Talk to me about Vision Forum

[Can Dance]

completely useless, but they just make me do the Duggars have any association?

[Striving4Grace]

My advice is to stay far, far, FAR away from anything and anyone associated with the Vision Forum. So much good insight has been shared in this thread that I really can't add anything else to it. IDK if the Duggars have a direct line to VF but I remember in the special that TLC aired when they paid to finish, decorate and furnish the Duggar house the girls were tucked into bed in sleep caps reading one of those VF books about historical girls. It could have been nothing more than more product placement though.

Originally Posted by Can Dance

completely useless, but they just make me do the Duggars have any association?

Michelle Duggar was honored at their Baby conference as Mother of the Year. If you watch the video done in her honor it's obvious they picked her because of her large number of children and the way she has witnessed to the world through her numerous childbearing endeavors.

[teamommy]

Is VF connected to those father-daughter chastity balls?

Originally Posted by teamommy

Is VF connected to those father-daughter chastity balls?

Yes, they promote them, iirc.

[newday]

Originally Posted by teamommy

Is VF connected to those father-daughter chastity balls?

It took me a few times reading that to realize that you were talking about a ball, as in an EVENT, not something you hold and juggle in your hands.

[teamommy]

Originally Posted by newday

It took me a few times reading that to realize that you were talking about a ball, as in an EVENT, not something you hold and juggle in your hands.

Oh, my.

[Hermana Linda]

The Duggars use Gothard and ATI which is linked in my mind with VF. If they are not formally linked, they are sure similar enough that when one is tagged in one of my posts, the other is usually tagged as well.

btw, I just posted about Legalism today.

[purple_kangaroo]

Here's an interesting article on the relationship between patriarchal views of women and slavery http://www.class.uidaho.edu/ngier/patrislav.htm

Traditional Christian ownership is explicit with regard to slaves but implicit with regard to women. Wilson's opposition to feminism is more radical than most people would think. Extended to society as a whole, his doctrine of the "federal" husband would deny women the right to vote, not only in their churches, but also anywhere else.[9] Following the ancient view, the patriarch rules his household and owns everything in it. . . . [10]

Sometimes this power goes to the patriarchs' heads and they become spiritual Titans. I define spiritual Titanism as an extreme form of humanism in which humans take on divine attributes and prerogatives.[11]

This article has some relevant quotes from VF people: http://www.alternet.org/reproductive...s/?page=entire

Vision Forum’s annual Father-Daughter Retreat, an event that’s described on Vision Forum’s website in terms that are, in a word, discomfiting. (“He leads her, woos her, and wins her with a tenderness and affection unique to the bonds of father and daughter.”)

The Botkin sisters write in So Much More that loving your parents means agreeing with all their opinions. “When your parents have your heart you will truly ‘delight in their ways,’” write the sisters in one blog post. “You will love what they love, hate what they hate, and desire their approval and company and even ‘think thoughts after them.’”

[BarefootBetsy]

My dh knows only the tip of the iceburg about VF's views on father-daughter relationships and he is made completely by the little bit he knows.

Voddie Baucham, in particular, has said some truly heinous things about fathers and daughters.

“A lot of men are leaving their wives for younger women because they yearn for attention from younger women. And God gave them a daughter who can give them that.”

To hear this disturbing statement in context (the Biblical Womanhood series) you can find it here (that statement is heard at the 2:08 time) :

youtube.com/watch?v=qljgjT2Q4-g

And I'm not sharing this to bear tales about these folks, but to warn people that this is the sort of thing VF condones. This is the sort of teaching that they consider to be just fine and appropriate and Biblical. There are so many things wrong with the above statement that I cannot even begin to touch on it. Where would I even begin? My dh was horrified. Horrified

[Striving4Grace]

VF can look all nice from the outside especially if you already are in agreement with WOS/QF/patriarchy but it is in everyone's best interest to really check out whom you're involving yourself and your family with before you do. Gothard, Pearl, Ezzo, Doug Phillips, Botkin, Voddie etc...if you really spend some time reading, looking and wading through the snark available out there you're going to find a lot of disturbing things. There is a deeply hidden core of rottenness there.

[CelticJourney]

Originally Posted by Can Dance

completely useless, but they just make me do the Duggars have any association?

There was a big two page spread on Michelle in their last catelogue (why I get it, I'll never know) pushing her book and labeling her as 'America's most beloved mother'. Formal or not, there is a connection.

[purple_kangaroo]

More quotes, from a paper on the Purity Balls: http%3A%2F%2Fdigitalarchive.gsu.edu%2Fcgi%2Fviewco ntent.cgi%3Farticle%3D1029%26context%3Drs_theses&r ct=j&q=always%20daddy%27s%20girl%20sarah%20faith%2 0schlissel&ei=wzhcTZiFD5KesQPmlPmOAg&usg=AFQjCNFn2 SXhytIRYGo_AGztXHjrc0z8Bw&sig2=pXPg3Cp-VE1zwRmzXYPaQw&cad=rja

Geoffrey Botkin . . and Doug Phillips . . . suggested that girls should not “learn career skills as emergency ‘backups’ to support themselves, as ‘learning to survive can teach girls attitudes of independence, hardness’” (Joyce, 222).

. . . girls who do not behave in such a manner can be assumed to be “unsaved,” for “the fruits of salvation would make a daughter eager to please and follow her father’s guidance . . . girls whose hearts are turned to their fathers will behave as Doug Phillips’ daughters: anticipating his needs, offering encouragement and physical affection (‘rubbing their fingers through Daddy’s hair’), and rejecting ‘patricidal’ friends who encourage them to keep secrets from their fathers” (Joyce, 224).

(emphasis mine)

The idea of giving your heart to your father and letting him be responsible for your spiritual walk and relationship with God, as well as everything else down to the level of thoughts, opinions and emotions isn't limited to females, though.

Robin Phillips has a rather lengthy article called "God in the Back Seat" which is actually an excerpt from his book critiquing the courtship/betrothal movement, giving several examples illustrating this: http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/largerhop...the%20back.htm

[Edited to take out the too-lengthy quotes--but I would highly encourage everyone to read the entire article.]


Robin puts it well when he says,

Any father who elevates his own ideas to hold a status that is co-equal with scripture is attempting to wear God's shoes, which is nothing short of spiritual idolatry. . . . It is revealing that in practice Lindvall puts a higher emphasis on children being their fathers disciples than their being Christ's disciples.

In one of Lindvall's newsletters, he tells of a situation in which a young man, at the age of 21, disagreed with some of his parents' beliefs as they began following Lindvall's teachings, and chose to move out of his parents' house before he was married. His parents disagreed with this decision, feeling that he should stay home and remain under their authority. When they wrote to Lindvall, asking his advice, Lindvall recommended cutting the "rebellious" son off completely and not allowing him to have any contact with his siblings or his mother, cut him off and give him up to the destruction of the devil--basically disown him.

When the son wrote to him, pleading that Lindvall hear the son's side of the story and reconsider this advice for his family to cut off all relationship with him, Lindvall replied,

Sons are supposed to be extensions of their fathers... The fact that your opinions differ so markedly from your parents is evidence that you have never fully given your heart to them. Solomon appealed to his son (Prov. 23:26), 'My son, give me your heart.' A son is supposed to give his father his heart. That means he fully surrenders to his parents' desires, opinions, tastes, aspirations, etc."

(emphasis mine)

He also went on to explain that he felt there was no Scriptural obligation to hear the adult son's side of the story before passing judgement.

Remember, this is an adult man we're talking about, not a child. Lindvall actually teaches that this level of submission to parents must continue even after a child is grown, married and living on his own.

(And, no, I'm not just going off of Robin's portrayal . . . I've sat through several Bold Christian Parenting seminars, heard Lindvall speak a number of times, and have read much if not most of what he wrote--I was heavily influenced by his teachings when I was younger, as he was a popular speaker at homeschool conferences in my area.)


---------- Post added at 10:19 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:09 PM ----------

In my opinion these teachings are dangerous both because they create a go-between between God and women/children in a way that I believe is contrary to the clear teaching of Scripture, elevate men and put them on pedestals to the level of what essentially becomes idolatry, and also because it has the potential to create kids who become adults that have difficulty knowing who they are, having a personal and direct relationship with God, and even forming opinions and making decisions once they are on their own.

Originally Posted by purple_kangaroo

In my opinion these teachings are dangerous both because they create a go-between between God and women/children in a way that I believe is contrary to the clear teaching of Scripture, elevate men and put them on pedestals to the level of what essentially becomes idolatry, and also because it has the potential to create kids who become adults that have difficulty knowing who they are, having a personal and direct relationship with God, and even forming opinions and making decisions once they are on their own.

Way to put it very succinctly. I've experienced all of those issues in one way or another. It's hard to put into words what distortion it brings to your view of yourself and God unless you've been then and gotten out. *shudder*

Anyone else noticing the Baucham/VF/patriarchy thing becoming more common and accepted in mainstream Christian circles? I know it is becoming more common here. For example, everyone I know LOVES Nancy Leigh DeMoss and the True Woman movement, and the True Woman main page has a video of Voddie Baucham and he speaks at their conferences.

---------- Post added at 05:24 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:18 PM ----------

Originally Posted by BarefootBetsy

My dh knows only the tip of the iceburg about VF's views on father-daughter relationships and he is made completely by the little bit he knows.

Voddie Baucham, in particular, has said some truly heinous things about fathers and daughters.


And I'm not sharing this to bear tales about these folks, but to warn people that this is the sort of thing VF condones. This is the sort of teaching that they consider to be just fine and appropriate and Biblical. There are so many things wrong with the above statement that I cannot even begin to touch on it. Where would I even begin? My dh was horrified. Horrified

My husband would agree with yours. He was absolutely disgusted by the nature of the comments VB has made. Not only about daughters, but about children in general. Voddie Baucham has said regarding children being born with sinful natures (wish I could find the audio link!!) that God "made them small so they wouldn't kill us in our sleep." As if the only reason they don't kill us is their physical inability to do so. Perhaps he is just a man given to hyperbole, but I find no cause to talk about children in that way.

Personally I think God made them small and helpless so we don't kill THEM! :P

[BarefootBetsy]

Originally Posted by rachelserine

Personally I think God made them small and helpless so we don't kill THEM! :P

Seriously though! I think that's why mine are so cute

And yes... I've definitely noticed these beliefs becoming more widespread and accepted in mainstream Christianity and amongst homeschooling Christians specifically.

Thatmom did two series of podcasts on this sort of thing in the homeschooling movement:

Here's the first one from 2007: http://www.thatmom.com/?page_id=2659

Here's the second one from last year: http://www.thatmom.com/?page_id=5036

They were definitely worth listening to, IMO. A lot of information and it takes a lot of time, but I listened to them while cleaning my house or folding laundry