I feel like I have to add my .02 to the “Men Want to Marry Debt-Free Virgins without tattoos” article. On the most basic surface level, that’s fairly good wisdom. But here is the problem with the prairie muffin/RC Sproul Jr/Doug Wilson/Doug Phillips crowd: there is no distinction between good advice and binding ethics on the church (or home church, what have you).
Why do I care? Because people will see these deviant ideas as reflective of Christianity and then become atheists.
Thesis 1: I am going to critique the background ideas but in doing so I am not attacking the idea of debt-free virgins.
Thesis 2: You can’t separate the transformed wife’s theology and ethics from that of the Pearls, whom she admits she follows.
Let’s look at the background worldview. What does this background worldview entail? The following quotes are from Created to Be His Helpmate. I won’t bother to refute them. Just read them out loud.
“If you want to keep your man and the father of your children, you are going to have to forget about your rights as a wife and forget his Christian obligation to his vows.” (pg 30)
more gems. This might be one of the more brutal line-by-line takedowns I’ve ever read.
I’m not a feminist. But at the same time I don’t want Christian sisters to get shacked up and misled by teaching that has resulted in child-abuse deaths, incest, etc. Have you ever seen a doormat woman? Now you have.
Thesis 3: Virginity and economic sanity are good things. Don’t make them idols.