voddie baucham explains the video clip on “older men yearning for younger women”

VB

A few months ago someone shared a YouTube clip with me of pastor and homeschooling and FIC leader, Voddie Baucham, discussing a father’s relationship with a daughter. (You will find the quote at the 2:08 time mark.) I posted that clip here as well as on True Womanhood and then, earlier this week, reposted it in a discussion on Amy Scott’s blog as an example of patriocentric teachings that I find troubling. Evidently I was not the only one who took issue with his claims that:


“A lot of men are leaving their wives for younger women because they yearn for attention from younger women. And God gave them a daughter who can give them that.”


Today, Voddie *has chosen to respond to the posting of that clip and I feel compelled to respond to his statement for several reasons. I hope you will read his essay before you continue reading here.

First of all, I have no personal issues with Voddie Baucham.  I do not particularly care how he raises his children, what sort of marriage he has with his wife, or what kind of dog food he feeds his dog.  It matters not to me if his wife has her head covered, uncovered, or shorn.  I don’t care if his daughter can do post graduate work and research or can whistle Dixie while chewing crackers and covering one eye.  I do care deeply and feel passionately, however, about some of his teachings.

It is quite sad to me that I have to go on record as saying any attempts I have made or continue to make to challenge Mr. Baucham are certainly not intended to be slanderous, libelous, or gossip.  I continue to be very careful to examine what he teaches both against the backdrop of the patriocentric movement he represents and in light of my understanding of the Word of God. (I posted the entire clip so everyone could see it IN CONTEXT and have quoted it verbatim.)  But since asking good questions and pondering the very real ramifications of teachings is often considered as such, here is my disclaimer. (Since I have never threatened anyone with death and can’t imagine the intelligent men and women who have discussed this topic with me doing so, I am hoping that he is certainly not assigning that to me.  It is quite offensive and irresponsible to see that last accusation thrown in the general direction of those of us who are asking sincere questions.)

When I first saw the YouTube clip in question, I was stunned.  I watched it in context; I tried to put it in the best possible light.  Since he is a pastor, I was assuming that he was following the golden rule of preaching…making the main things the plain things and the plain things the main things.  I also assumed that he was speaking from a place of Spiritual understanding rather than one of psychological conjecture. I have repeatedly asked for his quote to be placed in some sort of Biblical context and when I saw he was going to respond, I hoped I would see that.  So imagine my surprise to see no Scripture whatsoever, in spite of the fact that he evokes God’s name in his initial statement.

In his initial quote, Mr. Baucham assumes that it is normal for men to yearn for the attention of younger women because he implies that God gave them daughters to righteously deal with this yearning.  The only Biblical response to this “yearning for younger women,” I believe, is for men to acknowledge that they are sinning when they have that desire, to repent of it and turn away from it, and to recognize that God’s standard is yearning for ONLY the attention of his wife, whether she is 20 or 120.  Any other yearning, sexual or otherwise, is sin and must be dealt with as such.  God does not provide a means for fulfilling wrong yearnings, in daughters or otherwise.  That is the response I would have expected from a pastor, especially one whose desire is to minister to families.

Instead, Mr. Baucham invokes “Psychology 101” and exhorts us to pursue “fleshly wisdom,” (2 Corinthians 1:12), referencing filmmaker Alfred Hitchcock and actress Amanda Peat. So, as per your example, come along, Pastor Baucham, climb up on my leather couch, and let’s take a look at what the purveyors of pop psychology have to say about the reason older men yearn for the attention of younger women.

This is what my research tells me “Psychology 101” has to say:

1. Older men pursue younger women in order to preserve their fertility.  Biologically they desire to procreate and the best means of doing so is with a younger woman, not a post menopausal wife.

2.  Older men are sexually aroused by a fertile woman.

3.  Older men feel younger and sexually invigorated by younger women.

4.  Older men are flattered by the attention of younger women who are looking for maturity and stability (as opposed to those guys who are 30 and still playing video games all day) though not necessarily father figures.  In fact, most younger women who pursue older men choose men no more than 6 years their senior.

5.  An older man feels the need to compete with younger men in the work force and having a younger woman makes him appear more virile.  In the animal kingdom, the strongest males get the best females so a younger woman makes a man appear stronger.

6.  Older men are attracted to younger women because of the hard core and even soft core pornography that has set the standard for female attractiveness.

7.  Older men are attracted to younger women because they are more impressionable and are more easily influenced than women their own age.  It is considered a “throw back to patriarchy.” (exact quote)

8.  Older men are attracted to younger women because it is a distinctly human tendency to use visual stimuli in making choices of a mate. One author wrote: “More experimental work has been done on the connection between extreme youth, sexual attractiveness and pedophilia.”

9.  Older men say they feel less anxiety about sexual performance around younger women who are more inexperienced.

Interestingly, I was unable to find a single reference to Mr. Baucham’s “well-known cultural catchphrase” that older men turn to younger women because they really want a daughter.  I hope he will provide a link to this “Psychology 101” notion, though a Scriptural reference would be even better!

My second concern regarding Mr. Baucham’s statement is that there is an assumption that daughters are to give a special type of devotion to their fathers because of this alleged need.  It places a responsibility on a child that should never be there.  I do not know any passage of Scripture that talks about children fulfilling the needs of their parents.  In fact, it seems to me that Scripture teaches just the opposite, that we are to deny ourselves and follow Christ.  That we are to be like Jesus, and lay down our lives for others.  That we are to be willing to be poured out as a sweet smelling sacrifice to the Lord.  Godly family relationships happen when mothers and fathers and sons and daughters all practice the one anothering commands within their homes, forgetting about themselves and their own needs.

It is so sad to me that these wonderful family relationships, true gifts from the Lord, are being turned into such convoluted, unnatural bonds.  This latest offering from Mr. Baucham is yet one more reason for homeschooling moms and dads to be ever vigilant and to hold all teachings up to the light of the Word of God.

*Voddie Baucham has revised his response.

 photo Blog__Sidebar_Hello_zps79b9481b.png

Comments

  1. Savannah says

    Thatmom, thank you for being willing to stand up to what is obviously an attempt on Baucham’s part to intimidate you (and others with ears to hear and eyes to see) with the usual charges of libel, slander, and gossip. *yawn*

    I [obviously] read Baucham’s “explanation” and found it lacking. I have viewed the clip of the statement in question in full context (not ten seconds which he seems to allege) and do not see how he can defend his statement, although he still tries. He tries to lay the blame at the feet of others, (such as the church where he spoke these words – after all, if he really “said that”, they should have stopped him or something, or at least not reproduced the video), when he really just needs to say, if indeed it is the truth, “Look, I just misspoke. I was trying to get across one point, and I inadvertently articulated another”.

    By digging in, he just makes himself look stubborn and foolish. Wrapping it up in “psych 101″ language just digs that hole deeper and deeper. He seems oblivious to the obvious implications. And I think we all know that older men do not turn to younger women because they are. . .uh. . . looking for a “daughter figure”.

    And I have had it “up to here” with these leaders of this particular movement crying foul every time someone questions them in the blogosphere. It is not libel, slander or gossip! My message to them is this: you have put yourself out there, indeed making your very livelihood off the fact that you are leader in this movement, giving sermons and lectures, speaking at conferences, selling books and DVD’s, you name it. It is duplicitous and double-minded to then say that your views are not up for public scrutiny – because you are the one who made them public in the first place. It was your choice, and part of the deal is that you have to deal with criticism. A true leader and servant of Christ would welcome criticism, as an opporutunity to examine their words and deeds to see if they have misspoken or represented the Kingdom in an unflattering way. Many of these leaders, including Baucham, seem much more concerned with their thin-skinned selves than engaging in any introspection about their words and conduct.

  2. says

    I have to agree with Savannah: It struck me as I read Baucham’s article diatribe that he could have simply acknowledged, “I really spoke poorly” or, “I can see how I misspoke.” He didn’t need to go on the attack.

    Thank you for seeking to hold us all to the highest standard.

  3. Holly says

    It is interesting to me that in the video Dr. Baucham is calling us to Biblical love. Hmmm. Yet he can’t back up this particular assertion with a Bible verse OR even a biblical concept.

    This is truly bizarre.

    Savannah, you forgot the word “persecuted.” Oh, how easily those words are slung around.

  4. David says

    I totally agree with Savanah. I’ve seen in groups I know where control and a sense of propriety are involved. Question them and they turn around and get pretty in-your-face with “how dare you ask me” or a barrage of questions meant to deflect it.

    But this attitude of “libel”, “slander” appealing to our sense of sympathy regarding so called “death threats” is very sad.

    I remember Joe Fleener wrote a three part series about Patriarchy and talked about how he viewed it something with a wrong foundation. One P group came up with a response by, I believe, a lawyer on the team which state something like “Joe’s comments have brought much hurt in our circles”, and other things like that. I thought, “C’mon, Joe has no vindictive tone, he was just stating facts and giving his opinion.” But this person basically rambled on and on (other commenters on Joe’s link to their response we’re confused as to what the point was in the response) and I came away with the basic message of “we’re hurt…he called us names”.

    Savannah’s last paragraph should be carved in stone. They made all this public, so public comment is welcome. And that’s what it is. Comment. The Bereans didn’t say “well, it’s Paul. We don’t need to question it.” They DID question it, and scripture records that they had more noble character than other Christians for that very reason. They looked for themselves.

  5. shadowspring says

    Savannah put it so well. I appreciate her taking the time to write.

    I also very much appreciate thatmom, and all she is doing to help protect the home school families out there who are at risk of being sucked into the extra-Biblical cultish teachings of the patriocentric movement, Vision Forum being at the forefront.

    We older women have a scriptural responsibility to teach the younger women what it means to truly love their husbands and children. It is not true love to allow your brother taken in a fault to continue blithely down that path. It is true love to point it out with humility, as the posters on this blog and thatmom have done.

    Thanks for having the courage to put into practice the holy counsel of God, all of you who did ask Mr. Baucham to clarify. May God himself reward you with blessings that cannot be taken away. :)

  6. says

    David, I, too, am so weary of the cries of “libel, gossip, and slander” that are trotted out every time someone is publicly questioned. To imply that every critique of a public figure must begin within a Matthew 18 process is ludicrous but certainly sounds spiritual when these leaders do it. I wrote about this phenomena a couple years ago and, rather than elaborating, offer this post.

    http://thatmom.com/?page_id=2677

    I am so thankful that there are so many clear-headed and discerning people out there who get this and aren’t falling for such rhetoric. Only the sycophants are holding onto this attempt to silence the Bereans! I saw this play out in the past few days on Amy’s blog. When I first posted the link to that video clip, they claimed I had misquoted. (Tells me they realized how bad it truly sounded.) Then when I produced the proof (did they really think I would make up a quote like that and post it?) they decided that it would make sense if placed in context. So then when the context was challenged, the response was that he really didn’t meant it to sound the way it did. That it was just a mistake. So now he defends his statement and his explanation makes it sound even worse to many people and what is the response of the faithful? We are gossips and slanderers and libelers. The pattern is so predictable. I am so embarrassed for these people.

    I remember about 5 years ago when R. C. Sproul Jr. blogged about how women ought to not blog. I wrote a piece responding to it and got all sorts of grief from men I knew who would say the earth was flat if R. C. said so on his blog. A few days later when R. C. attempted to clarify (I think he thought it was an apology but it really didn’t seem like one) and these guys I knew wouldn’t back down and still defended R.C.’s first statement. Such pride! These women bloggers, ushering in the end of the world as we know it! (Doug Phillips said our web address ought to be http://www.titus2lesbianbloggers.com!)

  7. Corrie says

    Excellent response, Karen.

    I find it funny that we are continually told to look at the context of that video. Well, I looked at it MANY times. I watched it over and over again. A man on Amy’s blog even transcribed it for everyone and, honestly, it made his comment in question seem WORSE. If you take that comment in its context it produces even MORE confusion as to what he means. How is that an illustration of the “worse kind” of man??? I still have no idea what daughters have to do with men who have a penchant for having affairs with younger women. And I am sure those same men would say that their desire to have an affair with a younger woman has NOTHING to do with their daughters or receiving attention, lap-sitting or whatever from their daughters.

  8. Corrie says

    Karen,

    If I had a nickel for every time I was called a lesbian (or some derivative of it)…….. ;-)

    Also, the label of “libeler” has become old and boring for me. It is flung out there EVERY TIME you dare to question a person’s teaching. Being accused of that has no effect on me any more. It is old. It is boring. It is typical. It is expected.

    I consider VB’s ascribing malicious motives to “these women”/”Patriarch hunters” as fitting more with the terms of slander and libel than quoting a PUBLIC teaching and asking what it means.

    And my concern was not that anything unsavory was going on in his home, NEVER THOUGHT THAT AT ALL-NEVER CROSSED MY MIND, but how that teaching could very well be used by a pervert to justify his perversion. Sexual abuse of daughters is VERY prevalent and we can’t ignore that. God gave us some very good inner boundaries and sexual abusers use anything to break down those natural boundaries that come with our maturing bodies/sexuality. I know way TOO many women who were abused by their own fathers and most of these fathers were considered “good” men and very active in the church.

    I believe most men know the difference between sexual love and fatherly love and they express their love differently according to the specific person and the two never even meet. I see men who love their adult daughters, who do not push them away because they feel awkward and how they express their love by hugs and kisses on the cheek and they tell their daughters that they love them. And this is at the bowling alley! LOL

  9. says

    Just a few thoughts:

    To all complaining patriarchalists, from a conservative pastor who believes in male headship: grow up and act like men. You’re acting like witchy teen girls. Only a little kid gets on Youtube or a blog and complains that some critic hurt your feelings, or calls the examiner names. What are you, nine years old? Some people do deserve to be called “dogs”, as Peter said in his second epistle, but this isn’t one of those times. You don’t get to be critique-free. There are critics in the blogosphere who are just scorpions, and everyone should just ignore those types. But you could be critiqued by a feminist — and I regard feminism as anti-Biblical in its essence — and, shockingly, the critique could still be right. Why? Because a statement isn’t true or false because of who says it, but because of whether it can stands n its own merits. I read Camille Paglia, and I likely don’t agree with her about much, but I don’t dismiss her ideas about everything because she’s a lesbian. And I don’t agree with Mike Huckabee about everything, merely because he’s an evangelical or a former pastor. So man up, brother, and respond solely to the points themselves. And if you refute the critique, then the critic can’t pout, either.

    Second, you got caught saying something icky and weird about Dads and their daughters, analogizing that relationship to some older man sleeping with a younger woman. At best, and this isn’t saying much, you were drawing on Oprah Psychology 101, while claiming to be Biblical. Older men pursue younger women because they’re pretty, sexually attractive, and being with one flatters the ego. This isn’t rocket science, and it’s got nothing to do with unfulfilled fatherly needs. In fact, as a father of an eight year old girl, I think what you said was nasty.

    So here we go ahead, it’s the same pattern as Gothard: (1) Present some weird idea of my own as if it’s Christian, then (2) villify my critics as liberals, Arminians, Democrats, or some other depraved thing.

    What I yearn for is some Christian leaders who knew how to actually debate ideas. Where have you gone, C.S. Lewis, our nation turns its lonely eyes to you…

  10. Anne2 says

    A simple acknowledgment and apology for poor wording would have sufficed. I was surprised he broadly assumed and declared ill motives. Hatred? Isn’t that what the Bible calls thinking evil of someone? If he has proof of specifics, he needs to be specific. I could type, “all patriarchal adherents wear green socks” but that does not make it true. If I question or disagree with what you preach or teach, it does not mean I hate you. Are not preachers more accountable for their behavior, words, usage, meanings? I hope Mr.Baucham reconsiders and changes his words.

  11. says

    hey,

    I’m new to your blog. I think I am going to register that http://www.titus2lesbianbloggers.com domain name.

    Maybe you and all your opinionated female friends can start cross-posting over there.

    :D

    Seriously, I’m glad to see that not every homeschooler is off their rocker. I was almost beginning to think so. But I’m a happy egalitarian, “government schooling” dad of 5.

    I am adding your RSS feed.

    Scott

  12. says

    Voddie’s blog post is a mixture of self-righteousness, pandering for pity, and conspiracy theorizing. Unless you really are a member of the Illumnati, Karen, or some secret society of Midwestern feminist assassins. Spatulas sharpened to a fine edge.

    I’m sure there are lunatics out there, but I don’t think Voddie is as important or well-known as he seems to think that he is.

  13. says

    I understand Voddie’s point of view that this is sometimes a reality of the psychological workings in a man’s mind.

    The problem is, is that this reality of the psychological workings of a man’s mind is born of his sin nature. The only antidote for sin is Christ Himself. To claim that God created daughters to fill this sin-created hole is an affront to God in the sufficiency of His saving work, a supreme disservice to fathers who need to seek God for this hole in them, and an absolute violation of a daughters personhood and the innocence she should hold in her father’s eyes. A father should love his daughter for simply who she is and the fact that she is a beautiful gift deserving of cherishing. A father SHOULD NOT love his daughter for the ego stroking he can hope to receive in return. That is simply a dividend of a healthy relationship, not the goal.

    What is missing here is AGAPE love; unconditional, no strings attached, doing what is truly best for the object’s welfare LOVE. The reason this is so elusive is because it is only found in God Himself, and we must be abiding in Him to give it.

  14. Holly P. says

    I have been pondering this whole issue a lot lately ever since a dear friend of mine started trying to get me involved with Above Rubies, Created to Be His Helpmeet, and To Train up a Child. And then the year I attended our local homeschool conference and heard Kevin Swanson and started to investigate the Vision Forum more closely. Then with the connection of Geoff Botkin and an old church I attended, I really started to get suspicious.

    So here’s my new thought… is there a way to form a new homeschool ministry that attends conferences, sells materials, etc that is “Normal”? :) Could we be the “Normal Homeschool Ministry”? I think they need some competition and sanity at these conferences. Honestly, I haven’t attended my local conference since Swanson, especially because Baucham was the headliner last year.

    I’m sort of kidding, sort of serious. I just think that homeschoolers have worked too hard for acceptance to now have a group of people whisk us away publicly to a place where the government and local schools are going to start suspecting us again. This is really crucial in my opinion. There can’t be any appearance that girls are not getting the same equal treatment as boys or the government is going to be ALL OVER IT, before you know it. Same with the Pearl teachings. I feel like we’ve been adequately warned. LOL. Not to be alarmist or anything. :)

  15. says

    “A father SHOULD NOT love his daughter for the ego stroking he can hope to receive in return. That is simply a dividend of a healthy relationship, not the goal.”

    Alisa, how can it even be considered to be “love” if it is self-serving. By its very nature, love pours itself out completely for another.

  16. says

    Scott, welcome to my blog! I look forward to your comments.

    I hope you get to know some homeschoolers like the ones I know who are delightfully normal!

  17. says

    Holly P., I don’t know where you live but if it is anywhere near Cincinnati, I would encourage you to check out their upcoming convention:

    http://www.CincinnatiHomeschoolConvention.com

    I did see Doug Phillips in the line-up of speakers but was amused and delighted to see Susan Wise Bauer ahead of him in the keynotes!

    And I was also delightfully surprised to see the sponsor of this convention is Homeschool Legal Advantage, a fairly new group. http://homeschoollegaladvantage.com/

    After looking at their website, it appears they have many advantages over HSLDA, who has been so closely associated with patriocentrists.

    If you aren’t nearby, hang in there. I have been hearing the buzz that several groups around the country are in the process of planning conferences within the next couple of years that will have broader appeal to the 90% plus homeschoolers who are not sympathetic to patriocentric ideals!

  18. says

    Someone picked up on another problem with this encouraged level of father/daughter intimacy and mentioned it to me…the number of children who are sexually abused by a step-fathers/boyfriends. This person has worked inside the system with juveniles who were abused and was amazed, literally amazed, at this comment, in or out of context.

  19. says

    perhaps it is just me, but the link to Pastor V’s responce, isn’t working… is it down for good, or am I missing something?

  20. Savannah says

    Looks like the only change he made was to “clarify” that the “death threats” he’s received have apparently been from gay-rights groups, not us “titus 2 lesbian bloggers”. LOL

  21. says

    the whole thing leaves me with a sick feeling in my stomach…
    Perhaps he is NOT endorsing incest, or abuse.. but I think perhaps he is missing the way an abusive father can use that teaching… it is not the healthiest, most whole way to teach that principle.. I have listened to it in context..
    my husband and I have often enjoyed many of this pastors teachings..
    I feel very sad by his responce.. There is no humility, only pride…
    Everyone who disagrees, no, anyone who questions… must be wrong, libel, slandereous?
    wow…

  22. David says

    The statement still remains:

    “A lot of men are leaving their wives for younger women because they yearn for attention from younger women. And God gave them a daughter who can give them that. And instead, they go find a substitute daughter, You’ve seen it! We’ve all seen it! These OLD GUYS! Going and finding substitute daughters. Why? Why? We don’t understand what love is, folks.”

    And all I see is “leaving their wives … for … younger women” and “a daughter who can give them that.” Even with an explanation of “attention” it still remains why is the daughter supposed to supply something that a wife isn’t giving him?” Work it out with the wife. The “wife of your youth” Prov. 5.

    It’s still a bizarre statement. Words have meaning. And this still gives a responsibility that neither a father or a daughter are primarily created for.

    And what if a man has no daughters?

  23. says

    Yeah, nothing really changed. I guess that guy in my front yard in the navy blue uniform can put down his bull horn and stop yelling “Drop your crock pots.”

  24. says

    I JUST do NOT get it…
    he is defending his statement with the context.. which in my opinion.. MAKES the whole thing worse..
    we all here took it in context… and not only in the context of his little speech but in context of his ministry.. and the movement it is a part of…
    Is it really “slanderous” to point that out..
    If my husband leaves me for a young hottie
    would that be because I DID something wrong?
    or because my daughter FAILED to meet her “daughterly” role expectations?
    or perhaps
    because my husband was a SINNER????

    so so confused by this mans “explanations”

  25. says

    I’m with David and Anika. There just is no context that can justify prescribing it as a remedy to fix a problem. The fact that it iis an issue for some men is true. The fact that a Pastor is promoting this extrabiblical doctrine as part of the answer to it is just absolutely astonishing.

  26. says

    Hi Karen and all,

    I read your article, Voddie’s response and several comments, but I just had to say this (sorry if it’s already been said up in the comments somewhere): Voddie misses the forest for the trees. For one thing, he presumes that the only incest you could possibly be referring to is actual, physical incest. Well, what about the scenario created by the emotional needs being met for a man by his daughter? We’ve talked about it many times, but emotional incest, on the part of parents towards their children and in reverse is damaging as well. It’s also not promoted as godly in Scripture.

    Secondly, this Voddie is just embarrassing to read, to see how he starts off rallying his sychophantic troops by saying he’s being attacked “oh, look at me, because I’m respected, biblical, yada yada, people are attacking me for my sound teachings that cannot be scrutinized …” Very sad for these illustrious “leaders”.

    This same stuff happens in these self-promoting circles here with “lesser” leaders, and around the nation (and world probably).

    Every time I read these kinds of rants of leaders, Jesus just looks so very much more beautiful to me.

    Glad to see everyone again!

  27. says

    Kathleen, I am so happy to see you, too! {{{{{}}}}}

    I know what you mean about Jesus. It all certainly makes you long for heaven, doesn’t it?

  28. Corrie says

    “Older men pursue younger women because they’re pretty, sexually attractive, and being with one flatters the ego. This isn’t rocket science, and it’s got nothing to do with unfulfilled fatherly needs. In fact, as a father of an eight year old girl, I think what you said was nasty.”

    Jack,

    Well said.

    Also, Bill Gothard once gave a talk to a room full of mothers at a conference in Tennessee and told them not to be jealous of their husband’s attentions and affections of their daughters since these daughters remind their husbands of a younger and more obedient version of their wife.

    Yuck. As if that was a good thing and the women who might possibly react to this undo (I am talking I have seen some pretty bizarre things, almost as if the wife doesn’t exist anymore and it is all about the daughter and the father) attention are in the wrong?

  29. says

    Corrie, thank you for sharing that about Bill Gothard.. Is there a place where I can find more out about that? I have some friends who came out of this movement, and would like to learn a bit to be able to “get” where they are coming from…

    it’s all so NOT Jesus…
    I like Jesus..
    LOVE Jesus… Jesus is the BEST!!!!!!!!!!!!

  30. says

    Am I the only conservative pastor you gals know who is 100% inerrantist, evangelical, and supportive of solid male leadership, but who also thinks many of “our” guys are kooks?

  31. Someone coming out of all this says

    I would like to know the source for the Bill Gothard information. I was unfortunately raised on Bill Gothard and didn’t realize how much is in me.
    I have fallen victim to the Vision Forum and FIC movement.
    I have sat under the teachings of Voddie Bauchum and his other followers that
    are now leaders. My family and I are now under the attack of some for our questioning and asking for prayer in how to handle the things we are facing coming out of this movement. I am so thankful to find this information on your blog. I am so thankful for how gentle our Jesus is and am so shocked at how subtle the lies are in this movement. Thank you all for speaking out. You are like balm to those of us hurting and still trying to figure out what we are suppose to do now. It is like being released from prison and only knowing you better keep your nose clean. I have been released from this but find that I am not sure of anything but that Jesus is my Savior and somehow HE will lead me and my family through. I have so many things that I am unsure of and covet the prayers for us and others like us.

  32. says

    Dear someone coming out of all this:

    Thank you for leaving your comment. I will be praying for you and for continued healing. Here is some suggested reading that I think would be helpful:

    The Subtle Power of Spiritual Abuse by Jeff Van Vonderan
    A Matter of Basic Principles: Bill Gothard and the Christian Life by Don Veinot

    I believe the true solution to long term healing and continued spiritual growth is found in submersing yourself in the Word and to hear good, sound Biblical teaching. Read this article on how to determine whether someone is a true or false teacher: http://thatmom.com/?page_id=4136

    I always suggest that you begin by reading through the Gospels and then on through the book of Acts and then the Epistles. Read as though you have never read them before, praying and asking the Holy Spirit to guide you as you study. Keep a journal handy. Take special notice of the things that Jesus said and to whom he said them. Ask yourself the questions I posed in the link above.

    If it takes you awhile to find a good Bible teaching church, I would gladly share my pastor with you! http://www.bethanycentral.org/resources/audio.asp?filterSeries=50&filterFromDate=&filterToDate=&submit=Search

    You can listen to his sermons and also look at the outlines for each one for further study.

    God is good and His grace is sufficient for you. He will lead you into all truth!

  33. says

    One more thing you mentioned that is CRUCIAL to understanding the patriocentric movement….there ARE lies, some that are subtle and some that are not. It is so easy to be deceived by those who are leading this movement because it appears to be so good and right. After all, how can something is so “pro-family” be bad? But the truth is that so many of these teachings are not pro-family at all. In fact, they destroy the very relationships that they claim they are promoting…the ones between husbands and wives, parents and children, and brothers and sisters in Christ within the body of Christ.

    As I have said many times, look under the hood. Examine every single teaching in light of the whole counsel of God. Don’t just accept a pet verse here and there that is being used to build a paradigm. Seek wisdom that comes from God that is “is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, willing to yield, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality and without hypocrisy.” (James 3:17)

    So much of what is being taught in patriocentric circles is anything but godly. There is judgment instead of mercy, hierarchy (partiality) that results in a skewed view of submission, harshness rather than gentleness and hypocrisy (literally role-playing).

  34. Holly says

    You call this a Christian blog? Every entry here is nothing but gossip. If you simply don’t agree with someones ideas don’t read or listen to them. But to get on a blog and do nothing but gossip and slam someone, and call yourself a Christian is so hypacritical. The bible teaches to go to the person that has offended you and reconcile it with them, and if there is still a problem, bring in the elders of the church to question and confront that person, and if there is still a problem. Act like a Christian, turn the other cheek and walk away. Have you contacted the person that has offended you? Have tried to talk to him. If you have not yet and you get on the internet and do nothing but gossip, you give Christianity a bad tast is someones mouth that is considering becoming a Christian. Take the plank out of your own eye before you slam someone you don’t agree with. Read the story in the bible of the the men who wanted to stone a women to death beacause of her sin…what did Jesus say to them…”If any of you is without sin…cast the first stone.

  35. jennifer says

    you call this a Christian blog? I see nothing Christlike here. All I see is slander toward another brother in Christ. We may not agree with all we hear from a friend, pastor or someone in leadership, but that doesn’t give us the right to gossip about them and then turn around and call ourselves Christian. Go back and read the story in the Bible of those who wanted to cast and stone to death a women because of her sin. what did Jesus say to them. Any of you without sin cast the first stone. You may not agree with someone but to get on the internet and slam them and gossip about them and then call yourself a Christian is being such a hypocrite…get the plank out of your own eye, lest you be judged by the same measure.

  36. Cally Tyrol says

    Holly and Jennifer, I’d like to respectfully suggest that you read Karen’s thoughts on holding public figures/teachers accountable for what they say and why Matthew 18 does not apply to You Tube:

    http://thatmom.com/?page_id=2677

    And for what its worth, I felt no love or genuine concern coming from your posts- only immature outrage. That seems to be typical of patriocentrists when they are questioned. Instead of actually dealing with the issues, they cry gossip and claim that they don’t have to answer the questions people posit. I suggest you read your own words and then come back here to comment.

  37. says

    Thanks, Cally,for posting that article. It is really the only response I have to these sorts of accusations. That and the suggestion that the words “slander,” “libel,” and “gossip” be looked up in the dictionary.

    Thanks TG for the links. I am weary of public figures attempting to hide from sincere questions behind the Matthew 18 passage. Isn’t it interesting to think about it coming at the end of Jesus’ parables on partiality that I quoted in that first podcast?

  38. PC PAT says

    Go Voddie Bauchum, The ever convicting Warrior for God and this is a great example of Lukewarm and Extremely UnChristlike Christians getting offended by a mistake (and after all we all make them but by the comments you wouldnt think so). Sciptures are being quoted all over the place and the One that stood out to me. James 3:17 Peace, Gentle, full of Mercy, and Good Fruit. There is a complete lack of all these things here. “Check yourself”. If you are a Christian I suggest you look at the first six letters of the word Chistian which is Christ. We are meant to be “Christlike” and not disgrace the Church by dirtying our Brothers and sisters in Christ if they make mistakes. A real bad example of fleshly gratification. I am amazed that the Holy Spirit was meantioned aswell!!

  39. says

    Well, PC Pat, can I say it appears that you didn’t even check out the link or do your homework before you posted here since they obviously have made that information “private” and Voddie has also deleted his responses from his blog?

    Sorry, I stand by my critique of VGoddie’s dreadful statement and his even worse correction of it. Appears he, too, in now uncomfortable with what he said. Wish he would have just come out and said so.

  40. Jo says

    I have just now begun hearing about Voddie B. but, unfortunately can’t seem to access the original video or the “revised comment”. Nevertheless, I get the idea from reading all these posts, and I, too, am stunned and horrified at his words. And then to top it off with blaming the wife for the husband’s wandering eyes. Ah, yes, I remember the ‘Christian’ counselor who said to me 20 years ago, “First we have to find out what you did to drive your husband to the other woman.” I would have simply called it sin. He also said that I had to get rid of my anger. I was speechless in both cases. I should have said, “H—-, yes, I’m angry.” So Voddie has not presented anything new under the sun; it’s been around a long time, and WAY too many people have bought into it. Why? Well, it sells books, it gets conference invitations, and one can hob-nob with others of the same ilk, and they can pump each other up. Do it often enough, and people begin to think it must surely be ok. I’ve come to the conclusion that there are not only a bunch of idiots out there, but a lot of them are just plain SICK.

  41. says

    His so called updated response is laughable! He’s delusional. Use caution my friends… Jack Schaap started talking wacky like that too and now he’s going to Federal prison for ten years for violating a teen girl.

  42. says

    Lisa I, too, thought of Voddie’s weird take on daughters when I read the news about Schaap. Actions begin as heart attitudes.

  43. says

    Coming late into this thread. I am so disturbed by Mr Baucham’s statement – and his attempt at redeeming himself is even worse!

    Let me see if I’ve got it right:
    VB is saying that it is natural for men to yearn for attention from younger women. They don’t have to leave their wives to do that because God has given them daughters who can give them that sort of attention.

    Unfortunately, a lot of men feel awkward and uncomfortable as their daughters mature into young women. So, they seek that ‘attention from younger women’ elsewhere when they should look no further than within their own home with their daughters by embracing a biblical definition of love!

    What if a man has no daughters? Where is the wife in all this?

    Has VB done anything since to clear things up some more?

  44. says

    Yewnique, it appears that VB just wanted all this to go away. I have seen no retraction or correction of that statement and, you know, there were way too many people who chose to overlook it and didn’t hold him accountable. He is still a featured speaker on the homeschooling and reformed circuits. Pretty sad.

Trackbacks

  1. [...] And then there are the myriad of patriocentrists that Challies has promoted on his website through the years. Currently, scrolling down from the Pearl articles, you find a recommendation for Voddie Baucham. Perhaps he is a bit more refined that the Pearls but he is squarely in the center of patriocentric dogma with his insistence that daughters are to stay home until given in marriage and that men need the attention of younger women so that is why God gave them daughters. [...]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>