenged points of view.  All helpful.

There is a new thread about attachment styles and that has me interested to chat with my P tomorrow.   Something I want to make sure I've understood correctly.

When my wife is "far" from God...things calm.  Things go well and FF is doing things that represent "closeness" or "Godliness"...things won't stay calm for long, even though that's what she expresses she wants.

Think about what we generally say about pwBPD or BPD in general.  It's a "disorder" of "intimacy".  A Christians relationship with their creator is certainly an intimate thing.  So it seems to make sense to me there would be turbulence there.

If true...that's nice to know...but what do I do with it?

My P has also suggested my wife tries to "triangulate" with God and for me not to engage in lengthy religious arguments where my wife is "wrong" and ends up feeling "persecuted".

FF

[Notwendy]

I think we've been saying that too- God, or Biblical verses seem to be the third party in the Karpman triangle and the long discussions part of this.

A relationship with God is a relationship. If someone has dysfunctional relationships- they can also have a dysfunctional relationship with God.

I don't know what you mean by "far from God". IMHO, that's not possible. Whether or not a person is aware of it, God isn't far from anyone. Although in your family structure, you have the role of spiritual leader, what's in your wife's mind and heart is personal to her and she has her own relationship with her Creator.

I would be concerned if she's teaching the kids strange things, but her own thoughts, those are between her and God. She has her own spiritual path.

[formflier]

The far from God is really about what it appears (or she says) she is feeling.

Very similar to pwBPD acting out "more" when they are "more intimate" with someone, it appears that my wife acts out more...the "more intimate" she is with God.

Practically speaking:  More Bible reading, more praying = my rockin and rollin in my r/s with her.

A more nonchalant (or "farther") view of things keeps things more relaxed. 

There is an interesting double bind for her that "conservative Christianity" is very patriarchal.  She claims she wants to be the "super conservative Christian wife" and yet wants no part of patriarchy.    Basically.."I'll take all  that but I get to be in charge...I get to not be vulnerable".

Although when it suits her it provides easy access to "victim".

FF

 

[empath]

FF, I was thinking back over my marriage, and as my h became more involved in church (or when the leadership would let him be more involved), he became more anxious about following the "rules" of conservative Christianity. Until about 6 years ago, he would try to be more involved, but often would be put off or outright told that he couldn't. He had the attitude that he was going to "make them" put him in leadership, prove to them that he was "called". The past 6 years, things got more unstable in our home. Threats of divorce were thrown around on a more regular basis.

In a way, I'm glad that I was kind of forced to distance myself from h's church. It gave me a boundary where his spirituality and church experience was separate from mine. He was all fine as long as his pastors were telling him what to do and say - he thought this would make our relationship better and him feel better.

He spent most of the last year angry at God - and at the church, for not fixing the mess and his feelings.

I have stayed out of his relationship with God for a long time, even when he was studying another religion.