Jump to content

Type keyword(s) to search

The Duggalos: Jinger and the Holy Goalie

frenchtoast

By frenchtoast
in Counting On

cm-soupsipper
Message added by cm-soupsipper,

Closure Notice: This Thread is now closed due to the name (and much of the posting within it). Please be mindful going forward by naming topics in a way that invites a healthy community conversation. If you name something for a cheap laugh, this thread may be closed later because it encourages discrimination and harm. 

  • Start Topic

Recommended Posts

Ohiopirate02

Ohiopirate02

I also want to add to the discussion about this "article" from Publishers Weekly--Publishers Weekly is really not a prestigious periodical in the book industry when it comes to author interviews and book reviews.  They are great for reporting on the state of the publishing world and for getting information on the business of selling books.  The rest of their content is fluff.  They rely on a lot of sponsored content in their physical magazines, and that sponsored content includes stuff like this article on Jinger.  I have a strong suspicion that Jinger's publisher paid for this interview because PW passed on reviewing the book (along with all other major book reviewers).  Usually when publications choose to interview authors, they go with the authors who's books they have positively reviewed.  

  • Like 2
  • Useful 13
  • Replies 40.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Churchhoney

    2685

  • Sew Sumi

    1781

  • GeeGolly

    1721

  • Zella

    1576

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Spencer Hastings
Spencer Hastings

Tough crowd!  She's wearing modern shoes with closed toes, pants, and a shirt that literally calls back to her family's ridiculous rules and there are still 35 things wrong with what she's doing. 

Churchhoney
Churchhoney

That's okay. He's forgotten it a few times himself. 

GeeGolly
GeeGolly

My push presents after having my kids were my kids. 

Posted Images

Churchhoney

Churchhoney

(edited)
4 hours ago, Absolom said:

People may call the church Jinger attends a cult and there are so many definitions of cult that one will fit.  But, this is a regular church in the sense that people come and go and pick and choose their beliefs and level of involvement, etc.  It isn't the soul binding experience of IBLP/ATI.  It's no different than the conservative Presbyterian church a couple miles from my house.  In fact, I think it's more liberal in that where Jinger is attending doesn't seem to harp on about women's apparel or say that their place is in the home or discourage education.  

I call it cultish in the sense that JM has his own very particular theology that he's basically made up out of whole cloth while intimidating people into accepting it by the claim that he got it directly out of the Hebrew and Greek of the Old and New Testaments.......And that he does really seem to insist that everybody buy his view in all its details.....And it also seems to me (and others! ) that he's clearly had some kind of cult of personality going in his institutions for many years.

I agree with you that in many things  Gothardism and some other famous cults are heavy on, like clothing people wear and such, JM's setup isn't very cultlike. And it certainly doesn't APPEAR cultlike at all, in those external matters.

For me, however -- although not for everybody, I realize --  the essence of a cult lies in the cult-of-personality part and in any peculiar tenets of faith or theology that are of the mind-control or groupthink sort that the personality pushes above all else. And JM's worldview has quite a few of those, as I understand it!  

Edited by Churchhoney
  • Like 4
  • Sad 1
  • Applause 7
  • Useful 2
AstridM

AstridM

7 hours ago, floridamom said:

From what I have read, Jinger has exchanged Gothard's teachings for McArthur's. Not much difference. 

Possibly worse, imo. 

3 hours ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

I also want to add to the discussion about this "article" from Publishers Weekly--Publishers Weekly is really not a prestigious periodical in the book industry when it comes to author interviews and book reviews.  They are great for reporting on the state of the publishing world and for getting information on the business of selling books.  The rest of their content is fluff.  They rely on a lot of sponsored content in their physical magazines, and that sponsored content includes stuff like this article on Jinger.  I have a strong suspicion that Jinger's publisher paid for this interview because PW passed on reviewing the book (along with all other major book reviewers).  Usually when publications choose to interview authors, they go with the authors who's books they have positively reviewed.  

Exactly. And did they actually interview Jinger in person for this article? Or did they submit a list of questions to her publisher and they answered them for her?

SnapHappy

SnapHappy

(edited)
15 hours ago, AstridM said:

Exactly. And did they actually interview Jinger in person for this article? Or did they submit a list of questions to her publisher and they answered them for her?

Why should this matter? Nobody these days goes into any type of interview, whether TV, radio, video or print without knowing EXACTLY what will be asked. 

Everybody is prepped beforehand and answers are decided on. Even the low-key, unimportant and z-list celeb or influencer will never go in cold, if they even come up with their own answers. 

You may get the occasional AMA through Reddit, but even those are practically scripted.

And there are almost no live interviews done anymore in any type of media.  Not even Oprah.  

Edited by SnapHappy
  • Like 1
  • LOL 1
AstridM

AstridM

4 hours ago, SnapHappy said:

Why should this matter? Nobody these days goes into any type of interview, whether TV, radio, video or print without knowing EXACTLY what will be asked. 

Everybody is prepped beforehand and answers are decided on. Even the low-key, unimportant and z-list celeb or influencer will never go in cold, if they even come up with their own answers. 

You may get the occasional AMA through Reddit, but even those are practically scripted.

And there are almost no live interviews done anymore in any type of media.  Not even Oprah.  

I think this answers my question 🤣.

  • Love 1
Fosca

Fosca

(edited)
4 hours ago, BigBingerBro said:

smtn3ver0m6a1.jpg

Why is it so brown?  I've never had brown pizza; it looks more like something I cleaned up when my cat ate something wrong.

ETA: Someone on Reddit suggested it was a taco pizza with a refried beans base, burnt cheese, and canned jalapeños.  That makes the most sense to me, but I still wouldn't eat it.  

Edited by Fosca
New information
  • Like 5
  • Thanks 2
  • LOL 9
Churchhoney

Churchhoney

7 hours ago, Fosca said:

Why is it so brown?  I've never had brown pizza; it looks more like something I cleaned up when my cat ate something wrong.

ETA: Someone on Reddit suggested it was a taco pizza with a refried beans base, burnt cheese, and canned jalapeños.  That makes the most sense to me, but I still wouldn't eat it.  

According to Jingle's 'gram, it's a sweet-potato base (similar color to refried beans, as you mentioned, except a little more yellowish, I guess) topped with sweet corn, spicy marinara and crumbled bacon......

(As a person who doesn't like sweet vegetables or sweet main courses, period, that sweet-potato base would be a deal-breaker for me.....But I guess I can see some people with different taste buds really fancying it .... I'd prefer the taco refried-bean approach myself )

  • Like 3
  • Mind Blown 1
  • Love 2
jcbrown

jcbrown

39 minutes ago, Churchhoney said:

According to Jingle's 'gram, it's a sweet-potato base (similar color to refried beans, as you mentioned, except a little more yellowish, I guess) topped with sweet corn, spicy marinara and crumbled bacon......

(As a person who doesn't like sweet vegetables or sweet main courses, period, that sweet-potato base would be a deal-breaker for me.....But I guess I can see some people with different taste buds really fancying it .... I'd prefer the taco refried-bean approach myself )

I like sweet potatoes but that combination sounds like an abomination to me. So, it sounds like it looks.

  • Like 15
  • Applause 5
Gemma Violet

Gemma Violet

(edited)

WOACB's latest video is about the first chapter of Jinger's book. 

Jinger discusses:

* The first movie she and Jeremy saw as a couple was The Truman Show.  (Jinger says this movie is her life.)

* The FreeJinger forum and TWOP.

* Her love for big cities and taking a photo with Bill Clinton in NYC.

* She doesn't mention Gothard or IBLP in the first chapter.

* She says unfettered freedom does not produce the good life; it puts you in more bondage.

 

Edited by Gemma Violet
  • Useful 6
  • Popular Post
Albanyguy

Albanyguy

  • Popular Post
13 hours ago, Gemma Violet said:

The first movie she and Jeremy saw as a couple was The Truman Show.  (Jinger says this movie is her life.)

Actually, this is a fairly intelligent observation. Jinger's entire life was spent in a carefully planned and scripted "reality", performing for an unseen audience. Even before they were put before the TLC cameras, the Duggar kids were supporting players in "The Jim Bob and Michelle Show", going through the motions of an inauthentic daily life to impress others.

 

  • Like 30
  • Love 1
AstridM

AstridM

2 hours ago, Albanyguy said:

Actually, this is a fairly intelligent observation. Jinger's entire life was spent in a carefully planned and scripted "reality", performing for an unseen audience. Even before they were put before the TLC cameras, the Duggar kids were supporting players in "The Jim Bob and Michelle Show", going through the motions of an inauthentic daily life to impress others.

 

And then Jinger chose to continue that tradition, at least in part. 😢😢

  • Like 10
  • Sad 3
  • LOL 1
Churchhoney

Churchhoney

21 hours ago, Gemma Violet said:

 

* She says unfettered freedom does not produce the good life; it puts you in more bondage.

 

This last statement about freedom is just a very shorthand version of some MacArthur always says. Suitable for a book written by his PR guy. Jingle may fully understand and believe his commentary or this -- or she may just be going along with it, as she was taught to go along with things. I think it's hard to say when one his people is her coauthor and her husband's entire life and career plan depends on sucking up to J M.    

A longer version of what this statement means in MacArthurland is here, not that it'll surprise anybody. This is one of his most common talking points. Very big on how good the good old days were, before there were any liberal churches (he is 83, after all).....and a lot of homophobia, of course.

In short, people used to be kind and obedient to their parents and never never never homosexual. But now!! Nelly bar the door!   .....I'm not entirely sure how hating homosexuals contributes to Jingle's newfound freedom, especially since she was supposed to hate homosexuals under the Gothard regime as well.  But I think it's pretty clear that Jonny Mac has convinced her that it does. 

Not that we could expect anything else. 

If you go back three thousand years ago, you have a society of people doing exactly this, and it is the Israelites in the day of the Judges, and it says they wanted to do “whatever is right in our own eyes.” That, from the book of Judges. “We want to do whatever is right in our own eyes.” That’s the kind of time we live in today. Now, in order to do that, you have to make sure that you get the Bible out of the way because the Bible condemns much of what people want to do. So there has to be a denunciation of the Bible and the role that the Bible plays.

You need to get the Bible out of the schools, you need to get the Bible out of the public discourse, because if people bring up the Bible, it’s going to encroach upon someone’s freedom, and if someone quotes the Bible, they’re going to be saying something that somebody doesn’t want to hear, and that in itself should be considered a crime. Laws are fast being installed that are leading to one goal: To make biblical Christianity a crime - to make biblical Christianity a crime, that’s what it is about, to silence the Word of God. The society wants to be free from any moral restraint.

Now, let me tell you what this freedom is. It is not freedom. It is sin addiction. All human beings, apart from the gospel and salvation in Christ, are sin addicts. Everybody has his own assortment and concoction of drugs, but they’re all sin addicts. You can pick your poison, you can pick your sin, and you can even pick the level to which you escalate your sinful behavior, but you have to understand this, that the whole human race is made up of sin addicts. And if anything is true about them, it is this: They are not free.

No one would look at a heroin addict and suggest that that person was free. We would suggest that that is probably the worst sort of temporal human bondage that someone could be in. Someone addicted to opioids or someone addicted to heroin or someone addicted to any other kind of behavior that is destructive, self-destructive, we would never see that as a kind of freedom. We would see it as a horrible bondage that needs to be broken.

We need to look at the entire human race, not as people who are free but as people who are addicted to sin, and it’s an addiction they can’t break, and it’s killing them. And the death is not just physical, it is eternal. The whole human race is sin-sick and addicted to iniquity. In fact, Jesus says in John 8:34 - and here’s the sum of it: Everyone who commits sin is the slave of sin. Everyone who commits sin is the slave of sin, and everyone does commit sin; therefore, everyone is the slave of sin, everyone is an iniquity addict.

Two verses later, in John 8:36, it says, “Only if Christ sets you free are you really free.” So what people in our society think is freedom is simply a more extreme, public, unrestrained manifestation of their addiction to iniquity. In fact, the Bible is so clear about this that it says there is no one who is good, all they are is evil, there’s no good thing in anyone, even that which we might see as righteous is filthy rags.

Picture in your mind the worst scene of human drug addiction as it takes the victim near to death, and he sits in rags somewhere in a black alley, waiting to die and sticking the needle in again, and you have an illustration of what it is to be an unregenerate sinner. You can choose your drug, you can choose your sin, you can’t break your addiction.

When Christ comes, He sets us free from that addiction to sin. In the past, in our culture, there were some sort of social restraints. There were some limits that society put on people. There were certain expectations. You go back a few decades and there was a kind of general sense of goodness, there was a general sense of the importance of family, for example. I don’t know if you know this, 26 out of 27 school shooters had no father. What’s the common denominator?

There was a time when people had mothers and they had fathers and they had families and there was a sense of morality. And there were behaviors that had shame built into them, and you didn’t flaunt them, you hid them. All that is gone. There was a time when you could say there was a general goodness, there was a general kindness. In fact, there were literally millions of people who went to war for this country and other countries and died for the wellbeing of people they would never meet who hadn’t even been born. That was very sacrificial. But that was what people did in a nobler time.

Now there’s a mad rush into every imaginable and unimaginable form of iniquity, and it’s flaunted. This has become a problem for the church because at the same time the world is running rapidly after this freedom, the church has decided it needs to be the friend of these sin-laden people. So there’s a move toward pragmatism. We want to be accepting of these people. We want to welcome these people. We want them to like us.

In the liberal denominations, it’s, of course, reached almost virtually a terminal point where the true church is gone altogether, and the false church is now under the control of immoral ministers, homosexual bishops, lesbian pastors offering same-sex marriage, but even in the evangelical church where people say they believe the gospel, there’s a very, very carefully constructed method to try to win the world over, and that demands that we not confront their true condition. We can’t take their freedom.

https://www.gty.org/library/sermons-library/48-30/understanding-christian-freedom

  • Sad 12
  • Useful 2
Salacious Kitty

Salacious Kitty

12 minutes ago, satrunrose said:

I'm interested to see whether the book is quite so clear that freedom = freedom to hate gay people and those who support them. I know Jing and Jer believe it, but they're usually not so... out... about it. 

I think they'll skirt around the ebil gheys, but touch on other levels of Johnny Mac's brand of theology. The excerpt I read on Free Jinger didn't sound like Jinger. It was all the MacArthur ghostwriter/co-author.

  • Like 10
  • Sad 3
GeeGolly

GeeGolly

(edited)
13 hours ago, satrunrose said:

I'm interested to see whether the book is quite so clear that freedom = freedom to hate gay people and those who support them. I know Jing and Jer believe it, but they're usually not so... out... about it. 

I suspect they're a little more image savvy than Jill and Derick, or at least the ghost writer is - maybe.

Slamming the Gothard bullshit is all I need to know about a book that would never be on my radar but for the Duggars. I'm guessing the majority of folks who will read this have similar beliefs to Jing and Jer, so if it opens to door to questioning faith while dissing JB&M's beliefs, its all good.

Edited by GeeGolly
  • Like 6
the-grey-lady

the-grey-lady

(edited)
On 12/22/2022 at 2:32 PM, Churchhoney said:

Now, let me tell you what this freedom is. It is not freedom. It is sin addiction. All human beings, apart from the gospel and salvation in Christ, are sin addicts. Everybody has his own assortment and concoction of drugs, but they’re all sin addicts. You can pick your poison, you can pick your sin, and you can even pick the level to which you escalate your sinful behavior, but you have to understand this, that the whole human race is made up of sin addicts. And if anything is true about them, it is this: They are not free.

Sin addicts? My word, these people like to stew in their own misery.

Let me tell you who isn't free, MacArthur: Calvinists. 

On 12/18/2022 at 7:45 AM, Fosca said:

Why is it so brown? 

I ask that every time the Duggars post a picture of their "food."

Edited by the-grey-lady
  • Like 14
  • LOL 2
  • Love 1
Meow Mix

Meow Mix

As has been stated before, this is just a new set of propaganda that Jinger has put her name to.  Now instead of parroting Gothard through David Waller, she is parroting McArthur through her ghostwriter who is a staff member of McArthur's organization.  I don't think Jinger has a thought in her head that wasn't put there by someone else.

  • Like 23
  • Sad 4
AstridM

AstridM

1 hour ago, Meow Mix said:

As has been stated before, this is just a new set of propaganda that Jinger has put her name to.  Now instead of parroting Gothard through David Waller, she is parroting McArthur through her ghostwriter who is a staff member of McArthur's organization.  I don't think Jinger has a thought in her head that wasn't put there by someone else.

She is truly an empty vessel.

  • Like 11
  • Sad 2
cm-soupsipper
Message added by cm-soupsipper,

Closure Notice: This Thread is now closed due to the name (and much of the posting within it). Please be mindful going forward by naming topics in a way that invites a healthy community conversation. If you name something for a cheap laugh, this thread may be closed later because it encourages discrimination and harm. 

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...