“Dude, Where’s Your Brain?” My Answer to Kevin DeYoung, Part 1. . .

Kevin DeYoung has decided to pull a page from the Mohler-Maken playbook and take aim at the men over the complex issue of protracted singleness.

As a result, what we get is not only nothing new, but rather a recycled, regurgitated variation of an argument that is even LESS compelling than those offered by Mohler or Maken.

First, a few disclaimers, though:

(1) I am married. Happily. For a little over 2 years now.

(2) Before I got married, I was single. For almost 43 years. Doing the math, that adds up to almost a quarter-century of single adulthood.

(3) During my single years, I was (a) VERY involved in the Church, (b) gainfully employed for all but 15 months, (c) did not shy away from the women who were in my venues, and (d) cast a very wide net in my choices of women. In other words: I did not exclude divorced women, or women who had varying forms of baggage. I merely excluded those who were proven to be unstable or catastrophically overweight.

(4) I did not “play the field” during my single days.

(5) I was involved in a variety of churches–both small and large, including the largest Baptist church in Kentucky, where Al Mohler serves as a “Teaching Pastor”.

(6) I served as a teacher in various capacities: including children, youth, young adults, singles, and couples. I had a chance to see–firsthand–what goes on among the various groups.

Ergo, I think I’m qualified to speak to the issues here.

First off, we need to deal with the sterotypes that each sex has of the other.

The women often complain–not without merit–about three types of men: (a) the schlub who plays video games and downloads porn, and otherwise lacks ambition; and (b) the really cool “Alpha male” who won’t commit; and (c) the nice, quiet guy in the pews who “doesn’t take enough initiative”.

The men, in turn, will complain–again, not without merit–of three types of single women they observe in the Church: (a) the overweight gal who eats like a pig at those potluck events, (b) the pretty 24-year-old gal who will tell you how spiritual she wants her man, and yet changes boyfriends every proverbial five minutes, and (c) the otherwise cute, “Biblically divorced” 24-year-old gal with two kids.

While these are serious problems–and I’ll get to them later–they don’t fully account for the problem of protracted singleness. Yes, those are deep-rooted problems that are prevalent in the ugly, dirty world of Christian singles; and yes, those need to be addressed. But they are only part of the story. That is why I am going to start with the OTHER part, which has no simple answers.

With that, back to DeYoung.

In building his thoughts on the matter of protracted singleness, Kevin DeYoung has fallen for what is best-described as a false dichotomy. He looks at this exclusively in terms of single men versus single women.

While his treatment of THAT dichotomy–false as it is–has problems, he leaves out at least two key players here: (a) families that raise these men and women, (b) the Church culture that nurtures their views in childhood, youth, and adulthood, and unwittingly makes it MORE–not less–difficult for men and women to get married.

Moreover, he totally ignores demographic factors that work against singles in a way that they did not 50 years ago, and which are exacerbated by the fragmentation of the Church.

If there is a place where a Christian–male or female–ought to be able to go, express a desire to be married, and be encouraged rather than discouraged in that pursuit, it ought to be the Church. And yet, that is not the situation on the ground.

Contrast that with the Jewish community. If I am a Rabbi in Philadelphia, and a young single gal comes into my office, all I have to do is make a call to a Rabbi in Newark or Cherry Hill or New York, get the families together, and we’ll be having a wedding within 15 months. Jews are not the most resilient people in the world by accident: their networking skills are the stuff of legend.

Ditto for the Indian community. As an IT professional, I’ve known many Indians over the years. I’ve worked with them; I’ve played sports with them. When it comes to networking, and setting people up to get married, the Indians are up there with the Jews.

But Christians aren’t so good at this, and the reason for that can be summed up in one word: FRAGMENTATION. The Body is fragmented badly. One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism, and God-only-knows-how-many denominations, the vast majority of which are non-cooperative.

What that means: you may have a couple of good, upstanding Christian gals at First Baptist Church in Anytown; you may have a couple of upstanding Christian guys at Reformed Presbyterian Church in a nearby city; and those guys and gals will never meet, unless they manage to connect through other social circles or online venues.

I’ve been in several churches in which I was the only single adult–of either sex–in the building. Did those pastors lift a finger to help in the networking capacity? Nope. Did any of them know of a pastor who knew a gal who was marriageable? Nope. And yet, we seem to have no small number of marriageable Christian gals who can’t seem to find a guy.

Distance is also a factor. MrsLarijani and I know some marriageable Christian gals. One is in her 40s–divorced with a 5 year old–in the Cincy area; two are in the Louisville area, both in their 20s and never married; one–in her 20s and never married–is in the Chattanooga area; one is 40–never married–in central Kentucky; another is 26–and never married–and goes to our church. Each of these gals ranges from reasonably attractive to very attractive. Each would probably make a nice match for someone. While each has baggage of some sort, those are not irresolvable.

I know some marriageable Christian guys. One–50, never married–is in the Louisville area. One–37, never married–is in the Nashville area. One–a 48-year-old retired Air Force pilot, whose wife left him after 16 years–is in the Memphis area; one–in his 20s, never married, and is in the Army–in the Louisville area.

But each of these guys and gals comes from various Christian backgrounds: some are Baptist; some have Acts 29 backgrounds; some are Pentecostal; one is with a Vineyard church; one is a PCA Presbyterian; one is an evangelical with Reform leanings; one has Catholic leanings.

And that doesn’t account for the folks we know online. There are Christian ladies scattered across the country–Lisa Anderson and Martha Krienke of Boundless are in Colorado; S/C is in Cincinnati; Savvy is in California; Catwoman is in Canada; LadyElaine is in DC (I think); Renee (who blogs at Boundless) is in California.

Single Christians are scattered geographically and denominationally.

Even worse, with the job market being what it is, mobility–or, shall we say–the lack of it, can be a serious issue.

(Let’s say, for example, a good guy–John Doe–was interested in Lisa Anderson, whom I’ve encouraged guys to pursue at Boundless. But let’s say his financial and job situation made relocation prohibitively difficult for him, and he lived in Florida. Would Lisa be able to uproot herself, leave a good job at FotF, sell her house, move to Florida, and marry John Doe? Maybe…maybe not. Only Lisa can answer that one. Jack and Renee–bloggers whom I hoped I could connect–were unable to make the pursuit because of their distance from each other.)

Why do I spend such time on these matters? DeYoung does NOTHING to address those issues, and yet they are very real ones for singles who wish to traverse the logistics of meeting, getting to know each other, doing due diligence, and–ultimately–getting married. Addressing them requires more than the stupid, pat answers like, “if only men would be men…”

And so far, I have only addressed logistical, circumstantial, and denomination issues that impede singles. While those are huge, there is a very large internal problem within the Church.

That is where we come to the Church culture, and the families.

The Church is locked in a very difficult battle over what real masculinity is and is not. This goes to the heart of who Jesus is according to Scripture, contrasted with the modern understanding of Jesus as presented in seminaries and pulpits. This also extends to how the Gospel is preached and fleshed out in the Apostles, in how they lived and admonished men and women in the Early Church. Men and women are in the crossfire in this battle, as a very false presentation of the Biblical Jesus–and the Apostles–has been prevalent for over a hundred years.

That false Jesus is known by the moniker “Gentle Jesus Meek and Mild”, or–as I call him–the “Metrosexual Jesus”. Here is how it goes:

Jesus was this really gentle man who called everyone to be nice and kind, never get involved in conflicts, never argue or contend about anything, never get angry, do lots of kind things for your community, be cheerful in church even if your life is falling apart, and never take any form of self-interest.

What this ends up producing: men who (a) lack a backbone, (b) lack the ability to negotiate basic things such as salary with an employer, (c) refuse to intervene in exigent circumstances, (d) avoid conflict even when moral duty requires engaging it directly, and (e) exude character that–rather than attracts women–actually drives women away. Moreover, this culture drives men away from the Church because the Church is utterly disconnected from men due to their jaded understanding of masculinity.

What this also ends up producing: pastors who have not the first foggiest clue how to counsel men or women, because (a) they don’t understand the masculinity of Jesus, (b) they don’t understand the masculinity of Paul, (c) they have no backbone of their own because they are products of the jaded understanding of masculinity, and (d) they refuse to stand up to their wives as well as those women who dominate the committees in the Church.

The end-result: their children often grow up and RUN–NOT WALK–from the Church. Everyone here knows a few pastor’s daughters who want nothing to do with the Church today. This is because they grew up in families that everyone else looked up to, only to see that their families were rife with hypocrisy.

Now, does any of this excuse single men or women for their sins?

Not by a long shot.

At the same time, for the Church to provide an effective answer, the Church is going to have to get dirty and engage the cesspool that is the world of Christian singles. That means addressing the vices of men and women.

The hookup culture–which is sullied both sexes–is a serious issue.

Serial monogamy–a polished variation of promiscuity–is a serious issue.

Game–or, more accurately, the abuse of it for the purposes of sexual conquest–is a serious issue.

Pornography–the use of which is on the rise among women whereas it was once exclusively a male vice–is a serious issue.

Addictions–from food to alcohol to porn to romance novels–are very serious matters.

Prudence and diligence–or the lacks thereof–are very serious matters.

Addressing them is not simply a matter of preaching hard sermons, although I’ll not discourage that. It requires getting to know these men and women, fostering the relationships that allow you to get into their business without being a Gestapo agent, and helping them make high-percentage decisions that allow them to pursue, in Godly fashion, the desires of their hearts.

It requires men to man up, but also for women to put on their big girl panties.

It does not require men to get married in order to prove masculinity, but rather that those who wish to marry should act that out in Biblical masculinity, and for those inclined to remain single to do so likewise.

18 thoughts on ““Dude, Where’s Your Brain?” My Answer to Kevin DeYoung, Part 1. . .

  1. “It requires getting to know these men and women, fostering the relationships that allow you to get into their business without being a Gestapo agent, and helping them make high-percentage decisions that allow them to pursue, in Godly fashion, the desires of their hearts.”

    and that’s the BIGGIE that they don’t want to do. when i became a single mom, the church wanted to give us money and christmas presents for my girls. i told them what we needed was a place, a home, where we could spend christmas b/c we were alone. that was the last phone call they made. they didn’t even bring us a meal. giving money and gifts is easy … going on short-term missions trips is easy … but developing relationships with people, getting to know them – that’s where it’s real, desperately needed, and the one thing the church is fleeing from as though it were a sin.

    even in the church we sporadically attend now, the youth pastor’s wife emailed me and asked what they could do for my 14 year old daughter who refuses to go back to their youth group (because no one cared if she was there or not). i told the youth pastor’s wife that it would be great if they would spend time with her, get to know her, and let her get to know them … so she could have other adults in her life to look up to … to get to know their little children. that was the last i heard from her. i will not make my daughter go to a church youth group where they won’t talk to her, where they engage each other in conversations that reveal they are friends, and reveal she is not their friend, and the youth pastor and his wife only want her body there – not a relationship with her or to help her develop friendships with the other kids there. i even tried to develop friendships with some of the mom’s of the youth kids so our daughters could get together with us, and they didn’t want anything to do with me. they had their ‘group.’ they’ve had their group for years. they don’t want anyone new.

    i’m not against church, as in the body of Christ. i have no desire to play the organized church games anymore. been there; done that; have the horrible scars to prove it.

    what i am for is being there for others, getting to know them, letting them be real, meeting them where they’re at, praying for them, encouraging them, helping them when i can, where their need is, NOT where i perceive their need should be. like in the younger wife and mother (from our church) with whom i spent almost 3 hours at starbucks recently, who poured her heart out to me about the very real troubles in her marriage and with parents and in-laws, listening to her, encouraging her. she kept saying over and over, “I can’t believe I’m telling you all this. I never share this with anybody.”

    we need to be the somebody for each other.

  2. as for the article … i agree w/Amir.

    i thought … what about the parents? Amir addressed that well.

    and the way the author described all those sweet, innocent, godly, well-churched, single women … made me wanna puke. i’ve been there, done that, known them, been around them … and they certainly aren’t ‘all that.’ and, i wanted to know how he knew these things about these single women just by meeting them once or twice? anyone can bs the preacher. i’m not saying some of these women aren’t sweet and nice, but i’ve been in the thick of em all my life … there aren’t many.

    there have always been slugs … but if a dude you like loves video games, learn to play video games. if he likes football, learn about football. if he loves history, learn about history. if he loves music, learn about music. i daresay Mrs. Larijani spends much more time in the gym now than before they were married b/c Amir is a self-professed gym-rat. she’s with her man. men are going to spend their time doing things they love – and that’s OKAY (not talking about addictions here). if these sweet, innocent?, christian single ladies are looking for a man who spends all his time in bible studies, go to seminary.

  3. Great post.

    You alluded to this situation in your post, but I thought I’d call it out more directly: Christian men and women don’t have near the amount of participation or received wisdom of their elders/parents when selecting a mate.

    You mentioned the Jewish and Indian networks, which team up together to match Jews and Indians together with their compatible mates. Doubtless this involves parents on both ends, helping guide potential matches toward their children.

    American Christians do not afford their parents that much influence and, coupled with the other confounding factors you highlighted, serve to keep them from meeting one another.

    I dunno. Just a thought.

  4. Amir, well done!

    I live in the Washington, DC area, which has a lot of singles. In fact, there are a number of singles in my church. Most of the ones I’ve met are either young enough that I could be their father, old enough that I’m really not interested, or too dysfunctional to have healthy relationships. My church is also quite large, which makes it difficult for the clergy to get to know individual members all that well.

    We’re also involved in a lawsuit as a result of our decision to leave the Episcopal Church five years ago, and a judge recently awarded our property to the Episcopal Church and the Diocese of Virginia. So it’s not surprising that our clergy and vestry have other important matters on their minds at the present time.

    My church doesn’t have a singles group, but I’ve attended some functions sponsored by the singles group of a nearby nondenominational megachurch. I was warned by several folks I trust not to pursue relationships with women in that group because many of them were either too immature in their faith or had way too much baggage to deal with. Unfortunately, their observations proved correct.

    I’ve got my share of baggage despite never having been married; there was a period in my life when I wasn’t walking closely with the Lord and made a lot of mistakes. I’m also dealing with said baggage so that I can be ready should the opportunity for a godly relationship arise.

    I’m hoping attitudes toward singles in the church will eventually change, but I’m wondering if I will see that change in my lifetime.

  5. EW – “American Christians do not afford their parents that much influence and, coupled with the other confounding factors you highlighted, serve to keep them from meeting one another.”

    i agree. my kids are 12 and 14, and many of my friends have kids in high school and college or college graduates.

    one of the reasons for this is the basic philosopy that is ‘preached’ to american singles is to get your degree and get a job, THEN look for a spouse. they are strongly discouraged to look before those goals have been met.

    this does a number of things.

    (1) it (almost always) ensures the kids move away from home and go to college.

    (2) it usually ensures kids accumulate significant college debt.

    (3) it (almost always) ensures that those kids who move away from home to go to college develop their own lives separate from their parents, and they do not necessarily have much interraction with their parents while ‘dating,’ and so not much wisdom passed on.

    this thought process pushes finding and choosing of a mate solely into the young adult’s corner, so unless the parents have taught and instilled into their child the skills and wisdom that would help and benefit them before graduating from high school, they are likely to pick up those things from the college and work environment.

    there are some families that stay close through all these times, certainly. but the parents are often discouraging of any relationships that would lead to marriage before the completion of a degree and hopefully before landing that first job.

    in a sense, as the church is fragmented, as Amir pointed out, it has also fragmented the families.

  6. @Elusive Wapiti

    Christian men and women don’t have near the amount of participation or received wisdom of their elders/parents when selecting a mate.

    This is absolutely true. One of the positive lessons I’ve taken from Boundless is that I want my wife and I to play more of a “matchmaker” role in the future. I don’t know how well this will go over.

  7. @Samson J.
    An interesting observation, but be careful that you don’t fall into “courtship” legalism. Joshua Harris’ book, I Kissed Dating Goodbye, has, in some evangelical congregations, become the doctrinal equivalent of the Apostles and Nicene Creeds in mine.

  8. @Elusive Wapiti

    Christian men and women don’t have near the amount of participation or received wisdom of their elders/parents when selecting a mate.

    You mentioned the Jewish and Indian networks, which team up together to match Jews and Indians together with their compatible mates. Doubtless this involves parents on both ends, helping guide potential matches toward their children.

    American Christians do not afford their parents that much influence and, coupled with the other confounding factors you highlighted, serve to keep them from meeting one another.

    I dunno. Just a thought.

    Absolutely, no question about it. And I would suggest that it works both ways: (a) Christians don’t tend to afford their parents that much influence, and (b) parents of said Christians aren’t exactly making themselves available for that kind of influence.

    This, as you point out, is a key difference between our modern Christian culture as opposed to the Jewish and Indian cultures.

    @singleman
    That is correct: we cannot afford to fall into that courtship legalism. I would suggest that it’s not so much a “thou must do the courtship model” as much as it is “it might be worth considering–working out between you and your kids–the courtship model as a viable means of helping to facilitate a more equitable process of getting your son or daughter married well.”

    Some parents–I know some–have embraced it with success.

    Is it foolproof? No.

    Is it a Biblical command? No.

    Would it be a good idea to mandate, from the pulpit or otherwise? No.

    Is it worth considering? That’s for parents and their kids to work out amongst themselves.

    The larger issue, though, is that of singles–in cases where it can make a difference–utilizing their parents in the process of mate selection, and parents making themselves more available to help in the process.

    In past generations, parents played more of a role in the process than they do today. That much is indisputable. How much more do they need to play now? That’s a question the answer to which carries flexibility, but the parents–in general–need to be part of the discussion to larger solution to this current dilemma.

  9. @Ame

    and the way the author described all those sweet, innocent, godly, well-churched, single women … made me wanna puke. i’ve been there, done that, known them, been around them … and they certainly aren’t ‘all that.’ and, i wanted to know how he knew these things about these single women just by meeting them once or twice? anyone can bs the preacher. i’m not saying some of these women aren’t sweet and nice, but i’ve been in the thick of em all my life … there aren’t many.

    No question about it. Let’s just say that neither sex–as a group–is out there blazing a trail for Jesus. What you say about the “sweet, innocent, godly, well-churched single women” is true.

    That said, the situation isn’t much–if any–better for the men. There’s plenty of depravity to go around here.

    I will elaborate more about that later in the week.

    Any time you bring up the issue of protracted singleness, you are going to bring out the best–and worst–in both sexes.

    The women are going to scream and cry and wail about “men not being men” (not always without merit).

    The pastors–being the product of, at best, a quasi-feminist seminary education that includes Metrosexual Jesus 101, as well as the popular ideas that men are responsible for all that is wrong with women–go along with the women.

    The men are going to fire back with their own salvos about the women (again, not always without merit).

  10. @Samson J.

    This is absolutely true. One of the positive lessons I’ve taken from Boundless is that I want my wife and I to play more of a “matchmaker” role in the future. I don’t know how well this will go over.

    I’ve known some parents who have done this, and the results have been favorable. Those marriages have otherwise been very good.

    That’s not to say that we have to go to arranged marriages, or a hardcore courtship model.

    Still, parents would do well to look long and hard at the current landscape, and work hard–especially as their kids go into their teens and early adulthood–to foster the trust so that they can be better resources in the process of getting their kids married.

    I mean goodness…most parents I know put no small amount of effort helping their kids get into college, even to the point of helping them pick the college. Given that the selection of a spouse is even more important than the sheepskin you hang on your wall, parents would be well-advised to consider a similar role in helping their kids get married.

  11. Amir – absolutely agreed. and one of the ways to get to that reality and truth is to portray people as they are. just b/c a young lady walks into church acting and looking nice doesn’t mean she is. and male preachers need not to be suckered into believing they are. most women are born with the gift of persuasion, especially regarding men. male preachers should be more informed/aware of this truth and know they’re being taken enough of the time that they should re-evaluate how they respond to each individual woman. it is just as bad to group all women together as it has been to group all men together.

  12. That’s not to say that we have to go to arranged marriages, or a hardcore courtship model.

    Oh, no, I’m not talking about that. I think I just mean nudges, suggestions… maybe creating more formal get-togethers (but not *too* formal or anything).

    I mean goodness…most parents I know put no small amount of effort helping their kids get into college, even to the point of helping them pick the college. Given that the selection of a spouse is even more important than the sheepskin you hang on your wall, parents would be well-advised to consider a similar role in helping their kids get married.

    Yes, *exactly*. It is *amazing* that parents help their kids pick a college, but marriage is “none of their business”. Almost no culture, ever, has had the idea that marriage was “none of the business” of the parents.

  13. here’s what i tell my girls … i tell them i’ll teach them everything i know that will help them … i tell them i will be honest with them, and i am … i teach them the truth, and i tell them the truth. and i teach them that they get to choose the Truth or the lie – it’s their call. so when the subject of choosing someone to marry someday comes up, i tell them the same thing. i am here for them, i will continue to teach and train them and model for them. and i will tell them the truth. they can choose to believe it and act on it, or not.

    but there is one thing i will not do – i will not be passive or uninvolved. and here’s why …

    about 11 or 12 years ago, my two sisters and i were standing in my mom’s kitchen with her. my parents are now divorced. i am divorced from the man i was married to then. my youngest sister is embarking on a divorce. my oldest sister will likely never divorced, but her husband is, ummm, challenging. and my mother said to us very flippantly with an ‘oh, well; too, bad’ kinda voice, “Well, you all married men like your dad.” i was so angry with her. she never said anything to any of us.

    and i vowed i would never be silent with my girls. i vowed i’d tell them the truth. what they choose to do with that truth is their choice, but they will hear it from me. and because of the track record i’ve already established with them, they will know what i’m telling them is truth.

  14. Amir,

    I think another thing that bothers me about this is the fact that these things are largely related to the *application* of scripture, not the semantics of scripture. When we deal with problems in the church, we seem to expect the scriptures to give us a direct command to handle every problem that exists in the church. The problem is that this is just way too simplistic a view of language. Language is used to represent a view of reality, and within that view of reality, it is used to accomplish certain things. Understanding these two things is crucial to understanding how to deal with problems in the church.

    My pastor gave me an excellent example of this. Suppose that two people are out hunting. One guy holds the gun, and the other guy is on the look out for game. The latter guy sees the game off to the left and says, “Shoot to the left!” So, he shoots to the left, but misses. The game then runs off to the right, but he still continues to shoot to the left at the exact same place. After he runs out of ammo, his friend takes of his hat and hits him over the head with it and says, “What were you thinking? Didn’t you see that the game moved over to the right?” To which the shooter replied, “I was just obeying your command to shoot to the left; if I would have shot to the right, I would have disobeyed you.”

    The way in which the shooter treated the words of his fellow hunter is often how we treat the words of scripture. There are fundamental background assumptions and views of reality that betray what the text is intending to accomplish at a given point in time. That may be different from [although related to] the content of a given command. Such complexities are often ignored in favor of trying to find some text somewhere that says that “delay of marriage is a sin.” Worst of all, phrases like “it is better to marry than to burn” are treated in the exact same way as the shooter treated the words of his fellow hunter.

    The point is that it is exactly these matters that are crucial to understanding how the text applies in a given situation. We are to react to what the *intent* of the text is, in the context of how the text presents reality. That really complicates things, because now it takes wisdom to understand how the text’s intention and view of reality relate to our situation and our view of reality. That means that the application of scripture could change given our individual contexts.

    The problem is that we as Christians live in the here and now. We need to know concretely *how* to do something in our current context. The problem is, because the way in which language works and operates in terms of its intentions and views of reality, it is virtually impossible for a pastor to always be concrete, when so many different contexts exist in your congregation. For instance, one could say, “Anyone who tries to get someone to give you money off of an item in a store is stealing.” That might be true enough if there is a conspiracy between the person purchasing the item, and the cashier. However, what if the person is an employee, and gets a discount? What if the person has a coupon, or what if the manager has already approved a price change because the box is slightly damaged?

    Another example. Let’s say that the pastor says, “Don’t take things that aren’t yours.” That’s all well and good, except when you see a display in the store that says, “Free Sample.” Even in the example of murder, unless you can prove that the person intended to kill someone, you cannot execute them. If you are dealing with a case where there is a dispute as to whether a person’s death was due to a horrible accident or an intentional act, citing the law against murder will be rather pointless.

    That is not to say that there are not certain things that apply universally; there are. It is always wrong to kill someone in a premeditative fashion. It is always wrong to rape someone. It is always wrong to worship anyone or anything but God himself. Still, whether individual situations are examples of universals is questionable.

    I have come to the conclusion that the reason why books like Getting Serious about Getting Married or Get Married, What Women Can Do to Help it Happen sell so well is because they are so concrete. The problem is, in order to address this concretely, what they sacrifice is any relationship to the Biblical absolutes. The scriptures then have to be tortured in order to fit it into this paradigm. In some instances, the advice “Get Married” might be helpful. In other instances it might not [think of the difference between a sixteen year old girl and a twenty-eight year old pastor]. However, because these books are so concrete, and because these books cater to the desires of women [not to mention that they are controversial], they sell like hotcakes.

    What I want is to be able to deal with these issues concretely in a way that does not sacrifice the Biblical absolutes or add to them. That is going to be difficult, because the reasons for protracted singleness are variegated. However, if that isn’t the route taken to solve this issue, I fear that the integrity and sufficiency of scripture will be [and already is being] compromised.

    God Bless,
    Adam

  15. @Elusive Wapiti
    Parents of Gen X children were too busy “Fulfilling the American Dream” to offer any real guidance/networking to their offspring, let alone help out that they didn’t get stuck with (later divorced from) a deadbeat or a slut. Too much television, not enough networking, and not enough desire to make their children’s lives better.

Leave a Reply

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