All by Kay Cude, poet. Used with permission. Right click the image to see larger in new tab, or read below.
LOOKING INTO THE EYES OF THE SIN OF THE FLESH BY Kay Cude, February 26, 2018
How do we guard our hearts if our flesh becomes the lone sentry? How do we make wise decisions if we are its fountainhead of wisdom? How do we walk righteously if our pathway is no longer narrow? How do we abide in Christ as His branch if we believe we are the Vinedresser? How do we judge Scripturally if we are practicing hypocrisy? How do we trust God’s instruction if we are dubious that in all things it applies to us? How do we forgive a trespass if we secretly harbor anger and vengeance? How do we discern rightly if we rely upon feelings and experiences instead of the leading of the Holy Spirit through the study of God’s Word? BY Kay Cude, February 26, 2018
“So then, brethren, we are under obligation, not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh–for if you are living according to the flesh, you must die; but if BY THE SPIRIT you are putting to death the deeds of the body, you will live.” (Romans 8:12-13)
“But I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not carry out the desire of the flesh. For the flesh sets its desire against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; for these are in opposition to one another, so that you may not do the things that you please. But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the Law. Now those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires.” Galatians 5:16-17, 24
THE NECESSITY OF MORTIFICATION “Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth. Do you mortify; do you make it your daily work; be always at it whilst you live; cease not a day from this work; be killing sin or it will be killing you.” John Owen, 1616-1683.
I wrote recently about Women on the Speaking Circuit and used the example of Jackie Hill Perry, Beth Moore, Diana Stone, Priscilla Shirer, Jennie Allen…
Women who have children at home but gallivant all over the world speaking to audiences of unknown women are doing their role a disservice. The children suffer. The husband suffers. Their church suffers from her absence and suffers from the lack of her ministrations to the younger women IN her life. Why teach women 1000 miles away when there are women who would benefit from her teaching, presence, hospitality, and example 2 feet away down the pew?
Woman are biblically urged to be at home, tend to their home, abide in their home, and perform duties oriented to the home. The Proverbs 31 woman did all she did FOR the home, which is biblically her sphere.
For women who start out and then their ministry gets big and known, there is a tipping point. When I ran my newspaper business it was all about sustainability, repeatability, and scalability. Can I personally sustain this? What are my limits in energy, time, and talent? Can I repeat this over and over day in day out, year after year? Is my business scalable?
“Scalability refers to a business or other entity’s capacity to grow to meet increased demand“, says Investopedia. Can I meet demand on this ministry without having a negative effect on my home and life’s sphere?
There is usually a tipping point where the ministry (and usually it’s a corporation) gets big and the woman who founded it needs to re-evaluate her goals and realistically decide what to do next. It has been my contention that the above named women, and others, made the wrong choice. They invested themselves in their growing ministry, which inevitably took them away from their Godly role at home and church, and they became celebrities, with all that entails, which is usually negative.
The temptation of fame, or money, or even ‘good’ intentions such as ‘serving women’ or ‘serving Jesus’ were too much and they grew their ministry into a parachurch that took their time, attention, and energy away from the place where Jesus said it should be: HOME.
I was at a point like that a while ago. I’m not famous or anything, but I did start to receive requests to come speak. Idaho, New England, North Carolina, further afield in Georgia, different places. I declined them at first because I am still working full time and the dates were during the school year. But it made me think. I do like speaking and teaching. That’s my profession after all. My educational niche is Literacy, bringing text to children and helping them understand it. Doing that with THE text, the Bible, would be great. And to be honest, it’s flattering to get requests and to be ‘in demand’. (Pride, thou art sneaky…)
But no. After prayer and thought, I spoke with my elders and worked through the issue. I finally decided that my role is home, not to grow a ministry to the point where I need to incorporate, develop contracts, and travel away from home and church. Even if I never said another word or wrote another essay, just being IN the pew every week, present and visible, is a ministry.
I’d thought is there not one women I can help here, in my sphere? In church? Of course. Then why go help other women?
I do have a burden for the women I’d named above, and others, watching the negative effect being absent from home had on their families. Watching the temptations of celebrity chip away at their core. How ambition and energy used to sustain a growing ministry impacts them, and sometimes, even their message.
Many of these ministries and conferences become their own parachurch. While laudatory in many cases, some of these organizations increasingly draw women away from their home church, infuse them with false doctrine, and re-seed them back to their church to infect it.
I’ve written about my concern over these gallivanting women, and these growing ministries/conferences/parachurches founded by women, several times.
These are just a few of the essays I’ve written on the topic over the years. You can see I am truly burdened about it.
It’s why I admire and applaud Brooke Bartz, founder of the online global conference Open Hearts in a Closed World. She founded her conference in 2020. There have been 4 annual conferences- ’20, 21, 22, and 2023. It grew rapidly, soon hosting world class speakers and musicians. It quickly was partnered with American Gospel TV and The Master’s University.
This year she fulfilled her goal of moving the conference under the ministerial shepherding of her church elders. She never wanted the conference to become its own parachurch. She wanted to remain submitted, focused on her own sphere. It takes a strong Spirit-filled woman to abandon celebrity. To stick to her goal of NOT allowing the event to grow to the point where one’s identity and dare we say, celebrity, are attached. Here is part of her announcement:
The rest of her statement is at the link above. I loved this part, “in my sphere of influence”. Ladies, our sphere of influence is not the world stage. It is not jetting to this country or that state to impart biblical knowledge, outside of one’s own church and out from under authority of a husband, elder, pastor, or male-led board.
Brooke brought glory to the Lord with the teaching and now more glory by handing it over to the men!
Frankly, I’ve never seen a growing ladies’ ministry be handed over to the men at its tipping point. I’m sure it’s happened out of public view? Perhaps. But this was public, firm, and Godly. I rejoice with Brooke in having a full heart and seeing this wonderful example.
We need to be content where God has placed us, which is the home…church….perhaps a job (if single or other circumstances dictate). We really are not called to be celebrities, jetting in private jets with bodyguards, fielding interviews with globally famous news outlets, holding board meetings, negotiating speaking invitations and book contracts, when all the while the kids are at home eating takeout. The grandkids miss their gramma. Where her spot in the pew is empty. Where the husband is left to pick up wifely duties.
The Lord knows best and we thrive best at home. When we submit to that, He is pleased. Congratulations to Brooke and her husband, and her co-workers in Open Hearts in a Closed World for making such a fantastic decision.
Left, Brooke Bartz, founder of Open Hearts in a Closed World online conference. The conference will continue. It will not be live streamed but it will be videotaped, and available to watch on Youtube after the conference ends. It will be under the authority of Sola Bible Church and that is the Youtube channel one may watch the conference after it concludes this July, as well as the Open Hearts in a Closed World Youtube channel. May the women there be edified and the Lord of our souls be glorified.
I love educator-comedian Gerry Brooks. He used to be a principal in Lexington, Kentucky. He now goes around speaking about the education profession. He is beloved, because he says accurate things about all aspects of schools from Central Office to principals, teachers, children, custodians, lunch ladies, bus drivers, and nurses, paras, parents. He advocates for them all (except for State Education Mandates, Central Office, and parents who don’t parent- that’s why he’s beloved). He says true things about our profession in a hilarious way in videos on Instagram and Facebook. He is highly sought after as a Professional Development speaker, and fills themed Education cruise ships. He has millions of followers.
But I’ve noticed lately that he’s added a tagline at the end of his videos. When he gets off the ‘phone’ in one of his skits, he will roll his eyes exaggeratedly and exclaim, “Good LORRRRD!”
This is unfortunate. Using the Lord’s name as a curse word or as a vehicle for human exasperation is in fact, using God’s name in vain, which violates the Third Commandment that says NOT to do this (Exodus 20:7).
Here is a GotQuestions short explanation about using the Lord’s name and there is more to it than just using it as a cuss word.
“You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain, for the LORD will not leave him unpunished who takes His name in vain.” (Exodus 20:7).
A Surprising Melee Erupted
I posted the above on my personal Facebook page. I tagged Brooks in it. It was a thoughtful and heartfelt post, gentle I thought, and related to my conscience and my decision. I posted the address to the Third Commandment and said I’d have to stop watching his videos.
Social media is perplexing to me. I never know what will catch people’s attention and take off, for good or for ill. This one took off for ill.
The verse literally says not to do it AND that people who do it will be punished. The Lord God above has promised punishment for those who use His name flippantly and vainly. This is serious!
Instead, hundreds of comments came flooding in. I didn’t know my post had made such a scene, because I’d posted it before school, and while in school and doing errands, I do not have access to social media. Nine hours later I arrived home to find the result of saying “don’t take the Lord’s name in vain”. I didn’t read them all but of the scrolling I did I saw only 2 positive and affirming comments agreeing with the Third Commandment. The rest were the usual ad hominem, or dismissing the exhortation “Good Lord” as NOT vain, redefining the name ‘Lord’, or just resorting to mocking.
Well OK then.
What Do the Commentaries Say?
Matthew Henry opens his comment on Exodus 20:7 this way:
The first four of the ten commandments, commonly called the FIRST table, tell our duty to God. It was fit that those should be put first, because man had a Maker to love, before he had a neighbour to love.
So not taking God’s name in vain is of first importance, and a duty.
Matthew Poole Comments:
You shall not use the name of God, either in oaths or in common discourse, lightly, rashly, irreverently, or unnecessarily, or without weighty or sufficient cause.
Is sufficient cause to take the Lord’s name in vain because you need a tagline to end a comedy skit? No.
GIll’s Exposition says,
Thou shall not take the name of the Lord God in vain,…. Make use of the name Lord or God, or any other name and epithet of the divine Being, in a light and trifling way, without any show of reverence of him, and affection to him; whereas the name of God ought never to be mentioned but in a grave and serious manner, and with an awe of the greatness of his majesty upon the mind.
Is Violating the Third Commandment now a ‘Respectable Sin’?
In Christendom there are a few (and getting fewer) sins we agree are bad. Homosexuality, transgenderism, child molestation, or abortion are pretty much agreed-upon as sins and are thus evil. But there’s lots more sins we tolerate. Jerry Bridges wrote an important book called “Respectable Sins: Confronting the Sins We Tolerate“. Here is the Table of Contents:
Wrong is Wrong
I’d never imagined that one of the Ten Commandments would be dishonored and dismissed to the extent that was. Apparently Brooks gets a pass on this because he’s popular.
It’s like when Michelle Lesley @MichelleDLesley said on Twitter “Why do doctrinally sound Christians keep giving Rosaria a pass on preaching to men? If it’s wrong when Beth Moore does it, it’s wrong when Rosaria does it.“
Contrary to popular opinion, a celebrity’s popularity does not excuse his or her violation of the scriptures. The acceptability of the content of their speeches does not excuse violation of the scriptures.
Comments like those replying to my Gerry Brooks post about taking the Lord’s name in vain say more about the individual saying the regretful things than anything else. And the bulk of comments being weighted toward accepting the sin of taking the Lord’s name in vain just tells me again where society is at the current point in history.
Keep Your Conscience Sensitive!
My admonition for you, dear reader, is to stand guard over your conscience. Be vigilant about the commandments. It is easy to fall into accepting things God does not want us to accept when it seems that ALL of Christian society is doing it. We ARE surrounded by paganism, atheism, and apostasy. We are living in a moment where we ask ‘Does a fish know it’s wet?’
We have to know when we’re wet. Even though we may feel submerged in sin all around us, keep your conscience clean and clear.
Peter’s conscience was absolutely seared after he had betrayed the Lord:
And Peter remembered the word which Jesus had said, “Before a rooster crows, you will deny Me three times.” And he went out and cried bitterly. (Matthew 26:75)
David’s conscience was bothered about his adultery and murder of Uriah-
When I kept silent about my sin, my bones wasted away Through my groaning all day long. 4 For day and night Your hand was heavy upon me; My vitality was drained away as with the heat of summer. Selah. 5 I acknowledged my sin to You, And my iniquity I did not cover up; I said, “I will confess my transgressions to Yahweh;” And You forgave the iniquity of my sin. (Psalm 32:3-5).
Those are pretty ‘big’ sins: betrayal, adultery, murder, for which their conscience should have been pierced.
But what we may in today’s time consider a ‘little’ sin was Daniel’s choice to eat or not eat the King’s food. Daniel’s conscience would have been wounded by eating the King’s delicacies.
But Daniel set in his heart that he would not defile himself with the king’s choice food or with the wine which he drank; so he sought permission from the commander of the officials that he might not defile himself. (Daniel 1:8).
Ignore the conscience long enough, it eventually scabs over from all the pricking. It gets seared. You know that seared skin has no nerve endings.
by the hypocrisy of liars, who have been seared in their own conscience, (1 Timothy 4:2).
Paul guarded his conscience. He said twice,
Now Paul, looking intently at the Sanhedrin, said, “Brothers, I have lived my life in all good conscience before God up to this day.” (Acts 23:1)
Paul’s Change of Plans- For our boasting is this: the testimony of our conscience, that in holiness and godly sincerity, not in fleshly wisdom but in the grace of God, we have conducted ourselves in the world, and especially toward you. (2 Corinthians 1:12).
We do our best to obey Jesus, when we fail we rush to repent (and will be forgiven), and we move on with renewed vigor to protect our conscience from becoming dull. Heed your conscience when you feel those prickings.
Celebrity Can Be Deadly
As for thin-skinned celebrities- here are my thoughts. Very often, celebrities live in a bubble. This means they are often isolated and insulated from anything that doesn’t explicitly affirm their every move. The more famous, the stronger the bubble. They only see or hear or expect affirmation and approval. I’ve been blocked by Beth Moore, Rick Warren, and now Gerry Brooks. We saw this with Alistair Begg recently. Internet famous, beloved by his congregation, never really had a melee about anything he’s said, then BAM! His advice to attend a trans wedding caught fire and people pleaded with him to reconsider. Not only didn’t he reconsider, but he came out with a defensive and angry sermon the next Sunday that revealed his disdain and contempt for Americans he’d held inside all along.
In 2010 Sarah Pulliam Bailey wrote a long article about Beth Moore, who had recently ascended to her international popularity. Look at the hoops Bailey had to jump through to get this interview:
[Moore is] closely protected by assistants who allow very few media interviews. After several interview requests from CT, her assistants allocated one hour to discuss her latest book and ask a few questions about her personal life. Each question had to be submitted and approved beforehand, I was told, or Moore would not do the interview. Follow-up interview requests were declined. I was permitted to see the ground level of her ministry, where workers package and ship study materials. But Moore’s third-floor office, where she writes in the company of her dog, was off limits.
It is dangerous to be protected from gentle correction, rebukes, or criticism. Dangerous to be protected from the people we are supposed to serve. The more protected, the thinner one’s skin.
If you say, “well, it’s dangerous these days to rub shoulders with a general populace’, I’d agree. So in this case perhaps, dispense with focusing on international celebrity and say no to speaking engagements, and concentrate on your church and your neighbor. I am going to write more about that in a real life example shortly.
I am grateful for a Spirit who sanctifies me and makes me realize that I am participating in a violation of the 3rd Commandment. If Brooks’ using the Lord’s name as a curse of exasperation previously and I didn’t realize it, I am doubly thankful for the Spirit bringing this to my attention so I could repent.
Conclusion
I hope and pray that the obvious thorn that flew into Gerry Brooks’ conscience will do its work to spiritually rebuke him for using the Lord’s name this way. And I pray that the people who affirmed this as a ‘respectable sin’ will also eventually find their bones melting like David’s in regret and then repent. I hope this happens before they meet Jesus, ‘for the LORD will not leave him unpunished who takes His name in vain.‘
Ligonier Essay: Using God’s Name Frivolously Yet, of all the Ten Commandments, only the third commandment adds the grave warning that God will not “hold guiltless” those who misuse His name (Ex. 20:7). Obviously, God does not hold anyone guiltless who does not repent and trust in Christ, but the attachment of this warning shows that the Lord pays special attention to how His name is used.
I like the Appalachian fiddle instrumental version of the old song Just a Closer Walk With Thee. Here are the lyrics, written by an anonymous or unknown author
I am weak, but Thou art strong; Jesus, keep me from all wrong; I’ll be satisfied as long As I walk, let me walk close to Thee.
Refrain: Just a closer walk with Thee, Grant it, Jesus, is my plea, Daily walking close to Thee, Let it be, dear Lord, let it be.
Through this world of toil and snares, If I falter, Lord, who cares? Who with me my burden shares? None but Thee, dear Lord, none but Thee.
When my feeble life is o’er, Time for me will be no more; Guide me gently, safely o’er To Thy kingdom shore, to Thy shore.
The only mention of anything sovereign is the word ‘kingdom’ in the last line.
I watched the TV series of Queen Elizabeth II, called The Crown. It’s an excellent series, well written, well acted, with sumptuous production values. It is Netflix’s most expensive series to date. They spent a lot of money replicating the surroundings of the kings and queens depicted, and nearly exactly replicated the events they lived through.
One thing that the first season’s series has firmly shown, is that while the crown is a successive institution, the people inhabiting it alternate. Yet the people inhabiting it are still distinct from the commoners. The Queen, her mother, her sister, her father, any of the sovereigns, are isolated. They live behind fences and high walls. When they appear in public they are again shielded. If they are walking, there is always a large distance between the rows of people and the Queen (or the King as it is now). They might walk past the people, but they do not walk with the people.
Jesus is our King. He is King of KINGS and Lord of LORDS! He is the highest of the high. Has any King ever invited the commoners to walk with Him? No! Did King Ahasuerus (Esther’s husband) invite people to walk with Him? No! He decreed that anyone entering his throne room without him having called them there would be put to death! Did King Herod go out and stroll around with Lydia and Timothy and James? No!
Jesus invites us to be His friend, He is our Father, our Brother, our Intercessor, our Priest, our Redeemer, and our Savior. Yet…walking with the King is unheard of!
We sing that song in a lively fashion when we hear it on the radio, because it’s familiar to us and it’s sweet. But think about the words, really think about them. We ask Jesus to walk closer to us And He will!
None of this is news to any of you. But it does us good to think about Him once in a while as the amazing Person He is, King, who does not isolate Himself behind fences and walls. In what other kingdom at any time or anywhere, does the King invite His people to walk with Him? The King who does not dismiss the commoners, but invites them to participate with Him in his sovereignty is to be praised in wonder and awe.
Our pastor preached a parable from Matthew the other day. He explained an anecdote from the biography of Adoniram Judson. Judson was raised Christian. He went to college. He roomed with a magnetic, charming non-believer named Jacob Eames who slowly drew Judson away from the faith. Judson did not share this with his parents, but after a while, Judson apostatized. After Judson graduated he finally told his parents he wasn’t a Christian any more.
He asked for his inheritance like the Prodigal, which was a horse and some money. His mom sank to her knees and started praying right then. Judson left anyway. He desired to write plays in New York City. Later, Judson found his life of sin was not as fulfilling as he thought it’d be. This perplexed Judson.
One day he was riding thru a small town he never went to before and lodged at an inn he was unfamiliar with. Innkeeper said there was only 1 room but in the next door room a man lay dying, probably not make it thru the night. Do you want the room? Judson said fine, ‘OK, I’ll take the room, I’m not afraid of death’.
All night people whispered coming and going, taking care of the unwell man. Judson heard moanings and groanings from the man. Finally the man was quiet. Judson was disturbed about the proximity of eternity for the man, thoughts which soon turned to himself. Am I ready for eternity? Judson thought. He became troubled.
Judson fell asleep, awakening the next day feeling good and bounded downstairs for breakfast. He inquired of the man. The Innkeeper said the man did indeed die. Judson was sad, and began to think about the man’s eternity. He asked if the Innkeeper knew the man’s name. “Oh yes, It was Jacob Eames.”
Just 21 years old, charming magnetic vibrant Eames was dead and facing hell forever. Judson was so shocked, because he knew this was from God; the happenstance of finding this little village, this inn, the last room, the dying man he used to room with in college just a year ago, heard his groanings of his last night on earth…now dead. Judson stayed stock still in shock for three hours.
He didn’t convert right then but this was a key moment. Adoniram WAS in fact, scared to death of death. He enrolled in seminary that year and soon after, became one of the very first missionaries to leave America for other tribes far away, dedicating his life to Christ.
The Lord does pursue His people.
I think of that heartbroken mother on her knees praying Adoniram as he left the house. I am sure she continued praying. If you have a prodigal child, don’t stop praying. If the child is one of His, Jesus will seek that lost sheep and bring him home. if he is not one of His, your prayers glorify Jesus in any case. And our chief end is to give Him glory no matter our own desires, circumstances, or feelings.
Further Resources:
Ligonier: 5 Minutes in Church History (audio with transcript): Adoniram Judson
I don’t get a whole lot of comments on the blog. That is OK. People read it, all right, but I don’t think I could keep up with hundreds of comments if they came in. It’s just me here. No staff, nothing fancy.
I approve critical comments as well as positive ones. Some comments are worthy if an instant deletion. The comments I delete are for several reasons.
-comments containing links to false teachers or false doctrines. I do my best to protect my readers from falsity.
-comments with links to hours-long videos and the commenter gave no synopsis of what it’s about. I am not going to spend hours vetting a link if you didn’t spend minutes giving me a summary.
-comments opposing the point of the article with no example, proof, or even a reasoned argument. ESPECIALLY when the person is a coward and doesn’t even use their name to oppose it. Like this one I deleted today, and from a years-old article no less:
Whoever wrote this on this blog is such a spiritual babe with no even discernment. Your whole analysis do not add up
OK, fine to have a negative view of a piece I’ve written. But resorting to ad hominem accusations about my character (“spiritual babe” “no discernment”) without even bothering to explain his or her stance, when the article they’re rebutting is full of links, analysis, and a thorough argument, gets a swift “DELETE” from me.
I’m on Twitter/X, Instagram, Facebook, and WordPress. I’ve had a blog since 2006. That’s 18 years. For 6 years prior to that I ran a hard copy newspaper with an online version, which accepted comments and Letters to the Editor. So, I’ve had 24 years of dealing with the public’s reactions to things I’ve written.
I’m well versed in how to detect the difference between bull hockey, cowardice, and sincere dialog even if it’s clumsy. I have no problem deleting comments. Just because I operate in the public doesn’t mean I have to accept what I consider comments to derail the dialog, or attempts to incite a confrontation, or just an angry person using the shield of anonymous public discourse to bleed anger all over the place.
I have enjoyed the edifying benefit of some commenters opposing something I’ve stated where I found they had a point. Once in a while someone changed my view. They didn’t accomplish that by accusations and name calling. They did it by a kind and reasoned argument. You know, like the kind the Bible tells us to have:
The tongue of the wise makes knowledge look good, But the mouth of fools pours forth folly. (Proverbs 15:2, LSB).
The heart of the wise gives insight to his mouth And increases learning to his lips. (Proverbs 16:23 LSB)
The heart of the righteous ponders how to answer, but the mouth of the wicked blurts out evil. (Proverbs 15:28 LSB)
And especially:
Let your words always be with grace, seasoned with salt, so that you will know how you should answer each person. (Colossians 4:6 LSB)
Mean spirited, thoughtless, unreasoned ad hominem comments only do two things: reveal what is in one’s heart, and tempts the receiver to sinning by rejoining in similar responses.
If you are a person who comments online, please remember the Bible’s standards on the power of our words. Build one another up, even if you have a criticism:
but sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and fear, (1 Peter 3:15 LSB)
Our church has a healthy demographic of college kids and young marrieds. Some time ago I was watching an Instagram video story a young friend posted of a bunch of the youths in high spirits romping around the college campus at midnight, then heading to a local store for sodas, laughing and pushing and giggling.
I smiled, remembering my own hi-jinks and clean fun- road trips and loud laughter and silly fun. Ahhh, youth.
Those kind of memories are satisfying because that is how youths act, college or no. They’re boisterous, they’re lively, they’re carefree, they’re happy.
Kim Shay at The Upward Call blog published a good essay about older women not being a trope. (In TV or Movies a trope is a common overused theme or device). In many TV shows, the older women is depicted as silly, or a gossip, or a busybody. Think Hyacinth Bucket (Bou-quet) or the sanctimonious Church Lady of Saturday Night Live by Dana Carvey. Or Mrs Bridgette McCarthy on Father Brown, a church secretary, gossip, and often at odds with and acerbic toward other characters.
Shay’s essay was a look at how older women should act according to Bible verses that command reverence and sober-mindedness.
I’m an older woman now. I’m almost 64 years of age. I have completely white hair, overweight, a lumbering stiff walk, and oh my achin’ back. All the things that come with old age, including sagging skin, age spots, and general droopiness.
Not me. But sort of me.
I remember being a teen at a friends’ house listening to the latest music laying upside down, college road trips, my car stuffed with gangly youths, a young adult with my posse playing bar trivia…it was yesterday. Ladies, age creeps up on silent cat feet (with apologies to Carl Sandburg). The boisterous hi-jinks no longer suit. If I were to gadabout at midnight with pals, they’d lock me up for being crazy. Why? That’s not how older women act.
We line the wall at dances sitting in folding chairs, purses firmly atop lap. We tut-tut at the beauty and litheness of the young ones sailing by. We cook and serve the meals with a knowing nod and quiet hospitable satisfaction. We accept collect calls from grandkids at midnight when the car breaks down on the way home from hi-jinks. We rearrange the potlucks on the sagging table, they form the cleanup swat team afterwards. I say, we. I’m a we now.
I know some of these are a writing trope in themselves, but they are tropes because they are true.
Kim Shay wrote: “My husband once asked me with regard to the women who have spoken at my church’s women’s conferences: “Why is the speaker always young and beautiful instead of old and plain?”
I was noticing that, too. So many of the speakers at conferences now are younger women. Do younger women have something to say? Yes, but so do older women. And the elder females have been at it longer.
So since we have been at it longer what do we say about how to conduct ourselves? Well, whatever the Bible says we are to act.
Before I get into the nuts and bolts of biblical behavioral standards, I’ll mention that whenever I discuss behavioral standards, particularly applied to false teachers, these comments receive the most negative feedback of all the kinds of comments I make online. People hate to be reminded that the Bible endlessly outlines behavioral standards of any kind. There are general calls for certain kinds of good behavior, there are specific calls for individual demographics, and there is a reminder that we will be judged on how we behaved as well as what we believed.
In one set of verses we read about how we are to act, and the reason for it-
as servants of God we commend ourselves in every way: by great endurance, in afflictions, hardships, calamities, 5 beatings, imprisonments, riots, labors, sleepless nights, hunger; 6 by purity, knowledge, patience, kindness, the Holy Spirit, genuine love; 7 by truthful speech, (2 Corinthians 6:4-7a)
Why?
“so that no fault may be found with our ministry” (2 Corinthians 6:3b).
But what specifically of elder women? If we are married to a overseer, act in ways that aid him in keeping order in the household. (1 Timothy 3:4). If married to a deacon, the same, (1 Timothy 3:12. Additionally, deacon’s wives must be dignified, not slanderers, but sober-minded, faithful in all things. (1 Timothy 3:11). I am assuming that wives of pastors and deacons aren’t entirely youthful because the qualifications for pastors are not to be recent converts (1 Timothy 3:6) and to have built up a good reputation- which takes time. (1 Timothy 3:7).
If we are a widow, Paul in 1 Timothy 5 described real widows as: “Now she who is a widow indeed and who has been left alone, has fixed her hope on God and continues in entreaties and prayers night and day.” Which reminds me of Anna at the temple in Luke 2.
A widow could be put on the list for church aid if she had behaved in the following way-
A widow is to be put on the list only if she is not less than sixty years old, having been the wife of one man, 10having a reputation for good works; and if she has brought up children, if she has shown hospitality to strangers, if she has washed the saints’ feet, if she has assisted those in distress, and if she has devoted herself to every good work.
An elder married woman is not to be contentious, as Syntyche and Euodia were. (Philippians 4:2). Titus 2 is the famous verse that outlines how older women are to act-
Older women likewise are to be reverent in behavior, not slanderers or slaves to much wine. They are to teach what is good, and so train the young women to love their husbands and children, to be self-controlled, pure, working at home, kind, and submissive to their own husbands, that the word of God may not be reviled.
Reverent in behavior. Self-controlled. Kind. These are not hard to understand and not unreasonable to ask. When I write about behavioral standards other women rush to scream and rant, but really, what is there to rant against? They want to lose control? Be irreverent? Unkind?
Anyway, the Bible outlines behavioral standards for all ages. As I pass through the aging eras and enter the golden gate of elder womanhood, I’ll try to be mindful of how the Bible expects me to behave, so as not to discredit the ministry. Plus, in the Lord’s grace, I’ll try not to be a trope!
Further Reading
This makes a nice companion piece. Jared Wilson, that whippersnapper at age 49, not only muses on growing old, but provides some helpful tips to grow old gracefully.
I always thought the Sunday nap was because I was tired. During quarantine 4 years ago, I began to think otherwise.
And on the seventh day God finished his work that he had done, and he rested on the seventh day from all his work that he had done. 3So God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it God rested from all his work that he had done in creation. (Genesis 2:2-3).
I’m blessed to have a regular Monday-through-Friday work week, daytime hours. On Saturday I run around and do errands and cleaning and stuff that I’ve put off during the work week. So it’s like a 6th work day. Thus, when I get to Sunday, I’m tired. I go to church and I take a nap, and that is about all I do.
But during that time of “pandemic” where we are told to remain socially distant from others, work had stopped, I was quarantined inside my home. I was not tired on most days anymore. Oh, sure, when the work-stoppage first occurred, I napped to burn off the sleep debt and stress that had accumulated. But after the first week of the 2020-quarantine, the need for naps stopped.
I have sympathy for all those daughters and wives and women and sons who did not have a father. Either because their dad died early, or abandoned them, or divorce, or abuse. In a One Minute Apologist session, the impact of an absent father is discussed.
In addition to earthly issues, fatherlessness has serious spiritual implications for the child and adult. I distinctly remember the transition from the acceptance-as-normal of a two-parent home these days you have to further define, as women and man, married, mom and dad of opposite genders, to a home that ‘didn’t need’ a father. Where divorce was accepted as a something as simple as checking off items in a grocery list, and how women can ‘do anything’ including work AND raise the kids by herself. Fathers became bumbling fools on television and unnecessary in the public domain.
Throughout the ages, it was always understood that fatherlessness is a tragedy and deprivation, even when others needed to step in to take these roles through tragedy or the sinful choices of parents. Indeed, it is a tragedy that needs special attention. Orphans (James 1:27) and the fatherless (Ex. 20:22; Dt. 24:17, 19-21; Dt. 26:12-13; Job 31 17, 21) receive special notice and protection throughout Scripture. One characteristic of God is that God, as the Psalmist declares, “is a Father to the fatherless” (Ps. 68:5; see also Ps. 10:14, 18; 146:9; Hosea 14:3). Churches, as God’s representative on earth, should be a strong support to fatherless children and single parents.
It is a praise to the Holy Spirit when He saves a daughter or a son out of unbelief even though the earthly model for the Father was absent in their lives!
If you are in Christ, rest in the eternal fact that a loving Father has always loved you, even before you knew Him, and who will never abandon you again. Ever.
In tweeting about transgenderism, an angry person – obviously not a believer – challenged me with this-
you’re the reason baptists churchs are removing “baptist” from their names. How many divorced adulterers u take money from #hypocrite
He has a partial point. We make much of the homosexual and the transsexual, rightly holding up the doctrines of the Bible that speak to sexual sin, but often overlook the same doctrines that speak of divorce and unrighteous re-marriage. In those cases the remarried Christian is seen by God as an adulterer. Isn’t unbiblical divorce and adultery sin, too? Of course it is.
We all know the famous “God hates divorce” from Malachi 2:1. His command regarding divorce is reiterated in 1 Corinthians 7:10–11:
But to the married I give instructions, not I, but the Lord, that the wife is not to leave her husband. (but if she does leave, she must remain unmarried, or else be reconciled to her husband), and that the husband is not to divorce his wife.
He still hates divorce. But God did give some wiggle room for an allowable divorce. Not a desirable divorce, but an allowable one: if the spouse is unfaithful (Matthew 5:32), and if the spouse abandons the other spouse. (1 Corinthians 7:15).
Speaking of persistent sin, if there is someone getting a divorce on unbiblical grounds, for example, this is how MacArthur handles divorce as written in Grace Community Church’s Distinctives this way. His church’s distinctive is based on the Bible verses about divorce:
“Believers who pursue divorce on unbiblical grounds are subject to church discipline because they openly reject the Word of God. The one who obtains an unbiblical divorce and remarries is guilty of adultery since God did not permit the original divorce (Matt. 5:32; Mark 10:11-12). That person is subject to the steps of church discipline as outlined in Matthew 18:15-17. If a professing Christian violates the marriage covenant and refuses to repent during the process of church discipline, Scripture instructs that he or she should be put out of the church and treated as an unbeliever (v. 17). When the discipline results in such a reclassification of the disobedient spouse as an “outcast” or unbeliever, the faithful partner would be free to divorce according to the provision for divorce as in the case of an unbeliever departing, as stated in 1 Corinthians 7:15. Before such a divorce, however, reasonable time should be allowed for the possibility of the unfaithful spouse returning because of the discipline.”
But how often does a local church practice discipline like that? Discipline grows a church, doesn’t shrink it. (Acts 5:11-14). I think many churches have become somewhat like the world in that regard. They pull out the stops to prevent homosexuality from entering but have allowed other sins like divorce to become commonplace.
God’s people are united to their husband, Christ, by faith. This indissoluble union begins when we place our faith in the one who is “chief among ten thousand.” A significant implication emerges from this truth: Heaven is eternal because we are married to Christ, and God hates divorce. God would first have to sin by dissolving our union with Christ before Heaven could end. When God sins in this manner then Heaven will end.
the-end-time.org 
