Doug Gresham's Podcast

[fantasia]

There was a lot of interest in discussing Doug Gresham's religious commentary on the podcast we linked a news story a few days ago. I thought I'd go ahead and start this thread for people even though it's a bit off-topic for this forum.

For those of you who never listened to the podcast, it can be found here and it's quite long, about an hour, but it's also really good. As far as spoilers go if you're avoiding them, there are no specific spoilers, just general ones.

If you're wanting to discuss the movie bits that he talks about, please do so in this thread here.

[Dr Elwin Ransom]

Thanks for pointing this out, fantasia_kitty! Now I need to head over and listen to the Douglas Gresham podcast myself, the whole hour, so I can eventually come up with some religious opinions on it.

If anyone after listening has need of any opinions for themselves, I might could spare you a few of mine, plus shipping costs.

They make great stocking stuffers.

[Warrior 4 Jesus]

The podcast is closer to 1 hour and 20 minutes but it's very good. Some would say it's preachy but I think Gresham is just passionate about his faith and about the books.

[Pattertwigs Pal]

If anyone after listening has need of any opinions for themselves, I might could spare you a few of mine, plus shipping costs.

They make great stocking stuffers.

Thank you for your kind offer. Although I have been need of opinions in the past (I would often go up to my mom when I was working on homework and ask her what my opinion was), I think I'm okay on this one.
Doug Gresham mentioned being nondenominational and said something about hypocrites at church. To me it sounded like he was saying that he doesn't go to church. Did anyone else get that impression or did I just miss interpret it?

[FriendofNarnia2]

I think it is very true that many "Christians" are hypocrites, and just because someone is non-denominational doesn't mean they go to church. After all, Peter, James, and John were non-denominational.

[Aravanna]

I loved listening to Douglas Gresham's podcast. He seems like one of those men who have completely devoted themselves to the Lord and are ready to do whatever God requires of them. I really wish I could relate more!

The church I attend in my home town is non-denominational. It just means we aren't associated with any denomination. And Gresham did mention that he contacted several churches about that young mother who needed a mentor, so he's certainly not opposed to working with them. (Although he was incredibly annoyed with their "we don't have a program for that" attitude. )

What did people think about his homeschooling comments? Douglas Gresham has worked with a lot of people with social disorders, and he more or less blamed public school for a lot of that. I went to public school all through grade, middle, and high school. I feel I learned more than I would have by being home schooled since school teachers are more trained and specialized, especially at the high school level. No offense to my mom, but she couldn't have taught me Calculus because she simply doesn't know that much math. Oh, and I don't THINK I have any social disorders from all that time away from my parents. My sister might disagree.

I know some Christians homeschool because they don't believe in evolution and also to generally keep their children from being exposed to "worldliness" but I think that's a little bit cruel. If these kids attend secular college, they'll be completely unprepared for the onslaught of science and philosophy that flies in the face of everything they've learned. They won't have the experience to deal with the shock and won't have deal with any of the issues before.

Anyways, I'm sure I'm talking to a lot of "these kids" so I'd love to hear what your thoughts are.

[Pattertwigs Pal]

I guess I wasn't as clear as I meant to be in my post. I do know that there are nondenominational churches and just because someone is nondenominational doesn't mean he doesn't go to church. However, something about the way he said things made me think that he didn't go to church.

I went to public school all through grade, middle, and high school. ... Oh, and I don't THINK I have any social disorders from all that time away from my parents. My sister might disagree.

Ditto

[FriendofNarnia2]

I was educated at home most of my life and all the way through high school, and I certainly didn't feel unprepared for college in anyway.

I think it all depends how your parents homeschool their children. I know a lot of "homeschoolers", some of which match your description, and many others that do not.

[220chrisTian]

I loved listening to Douglas Gresham's podcast. He seems like one of those men who have completely devoted themselves to the Lord and are ready to do whatever God requires of them. I really wish I could relate more!

Agreed. I wish I could relate more too.

I went to public school all through grade, middle, and high school. I feel I learned more than I would have by being home schooled since school teachers are more trained and specialized, especially at the high school level. No offense to my mom, but she couldn't have taught me Calculus because she simply doesn't know that much math. Oh, and I don't THINK I have any social disorders from all that time away from my parents. My sister might disagree.

Like you, I went to public school after the 3rd grade. I was homeschooled only two years. My mom doesn't know Calculus either. There are many things she couldn't teach me and she knew that, which is why I don't regret my public school years, esp. high school.

I know some Christians homeschool because they don't believe in evolution and also to generally keep their children from being exposed to "worldliness" but I think that's a little bit cruel. If these kids attend secular college, they'll be completely unprepared for the onslaught of science and philosophy that flies in the face of everything they've learned. They won't have the experience to deal with the shock and won't have deal with any of the issues before.

This is much too simple. You don't know some of the real issues. The question of public school or homeschool simply depends on the school's religious and cultural environment. Evolution is one problem. Sex education, at a much too early age, is another. I just posted on Facebook two horrifying news stories about parents fighting the governments in Britain and Germany regarding home-schooling their children. The first government thinks homeschooling parents need a criminal background check. The second wants to introduce primary age children to sex education, something homeschooled parents won't do, and I'm using a euphemism for the sake of this forum. In Germany, homeschooling is illegal. Here in the US, especially in California, parents are having the same problem with the public schools, i.e. inappropriate sex education--both in substance and age-level. What's the source of all this anti-god garbage? The UN! Thank God my public schools were spared all that. I grew up in a Christian town and many of my teachers were Christians, or at least attended area churches. That is one blessing of the American South, although it's not perfect by any means.

I'll have to listen to that podcast, won't I?

[Dr Elwin Ransom]

What did people think about his homeschooling comments? Douglas Gresham has worked with a lot of people with social disorders, and he more or less blamed public school for a lot of that.

Along with 220, I still have not yet listened to the, ahem, actual podcast. Still, it shouldn’t stop me from commenting about a topic I’ve been blessed to know well! I was homeschooled all my life. For me, who was very often an introverted twit, it was what I needed. For some, such as you, Aravanna, it wouldn’t have worked so well.

Blaming public schools for social disorders seems best done with disclaimers. Homeschoolers have their own set of disorders, some unique to homeschooling, and some problems almost exactly the same as those worsened by public-school systems.

Where I think some homeschoolers particularly fail is subconsciously assuming that if their kids aren’t in public school, then they’re pretty much immune to sin. Public school quietly becomes the object of evil — and there are no “objects of evil” — instead of indwelling sin in a human heart. At least the public-school folks know there are terrible schools out there. Many homeschoolers I have known seem to assume they’re Practically Perfect (except for those oh-so-stressful days, etc.).

I hope Gresham may understand that homeschooling is not a golden bullet. Its negative idiosyncrasies may be more prevalent in the U.S.

I know some Christians homeschool because they don’t believe in evolution and also to generally keep their children from being exposed to “worldliness” but I think that’s a little bit cruel.

I don’t think “cruelty” is the main problem with this sheltering. Perhaps it’s a bit naïve, but not cruel. Such parents — the majority I have seen — truly want the best for their children. However, Having the Best for the Children can become an idol as much as anything can. And if one believes the greatest sin is Worldliness and begins assuming that if you avoid the world then you avoid most sin, that fails to glorify God and allow children to grow naturally in discernment.

Lewis pointed out brilliantly in The Great Divorce that sins such as lust and violence may be worse than valuing good things like mother-love or patriotism too highly. However, Lewis noted, the worse sins are less likely to be turned into religions.

Homeschooling for many people has become a religion — a “Christianity And” something-else (to quote His Utter Subliminity Screwtape) hybrid.

If these kids attend secular college, they’ll be completely unprepared for the onslaught of science and philosophy that flies in the face of everything they’ve learned. They won’t have the experience to deal with the shock and won’t have deal with any of the issues before.

Aravanna, and I am familiar with the scenarios you describe. However, though you may not have seen this yourself, I have known of homeschooled kids who did just fine in secular college and rather relished combating the Godless science and philosophy that was thrown at them.

The main problem with these types of homeschooled graduates is that they can be really snarky while they’re doing this. I put myself in this category, back then (I hope not so much now). Rather than grieving as a representative of God’s Kingdom for a lost world, and being properly angry about its rebellion against Him, I took the Worldview War much too personally. Self-righteousness (another symptom of many homeschoolers) had crept into my life. In many subtle ways I acted as though I had worked to attain the truth I knew. But what did I have that I did not receive as means of Grace from others — especially God?

I can’t blame this on my parents, or homeschooling culture, or Bill Gothard, though the latter two certainly did not help correct the pride in my heart. I can only blame myself. And this is not to say that we should keep quiet with the truth and not be active. We should! All homeschooling graduates should. But they should do this with humble orthodoxy. Without God’s intervention, they would be just as bad as all the pagans.

Of course, I’m assuming here that these homeschooled graduates actually get to college in the first place. 220, thank God you’re undertaking higher education. Am I to assume you did not automatically turn into a raving secular feminist who hates men and God’s created order and has constant chips on her squared shoulders?

Some homeschooling leaders assume that if a woman does anything remotely close to working outside the home, or seeking higher education, then she is becoming a feminist and is therefore blaspheming God. Maybe you’ve heard this view, or more likely the implications, coming from some homeschoolers. This is patriocentricity, the father-is-pretty-much-head-of-all system of beliefs, and its leaders and trying to make its beliefs standard issue for anyone who decides to homeschool or who embraces Biblical husband/wife roles. It’s un-Biblical, subtle, and often annoying.

Recently I wrote this to someone, about a patriocentrist lady-leader. (For a supposedly male-led movement, these circles have a lot of ladies pushing these ideas and paradoxically having nice control over their acts of wifely submission; I wonnn-derrrr how that could be!) I can reproduce (ha ha!) some of it here, with its original recipient anonymous.

I wonder if any of our friends may be aware of Chancey’s statements that any Christian woman who works outside the home is blaspheming God? Or that it would be better if Christian women did not vote, and that such a concept is part of a flawed system? Or that any Christian parent who somehow does feel their public school is okay is always sinning?

(I can source these assertions if you like, but I don’t want to seem I’m only building some legal case! Still I’ve seen where this has been said.)

[. . . I]n the very least these are things about which Christ’s people may legitimately have differences — Romans-14 issues of conviction not specifically in Scripture.

This would be a good time for me to say again [. . .] that I am staunchly complementarian! :-D Scripture outlines different roles, though not different levels of importance, for husbands and wives. To some extent these roles are conferred upon the children — though again I would disavow the wrong “daughters as helpmeets until fathers find them husbands” teachings of some, including Chancey. So this isn’t about this kind of “patriarchy” vs. feminism, but this kind of “patriarchy” vs. feminism vs. more-Biblically balanced complementarianism in the center.

So, in seeing a quote from Chancey without at least a disclaimer about her questionable-at-best views of what “real” male/female roles always mean, I am worried that some Christians wondering about these issues will be skeptical about all true Biblical complementarianism because of these views. Unfortunately, it is wrong teachings like those of the “Ladies Against Feminism” [a website run by women elevating the men in their lives, including their little boys (I do not joke), and their own submission to them] folks that are framing the discussion in a wrong way.

Part of the problem may be deeper than just beliefs about male/female roles, I’ve come to suspect. The main issue may arise when a leader, ministry or whatever, starts basing teaching on an “anti”-something, rather than on positive emphasis on Biblical balance, Law and Grace, God’s truth and love, and other healthy doctrine “tensions.” Even Chancey’s site name shows a core bias: it’s “Ladies Against Feminism.”

I wonder if they would even acknowledge that one could theoretically overcorrect against feminism into a form of Christian Chauvinism? Then a future generation of women would rebel against that, the way the women now are rebelling against feminism, and back and forth, back and forth, and at either extreme, ignoring the Gospel of Grace in the center.

So far I haven’t seen much other from Chancey and Co. than an emphasis on that one issue of male/female roles, along with homemaking, fathers-and-daughters, etc. And an emphasis on missions has been substituted for an emphasis on expanding families as much as they possibly can. I wonder how they would look at other Christians, outside the “circle,” who believe they have different callings, such as a man or woman legitimately called to overseas missions who believes he/she has the gift of celibacy (not as common as some believe, I think, but it’s still in Scripture, and I once hoped I did not have this “gift”!). How would the “militant fecundity” [you must have lots of children] folks look at single Christians who don’t/can’t marry? What if my wife and me were unable to have children, or could only have one or two, or decided to have only one or two?

Some of this you may recall from our last exchange. Personally, my wife and I look forward to imitating Christ and His church (a la Ephesians 5) even more in our marriage (we will be married seven months on Dec. 30) and teaching His law and His grace to our future children.

Yet we also come from homeschooling backgrounds, and have seen firsthand the damage that overdone “against feminism” kinds of views can do in families. I have known of families who started out with the best of intentions to keep their children safe, avoid feminism and worldly sins. But gradually they became very hostile or fearful about Christians with different standards (and especially to non-Christians, which compromised the family’s gifts and ability to impact the world for Christ’s sake). Many of their children later rebelled, throwing the “baby” of actual Biblical truth out with the “bathwater” of the other views. We’ve seen this happen on many occasions and are burdened to try learning why it does happen.

[. . . I]t’s a vital topic for sure, and I believe this is one of those areas God may want me to bring up with some people. As a homeschooled graduate and future homeschooler, especially, I yearn not just to correct for excesses and Do Things Better, but love God’s grace.

So I do hope especially that Gresham is aware of this, at least in the U.S. (it’s a very America-centric movement, so far). Homeschooling has its own too-prevalent and dangerous drawbacks here. Patriocentricity is the biggest one.

[daughter of the King]

I share a computer with my siblings, and so I have not had time to listen to the podcast either. Hopefully I will in the near future so I can really discuss what Douglas Gresham said.

In the meantime.........

Where I think some homeschoolers particularly fail is subconsciously assuming that if their kids aren’t in public school, then they’re pretty much immune to sin. Public school quietly becomes the object of evil — and there are no “objects of evil” — instead of indwelling sin in a human heart. At least the public-school folks know there are terrible schools out there. Many homeschoolers I have known seem to assume they’re Practically Perfect (except for those oh-so-stressful days, etc.).

I have seen this happen, and it really is one of the big downfalls of homeschooling. I don't think I ever assumed that just because I was homeschooled I was perfect(like I said, I don't think I did), but I have noticed the occasional tendency to look down on the people I know who were public schooled. Sometimes I look at them with pity though, because most of the girls I know are obsessed with who went out with whom and they have no idea that there's more to life than that.
I think that's one of the reasons my parents homeschooled my siblings and myself. They homeschooled us not give us a "better education," but to keep us away from the influence of what goes on in the hallways. Peer pressure has very little effect on me because my peers were my brothers and sisters and it's incredibly easy to ignore them when I want to.
I also don't have the desire to date. If and when God brings a man into my life, I'll be waiting. Until then, I don't need to have a boyfriend.

Aravanna wrote:If these kids attend secular college, they’ll be completely unprepared for the onslaught of science and philosophy that flies in the face of everything they’ve learned. They won’t have the experience to deal with the shock and won’t have deal with any of the issues before.


Aravanna, and I am familiar with the scenarios you describe. However, though you may not have seen this yourself, I have known of homeschooled kids who did just fine in secular college and rather relished combating the Godless science and philosophy that was thrown at them.

I'm in college, and I'm doing fine.

[starkat]

*pokes head in* The discussion of the moment in the Homeschoolers thread in the Spare Oom is also on public/private vs homeschooling. On the off chance other people want to discuss other aspects of Gresham’s interview, I thought I'd drop a suggestion of moving the Homeschooling discussion over to that thread 'cause you guys have some interesting discussion points. *retreats to the homeschoolers thread*

[220chrisTian]

Sometimes I look at them with pity though, because most of the girls I know are obsessed with who went out with whom and they have no idea that there's more to life than that. I think that's one of the reasons my parents homeschooled my siblings and myself. They homeschooled us not give us a "better education," but to keep us away from the influence of what goes on in the hallways. Peer pressure has very little effect on me because my peers were my brothers and sisters and it's incredibly easy to ignore them when I want to.

Interesting. I wasn't one of those obsessed girls ... partly because I didn't hang out much in the hallways. My middle and high school life was mostly academic. I didn't make many friends. I kept my nose in the books. Peer pressure wasn't a problem for me either, but that has more to do with one's self-image. Peer pressure can be a problem for someone at any age, time, or place if he or she has a poor self-image. Please don't think that having a boyfriend/girlfriend or iscussing others' relationships is all there is to public school.

I also don't have the desire to date. If and when God brings a man into my life, I'll be waiting. Until then, I don't need to have a boyfriend.

Good for you. But don't think that the desire, or lack, to have a boyfriend/husband has anything to do with self-esteem/image either.

Public school quietly becomes the object of evil — and there are no “objects of evil” — instead of indwelling sin in a human heart. At least the public-school folks know there are terrible schools out there.

Agreed. Home-schooled children aren't immune from sinful hearts. I wasn't, even though I was home-schooled only two years.

220, thank God you’re undertaking higher education. Am I to assume you did not automatically turn into a raving secular feminist who hates men and God’s created order and has constant chips on her squared shoulders?

Some homeschooling leaders assume that if a woman does anything remotely close to working outside the home, or seeking higher education, then she is becoming a feminist and is therefore blaspheming God. Maybe you’ve heard this view, or more likely the implications, coming from some homeschoolers. This is patriocentricity, the father-is-pretty-much-head-of-all system of beliefs, and its leaders and trying to make its beliefs standard issue for anyone who decides to homeschool or who embraces Biblical husband/wife roles. It’s un-Biblical, subtle, and often annoying.

I'm not a feminist. I was actually taught to be quite the opposite. I don't have any chips on my shoulders. I don't think seeking higher education makes me a feminist though. My mother has more a feminist outlook than I do. I think my attitude is in some ways a reaction to her, as you noted in your post. Some women are called to be in the home, and some outside, as the Bible evidences. The point is finding God's calling for oneself, no matter what it is or where. Church history is full of women, single and married, who answered God's call to serve on the mission field, in churches, etc--outside the home. So why pigeonhole men or women into specific roles? God is bigger than that.

[Narnia #1 Fan]

I will have to listen to this podcast myself also. It sounds really good from what I have read here, but I will listen and then come back and post what I think of it.