Gimme That Old Time Religion

[Rhondinella]

Ok, guys, I'm letting this conversation run, because the discussion of actual religious beliefs has been respectful, even in disagreement.  However, let's move off the issue of what the other person means by "hate" and whether it matches your understanding and definition.  That is pointless and serves no purpose except to escalate the conversation.

 

And yes, I'm addressing GEML and betweenyouandme specifically.

[Betweenyouandme]

There's a reason Jesus talks more about self-righteousness more than any other sin. Doesn't mean other sins aren't important, but it's awfully difficult to follow the first two Commandments of loving God with all your Heart, Soul, Mind and Strength and then your Neighbor as yourself if you are all caught up and busy loving and praising yourself and putting other people down.

I agree. I think it's easy to either be hypocritical or judgmental when discussing religion, which an easy solution would be to never talk about it. But, of course there are times when it's needed or called for. And, even if someone never says a peep, they can still be judgmental or hypocritical in their heart. But, then...I feel like I shouldn't judge judgmental people, so it can be a cycle.

I like it GEML how you say if that's what your mind is focused on. Maybe a helpful idea would be to go do something productive or helpful when these feelings come up. (Not telling you to go do that. Just saying your post made me think of doing that in general).

[GEML]

I agree. I think it's easy to either be hypocritical or judgmental when discussing religion, which an easy solution would be to never talk about it. But, of course there are times when it's needed or called for. And, even if someone never says a peep, they can still be judgmental or hypocritical in their heart. But, then...I feel like I shouldn't judge judgmental people, so it can be a cycle.

I like it GEML how you say if that's what your mind is focused on. Maybe a helpful idea would be to go do something productive or helpful when these feelings come up. (Not telling you to go do that. Just saying your post made me think of doing that in general).

Think of it this way - Jessa makes an allusion in her Facebook rant to some struggle in her past that she needed to overcome spiritually. Imagine how much more productive, and yes, maybe even ENCOURAGING her post might have been if she had shared that instead of standing on a soapbox and basically telling all of us that if we don't do as she says, we are doing it wrong?

[DangerousMinds]

I don't need any god to tell me murder is wrong. Does anyone?

[Missy Vixen]

I predict that Jessa (and Ben) will live to regret these comments. They're tone-deaf and offensive at best. They've also been picked up by major media sources as of today.

[JennyMominFL]

As a jewish person, i would like to say that at least the god of the Tanakh did not condemn non believers or wrong believers to eternal torment. So I'm not really sure the NT god is much nicer.

 

JFTR, I am an Athiest now 

[Betweenyouandme]

If we're picking and choosing which parts of the Old Testament to follow then please see http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/03/25/850561/-An-Open-Letter-to-Dr-Laura-Schlesinger# (someone fix that for me please? I don't know how to do it)

This is my understanding. Christians were never bound by the law of the Old Testament. Christians are to follow spiritual and natural law, meaning by using the "golden rule" and by loving God with all our hearts we are to revisit the laws of the Israelites. The Ten Commandments are usually the first to come up when discussing natural/spiritual law. We often know them by reason- just like above a poster said they don't need to be told murder is wrong. Therefore, the question is more what laws from the Old Testament are spiritual laws? But, again, it's only faith not the following of laws that gets one to Heaven (because it's impossible to never have sinned according to sin in the Bible). So, I don't see it as God changing what is right or that we by the Bible's instruction disregard the Old T or follow everything it says. Christians simply had a new set of "rules" or lenses to look at the OT through.

If anyone is interested, Romans and Matthew are probably the books of the Bible to read for more information.

Again, I'm explaining what I've learned about the NT v OT laws. Not trying to argue about what anyone needs to believe.

Edited February 27, 2015 by Betweenyouandme

[Micks Picks]

Natural law is quite a bit different than what people have been discussing here.  It is based Dangerous Minds comment about murder. It isn't really bible based, more reason based.  [snip]

Edited February 28, 2015 by Rhondinella
don't tell other posters what to do

[floridamom]

The Roman Catholic Church believes that there are two "levels" of sin. venial and mortal...sort of like misdemeanors and felonies...If a person of faith passes away with unconfessed, unforgiven mortal sin in their life, without repentance, those are major sins, which will separate you from God for all eternity, ie, hell with no hope of salvation at the final judgment. A venial sin, is one of lesser offense, probably little things that we all do at one time or another. Also, if unconfessed, forgiven of, and unrepented of, brings us to a "place of purgatory". Since there is NO sin in heaven and it is perfectly good and pure, this is a transition process in which we cleanse ourselves or purge ourselves of those unpure things and shed earthly attachments...it is temporary and salvation is right ahead; entrance in to heave. Since no one on earth is perfect, and/or may have had the opportunity of repenting and correcting those transgressions, we "work it out" at the entrance to heaven. In Jessa's belief system it is either heaven OR hell; permanency on either front...so, if there is NO impurity at all in heaven, and we are not perfect, I think no one would enter the kingdom of heaven directly from here, and her only alternative is to "rot in hell for all eternity"....pretty hard to achieve perfection isn't it? I understand that Protestant sects also do not believe in "purgatory, per se,' as the catholics do, but perhaps they believe in some type of transition of the soul, that eternity is also theirs, but maybe not instantly? I am not clear on the mainstream Protestant belief on that...Jessa's interpretation is quite cold, cut and dried, much like herself! (if it IS HER post).

I admire and agree with much of the mainstream protestant belief system and how they approach struggles here on earth with much forgiveness and acceptance. I try to take positive traditions and beliefs of all Christian faiths and believe that the Almighty would not "stop us at the gates of heaven to ask us which walls we worshipped in" as He loves and appreciates all gestures of adoration, worship and praise that are sincere.

[mbutterfly]

Also not arguing but just sharing my thoughts. Though as mentioned Matthew, Paul and others teach that Christians needn't follow the cultic laws of the Old Testament, and for this the Council of Jerusalem story in Acts gives us a good sense of how they worked through it -- with the leadership of one of my Bible favorites, James the brother of Jesus. Still, the Law is a gift to us from God. It is -- as the Psalms tells us so lyrically -- a thing of beauty. God gives us the gift of the law so that human behavior can be sorted out -- justice against injustice. Of course, the Law of the Bible is not dissimilar to the moral creeds of many world religions. However, for most of us in our North American culture, the Law of the Old Testament is our frame of reference. If you neighbor's ox tramples down your vineyard, your neighbor must pay you fully for even your potential loss (and possibly kill the ox, but that may go a bit far). So, I do believe Christians should embrace the spirit of the Law. And, I'm supposing the Duggars don't differ from most of us in these core values. They're just caught up in the "law" of Gothard too. 

Edited February 27, 2015 by mbutterfly

[JennyMominFL]

JFTR, Jews believe that the Tanakh(OT) is for Jews. Jewish law was and is for Jews. Non-Jews are not  and were never required to follow the law. 

[Betweenyouandme]

The Roman Catholic Church believes that there are two "levels" of sin. venial and mortal...sort of like misdemeanors and felonies...If a person of faith passes away with unconfessed, unforgiven mortal sin in their life, without repentance, those are major sins, which will separate you from God for all eternity, ie, hell with no hope of salvation at the final judgment. A venial sin, is one of lesser offense, probably little things that we all do at one time or another. Also, if unconfessed, forgiven of, and unrepented of, brings us to a "place of purgatory". Since there is NO sin in heaven and it is perfectly good and pure, this is a transition process in which we cleanse ourselves or purge ourselves of those unpure things and shed earthly attachments...it is temporary and salvation is right ahead; entrance in to heave. Since no one on earth is perfect, and/or may have had the opportunity of repenting and correcting those transgressions, we "work it out" at the entrance to heaven. In Jessa's belief system it is either heaven OR hell; permanency on either front...so, if there is NO impurity at all in heaven, and we are not perfect, I think no one would enter the kingdom of heaven directly from here, and her only alternative is to "rot in hell for all eternity"....pretty hard to achieve perfection isn't it? I understand that Protestant sects also do not believe in "purgatory, per se,' as the catholics do, but perhaps they believe in some type of transition of the soul, that eternity is also theirs, but maybe not instantly? I am not clear on the mainstream Protestant belief on that...Jessa's interpretation is quite cold, cut and dried, much like herself! (if it IS HER post).

I admire and agree with much of the mainstream protestant belief system and how they approach struggles here on earth with much forgiveness and acceptance. I try to take positive traditions and beliefs of all Christian faiths and believe that the Almighty would not "stop us at the gates of heaven to ask us which walls we worshipped in" as He loves and appreciates all gestures of adoration, worship and praise that are sincere.

I personally believe that no one is yet in Heaven or Hell and won't be until the End of Times except some saints. I think most Christians would disagree with that, but I don't consider it a huge deal by far. It's just my understanding of the Bible. I mean, some churches do teach this, so I'm not saying im the only one! Revelation 20 is where my belief comes from. It certainly sounds to me that saints are first and the rest of us won't be risen from dust after our first death until all who will be martyred have been killed (Revelation 6:9-11)

Anyway, I don't personally believe in a drawn-out process of purification before Heaven. But, I do believe there's no sin in Heaven. I think that's simply because we will have release from the Devil, and God can wipe away all of our tears. We'll have no hunger or physical discomfort/needs that on earth can drive a lot of sin. I do very much believe flesh and the Devil cause sin. I think one will get to the gates and have to answer to his sins in front of God. But, Jesus will have his name in the Book of Life if he believed on earth.

I certainly don't understand all of Revelation. But, it is helpful to me when I think about the afterlife. I find it a blessing to know that even though I keep failing and I hate it, I can still get to Heaven because of Jesus. Because I love Jesus, I feel horrible when I sin because I believe my sins are why Jesus had to die. If I could've stopped being so selfish and followed what's right, Jesus wouldn't have had to be tortured and killed. I think that was a gift. And, it makes me very, very thankful. I don't die down in being ashamed and guilty. I try to make it a reason to keep trying and be better.

Edited February 27, 2015 by Betweenyouandme

[GEML]

The concept of heaven and hell in Protestantism is a rather murky one. We owe a lot of our thoughts of hell for instance to Dante's inferno than we do Biblical passages. Most American Christians are uncomfortable admitting that, because our theology is so rooted into the concept, but it's not as easy to "prove" biblically than a lot of other things.

[Absolom]

There are denominations who don't take Revelation literally but allegorically that it was about the time during which it was written and has nothing to do with "the end of days."  

[GEML]

And the whole concept of the apocalypse in a "Left Behind" sense is relatively recent. And although it was mostly due to English theologians, it's strongest roots are very American.

[Almost 3000]

And the whole concept of the apocalypse in a "Left Behind" sense is relatively recent. And although it was mostly due to English theologians, it's strongest roots are very American.

Funny story (at least it made me laugh) ahead. I run a used book store for a local Friends of the Library group. I shelved the Left Behind series in the Sci Fi/Fantasy/etc. section. For about six months a patron kept moving them to the Religion section. Back and forth we went...

[DoctorWhovian]

Natural law is quite a bit different than what people have been discussing here.  It is based Dangerous Minds comment about murder. It isn't really bible based, more reason based.  [snip]

 

There was originally a canonical natural law. It later developed into the 18th century idea of natural law. 

 

My grandma once said to my uncle and I, who both said we were atheists, how would we know what was right and wrong without religion. My uncle kind of scoffed and went mom, are you serious? The subject was dropped, but the point stands. The idea that not having religion means you can't know that something like murder was wrong is absolutely ridiculous. 

[Betweenyouandme]

I think whether or not the term "natural law" is used the concept is brought up all throughout the Bible. I don't understand Micks Picks comment because I'm not sure what "what people have been referring to" and the "it's" are referring to exactly. But, I'll take a stab at it lower down.

(However, I do want to be clear I'm not suggesting that people who aren't Christian are unaware murder is wrong. My post above was referring to the post I quoted that linked to laws of the Old Testament. I was explaining my view of why Christians follow some OT laws and not other laws. I wasn't trying to suggest what any other person would, could, or should follow or why).

I personally don't think that religion and reason are always separate or that they can't sometimes be separate.

Now, certainly some Christians only recognize spiritual law. They do not believe in Christians relying at all on their reason as far as sin goes. I, personally, try to balance both because I think sometimes my reason may tell me it's okay to do something that's actually (as I understand the Bible) against God. Now, I could just say I only follow spiritual law to make sure I was always clear on what the Bible says God wants. But, I don't deny that all people know natural law, not just Christians. And, I have seen many instances where the Bible refers to natural law.

What I think, going out on a limb here, is the possible disagreement of what natural law is actually and specifically referring to. The biggest hot button I believe is when this is talked about is sexual topics. I'm not going into detail on this out of respect to all and being unsure of an appropriate way to speak. But, the overall example of sexuality can be used to possibly highlight people's different thoughts of what natural law means and is referring to.

I know I'm being vague. A question to highlight the differences is this- Is natural law decided by what goes along with what Earth's creator had in mind...or, does natural law go by what keeps people in harmony, causing no harm to self or others?

Murder is an easy example where it would be against both meanings of the law. Other examples are not always agreed on, like divorce and sex outside marriage and self-defense. And, I'm not saying all Christians or all non-Christians come down on one side of the bar.

Anyway, I'm sorry to bring up specific things that may be sensitive. I'm not trying to start an argument about those things. I'm trying to throw out examples of things besides murder to explain my point. My point is just that natural law doesn't mean the same thing to everyone and even those who are using the same definition may feel very differently about what is for and what is against natural law.

And, for me, I use spiritual law to help me in my own life to figure out things when my mind of reason is unsure.

Like I said somewhere in this thread, Romans and Matthew explain a lot, imo.

Romans 1:20

For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.

Romans 2:14

For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law.

Imo, these verses are discussing natural law.

Edited February 28, 2015 by Betweenyouandme

[Betweenyouandme]

Ever want a good laugh, I highly recommend Chick Tracts. http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0071/0071_01.asp Here is one (of a few) on Catholicism, and why it's not Christianity. I don't understand how someone can be so angry about a group of people worshipping a little different, but whatever.

I don't see it as angry.

It's an answer to those asking why fundamentalists think Catholicism isn't "right."

To fundamentalists and some Protestants, all these things aren't worshipping a "little" differently. It's the core of what some churches teach.

Now, certainly, if a fact stated about Catholicism is incorrect or if someone else disagrees with the tract's interpretation/opinion/statements about Catholicism, they can certainly state them or ignore the tract.

[Rhondinella]

Well, "hate" is probably too strong a word, I agree.  But I read the tract (and I've seen LOTS like them in my life) and the people/group producing that certainly don't look favorably on Roman Catholics.  Let's not fool ourselves into thinking they're being charitable in some way.  It's ignorance (in the truest sense of just not knowing what they are talking about) and fear motivating these kinds of attitudes. 

 

And now can we please restrict ourselves only to religious topics that directly relate to the Duggars or something on the show.  To my knowledge these tracts have nothing to do with them.  Thanks.

[Betweenyouandme]

I'm moving a post from another thread here to follow directions. If this isn't correct, I'm happy to put it back. Not trying to prolong the tract topic.

The idea that Catholics aren't Christians always amuses me. What do folks who believe that say about the first 1500 years of Christianity when aside from the Copts and a couple others all of Christianity was Catholic or Eastern Orthodox? Do they try to say that the church wasn't Christian?

They very well might. Someone who strongly believes going to Heaven only requires belief in Jesus and admittance that we all sin and need him to save us, in fact, may think that anything outside that strict belief dismisses true faith in Jesus. My stepdad strongly believes that the Bible clearly states that Jesus wipes away all sin no matter what, for example. He thinks any belief that adds or takes away to that equals lack of a sincere, strong faith. He doesn't care about the history of what some people used to think. He cares in what he thinks the bible says. Just sharing a view I've heard.

[Rhondinella]

Let's move off the topic of "general religious beliefs" please.  Keep this Duggar-focused.

[KatWay]

"Poor Helen is completely brainwashed"

 

Yeeeaaaah, she's not the only one.

 

The Duggars and others like them believe they know all about Christianity because they can quote from the bible by heart - so do they also know Aramaic and ancient Greek and Latin? Have they studied all the many different versions and translations of the bible that are out there? Do they realise that the bible wasn't originally written in English? I'm gonna say no to that. Then how do they know the careful wording of the bible which they discuss is even the original wording at all? But I guess learning all of that would be a problem for the Duggars' firm anti-education stance. Hey, you know who actually does all that studying? Catholic priests.That's not to say they are any more "right" in their beliefs, butI'd wager  the pope knows a good deal more about Christianity than the Duggars do.

[Rhondinella]

As a Bible professor, you are preaching to the choir. :-)

 

One thing I admire about Islam is that at least they have integrity on this issue: to them the only version of the Koran that is authoritative is the Arabic version.  Translations into other languages are not considered the same thing (as I understand it), and are seen as more like commentaries on the text than the text itself.  Which is why even women in most Muslim countries are encouraged to study Arabic, so they can read the text themselves.

 

I'd love to see this become the standard in Christianity.  But since it won't, I at least appreciate people who recognize that unless they can read and translate the original, they should not make pronouncements about the meanings of certain words or phrases.

[Absolom]

I am currently slogging my way though a book on Biblical textual analysis.  I think every other page I run into something that makes me want to scream at the Jim Bob Duggar method of Bible reading and teaching.  I know I'm not a Biblical scholar and this convinces me more and more of that every chapter.  

[Gianthambeast]

I don't see it as angry.

Now, certainly, if a fact stated about Catholicism is incorrect or if someone else disagrees with the tract's interpretation/opinion/statements about Catholicism, they can certainly state them or ignore the tract.

Calling the eucharist the "death cookie," is erroneous, hateful, and irresponsible. 

 

Death Cookie

 

Writing a tract suggesting that the Jesuits were responsible for the Holocaust is unconscionable and woefully inaccurate:

 

Holocaust

 

 

 

 

Edited March 3, 2015 by Gianthambeast

[Sew Sumi]

I am currently slogging my way though a book on Biblical textual analysis.  I think every other page I run into something that makes me want to scream at the Jim Bob Duggar method of Bible reading and teaching.  I know I'm not a Biblical scholar and this convinces me more and more of that every chapter.  

Let's not forget that while in Scotland, the Duggars were walking around a castle, and Boob proclaimed it the place where "King James translated the Bible."

 

smh

Edited March 3, 2015 by Sew Sumi

[floridamom]

Scholar theologian Jim Bob Duggar clearly stated that "this is where King James WROTE the bible.....to his children, seriously, can you imagine that?

[Rhondinella]

Well, I had a Bible prof in seminary who told the story about a lady in a Bible study he was conducting who was absolutely CONVINCED that the King James Bible was written and/or translated by the APOSTLE James.  Nothing he said could convince her otherwise.

[Marigold]

Well, just to throw out an idea that I don't think has been addressed

For some Christians, the idea of needing a degree to read and interpret the Bible is not necessary. It is a spiritual book and it is believed that the Holy Spirit will guide you, lead you and teach you as you read.

I'm strongly assuming this is the case with the Duggars, Ben and the entire crew. It bothers a lot of people and I do understand why it does but it's not a major issue for me.

Anyway, just offering a different perspective...

[Absolom]

It bothers me because of what some of those untaught people like Jim Bob decide the Holy Spirit has lead them to believe.  If they would allow a little education and research into their heads, it could clear up a lot of ignorance.

[Rhondinella]

Yeah, I totally get what you're saying, Marigold.  And I am strongly against the attitude that you have to have an advanced degree in Bible (or anything else) in order to interpret it "correctly."  And I do believe God can inspire and guide people to understanding.  I just think that with that has to come a humble and teachable attitude, which is pretty antithetical to the fundamentalist mindset.

[satrunrose]

While I would usually come down vey strongly on the side of learning as much as you can about other faiths, whether you agree or not, in the case of the Duggers I'm hoping they stick with their "Hindu? Like, whatever" attitudes. Why? Because the they've been putting so much effort into missions and generally proselytizing the Gothard mind set (a philosophy which I find very scary). If they could have an educated and informed debate on how their brand of Christianity is different from (and in their mind superior to) Catholicism, for example, they might get somewhere. Right now all they have to offer is manicures, hellfire and a lifetime supply of denim, flip-flops and aqua net.

[galax-arena]

You're a glass half full kinda person, aren't ya, satrunrose? :D 

Edited March 5, 2015 by galax-arena

[Sew Sumi]

Scholar theologian Jim Bob Duggar clearly stated that "this is where King James WROTE the bible.....to his children, seriously, can you imagine that?

LOL you're right. I was being far too kind. 

 

There was also the discussion of moss:

 

From a 10-12 year old Howler: "Dad, what's moss?" 

 

Boob, who obviously couldn't give a real homeschooling-moment answer, resorted to: "God's carpet." 

[mbutterfly]

Well, I had a Bible prof in seminary who told the story about a lady in a Bible study he was conducting who was absolutely CONVINCED that the King James Bible was written and/or translated by the APOSTLE James.  Nothing he said could convince her otherwise.

I've heard similar stories so she wasn't unique. And it wasn't all that many years ago when the Texas legislature was considering making their schools officially bi-lingual that a woman famously called a local radio show and said, "If English is good enough for our Lord Jesus, then it's good enough for Texas." I do wonder whether Jim Bob might have had a similar, if atavistic, reaction. 

[DangerousMinds]

IIRC, Gothard is an educated man. Spiritual? Not so much IMO.

Mbutterfly, I flove that story!

[Micks Picks]

Great post Dangerous Minds.  Years ago and my husband and I used to flip channels and began to note that one guy was always on.  He spoke for hours on end and wrote on a whiteboard behind him with liberal use of arrows pointing back and forth at each other.  He was always on so we got to calling him god.  Oh good, god's still here.  Well then fast forward 20 years and I don't see him, but his daughter now.  The goddess.  She's always there.  They always tell you your contributions are not tax deductible nor should they be.  Hell, at least they are honest in that regard.  Well educated, selling a product, know about ancient texts, but no info on spirituality.  They make a buck too, but don't seem to bring kids to camp or anything.  So in that way I respect them more than Gothard.

[Marigold]

Absolom, I don't know if it's ignorance or lack of education that is the problem. There are very well educated people who I disagree with and I know you do too.

When it comes to religion, a lot of it has to do with personal interpretation of a holy book.

Ha, Absolom, I have two college degrees and a masters degree. I love to study theology of all religions. I bet we don't agree! ;) I'm not ignorant but my interpretation of Christian Scriptures is different than yours, I guess.

Of course, I don't get all preachy like the Duggars. I'm respectful. That's what bugs me about the Duggars, Dillards and Seewalds.

[Absolom]

Changed my mind.  This isn't the place for that discussion.  You can PM me or let it go.  

Edited March 6, 2015 by Absolom

[Marigold]

Sorry Absolom, we posted at the same time.

I did read your response though. I deleted mine since it doesn't make sense without yours!

I just meant specifically in their Biblical Interpretations...the rest of the stuff...yes, they do rub people the wrong way.

Edited March 6, 2015 by Marigold

[Wordsworth]

 

Well, I had a Bible prof in seminary who told the story about a lady in a Bible study he was conducting who was absolutely CONVINCED that the King James Bible was written and/or translated by the APOSTLE James.  Nothing he said could convince her otherwise.

 

 

I wonder what realm the Apostle James ruled over...?

[jenny2682]

Same here.  But our NFP couple had 6 children, were pregnant again and admitted that they weren't very good at following the rules ;)

 

I was also struck that weekend by how in the same "class" the husband said that as good practicing Catholics we shouldn't be doing anything to prevent a pregnancy.  Cut to 15 minutes later he was talking about his mad skillzzz in charting his wife's cycle and saying that he was able to plan vacations around her fertile days so that they could have fun without risking pregnancy.  I stopped listening after that. 

What Catholics believe is God created the biological function of procreation and how the body works etc. God gave the body a time period of ovulation for procreation. The rest of the month the woman does not biologically produce what is needed to start conception. Therefore, NFP is working with your body and using the time period (either having sexual intercourse to produce or abstaining). Any artificial barrier (sponge, condom, pill, IUD, withdraw or whatever) or contraceptive goes against working with the bodies natural function and is against what the body and therefore sexuality was made for. Sexuality is a gift. It is a responsibility and I guess boning everyday or with multiple partners is not cool. A married couple is supposed to work together to decide if they want children, if it is a risky time of month, etc and as a couple make the decision to proceed or abstain.

 

The Duggars seem determined to prove that they can just conceive at the drop of a hat. They do now seem to be backpedaling from Gothard, but a few years ago it was as if they found this religion and were bound and determined to be the poster children. I do believe they enjoy their sexuality but want to PROVE it to a unhealthy degree. Josh, Jessa and Jill seem like when they became engaged they all but said "Yes we want to hump on this person at this very moment and drool is coming out of our mouth but we won't because it's wrong. We can't even be tempted to kiss or hug". That is also IMO unhealthy. I could not believe Jill stole a pregnancy test from her mother nor that Anna seems determined to pop out as many kids as Michelle. It is especially unnerving because all parties involved seem about as savvy and educated as your average 13 year old. And that is because of the Gothard/Quiverfull doctrine.

[Darknight]

Nfp is also birth control. If you really want to leave it up to god then just have sex

[ginger90]

Nfp is also birth control. If you really want to leave it up to god then just have sex

Or...........don't have sex.

[DangerousMinds]

Or don't have vaginal sex . . .

[Micks Picks]

Then you get anal cancer..

[floridamom]

Just to clarify, the Catholic church thinks ARTIFICIAL birth control is not the way to go. One of the reasons they site is that it isn't healthy for a woman's body...yes, I do agree that they "stray that line" because the outcome is the same either way....no baby..but, NFP, which basically is abstaining during what most likely is the fertile time for a woman, is a form of birth control....this, the Duggars could do also, simply "don't do it " those days...but I think they, like Jim Bob and Michelle have proven don't give a mind at all to being careful in the least in their behavior, but actually seek TO CONCEIVE...why else would she keep such close track of her ovulation calendar and come up with a child every year? but I would think that since Michelle has been pregnant or nursing most of these 30 years, her cycle wouldn't be anything she could count on...they still don't add up to me. Once again,, I hope I made sense....I'm having a difficult personal time right now...so thanks guys, for cutting me some slack here.

[floridamom]

Re: Michelle's "discovery of Jesus"...I always understood that the Ruark family had and has a religion and it is a Christian one...Michelle didnt' convert TO Christianity, but joined the SECT of Christianity that Jim Bob peddled to her, that extreme type, no dancing, music, THEN they discovered Gothard after a few years of marriage, birth control, etc...I would like to know what were her spiritual,, religious practices when she was in her parents' home? Did they EVER go to church? Did they officially belong to one? I'm sure they weren't atheists, because that might have been publicized already. I assume her family were nice, regular, and church attending folks..what's wrong with that? Nothing, IMO.

[JoanArc]

Floridamom, didn't Michelle convert at 15 after her friend showed her one of those 'the rapture is neigh' movies? Maybe she went along with the family, but didn't really believe in it, like Jinger did too.