Last post, Michael started his analysis the three types of men. According to the Pearl's, God created 3 types of guys to reflect different aspects of his (trinitarian) personality. Men are either Command men (like God the Father), Steady Men (like Jesus Christ), or Visionary Men (Like the Prophet Holy Spirit).
All of creation comes in threes. There are three dimensions and three primary colors from which all colors are derived. The atom is three parts, and the proton and neutron are constructed of three quarks each. The earth is composed of crust, mantle, and core. Plants require nitrogen, phosphorous, and potash. There are three kinds of flesh-mammal, bird, and fish. The body is bone, blood, and tissue, with three layers of skin and three joints in our fingers. There are three parts the eye and the digestive system. There are three heavens. The family unit is man, woman, and child. We are body, soul, and spirit. The soul is intellect, volition, and sensibility. The evidence is endless wherever you look-sea, land, or air.
This should be an obvious point, but not everything comes in threes. I was going to pick apart each item, but I think I'll leave that to someone else. The one that really stuck out to me was the three kinds of flesh. Yes, there are mammals, bird, and fish. What about reptiles? Insects? Heck, the Bible even says "All of the things that creep". But I guess like so much of PearlWorld, if it doesn't fit with their (limited) views, it's ignored.
So we would expect to find three types of men created in the image of God, just as the scriptures imply. As you look at the evidence, I am confident you will agree. And you will laugh with amazement at seeing yourself as a reflection of one of these three types.
[He then explains (again) the three types]
One thing I think is interesting, is that it is easy to see these characteristics in people. I'm sure part of it is kind of like the psychic effect. People want to believe, and so psychics say vague things that are really open to interpretation, and people tint that to hear what they want. It's the same with personality tests. You take a quiz, and you read the synopsis at the end. It says "You like adventure and taking risks." You could interpret it to mean the time you skydived into the Grand Canyon (without a parachute!), or the time you asked your boss for a raise that you deserved. What I'm saying is it's all too easy to read a nice, vague synopsis, and think it describes you perfectly.
As we explore the profound variance found in men, considering the strenghts and weaknesses of each, it will enable you to understand your wife's responses, thus allowing you to better steer her into her role as your helper. Each image has amazing strengths and weaknesses. Gaining wisdom and knowledge in this area will help you develop your gifts and avoid your weaknesses. It will help you understand your wife's reaction and cause you to curb your inclinations to the extreme.
Oh. I see. The main reason knowing these 3 types is important is so a man can better train his wife. No, he didn't say train, but it seemed to me that the implication was there. "Steer her into her role"? Um, no. A woman is a person with her own ideas and needs. It's perfectly OK to sit down and have a conversation about each other's needs, but it is not OK to attempt to "direct" one's spouse where you want them to go. I believe that's called manipulation.
One decent thing about the idea of knowing your type is that yes, it is good to know your strengths/weaknesses. It's been my experience that the more self-aware a person is, the more in control of their actions they are. And that's always a good thing.
When you know your natural strenghts and weaknesses, you will not demand of yourself something different from your capabilities. All problems are solvable, but the solutions are different for different types of men. So we are going to help you know yourself as God created you. This will be fun!
Yes! It's true! Different people require different solutions! Oh wait. I said people. Silly me. It's only different men.
We have spoken of the three types of men as if a man is exclusively one type or the other. A few men do manifest one type to the exclusion of the other two, but most men are predominantly one type with a little of another mixed in. I have never met a man that completely expresses the well-rounded image of God. Can't pinpoint what image you are? You will, but first we must consider the nature of the little lady in our life.
Decent point. People are a mix of lots of traits. In some instance, a person would be more likely to command. Another to dream. I think it's weird, though, that he seems to think that people are the same in every circumstance. In college, in a drama class, we wrote down where we were and how we interacted with other people, and the world. And everyone got the same result. People acted differently in Chem class than they did at work, then they did at the library, then they did at their grandma's. People are multi-faceted, and sometimes different approaches work for different situations.
And please stop referring to women as "little ladies". Little ladies are 6 years old. Not married women.
It seems God did not create women as he did men, strongly fixed in one dominant type. You will remember that Eve was created differently from Adam. Adam was taken from the dust of the earth and God breathed life into him. Eve was taken from Adam's side, bone of his bone, flesh of his flesh. It is as if the ladies are T-cells, meant to grow into conformity of their husband's nature-not to be identical, but to complement with contrast.
Once again, Michael forgets the 2 creation stories in Genesis. Read your Bible, sir! Also, I find the idea that women are "T-Cells" (really, T-cells?) a bit confusing. According to Wikipedia, T-cells are : T cells or T lymphocytes are a type of lymphocyte (itself a type of white blood cell) that play a central role in cell-mediated immunity. They can be distinguished from other lymphocytes, such as B cells and natural killer cells (NK cells), by the presence of a T-cell receptor (TCR) on the cell surface. They do not have antigen-presenting properties (but rather, requiring B cells or NK cells for its antigen-presenting property). They are called T cells because they mature in the thymus. There are several subsets of T cells, each with a distinct function.
Doesn't really say that T-cells grow into whatever cell they want. Perhaps he means stem cells?
In that sense, they aren't as limited as we are. But women who are not married, or those who have not grown into their roles as their husband's help meets will also manifest one of the three images in a significant way. As such, they are imbalanced. Likewise, a girl who waits until she is in her late twenties or older to get married is more likely to have trouble conforming to her husband's type because she has been independent so long, growing in her own direction.
Gasp. The horror! A woman who has her own "type" and own direction! We must stamp that out with early marriages! We can't let women be imbalanced! No, we must help those poor women grow into the perfect help meet for the husband. Under no circumstance should the couple try to attempt communication and find a compromise in the middle somewhere.
The woman's nature is that of an assistant to an autonomous man. She is designed to adapt and diversify for the sake of the relationship. A helper doesn't set the agenda, she follows. Learning to giver her life to help another succeed doesn't come naturally. It is a growing process that is not always frictionless.
Only men are autonomous? Really? And women are only designed to adapt to the man? Ugh. This stuff is so toxic. I really REALLY took offense to the line "Learning to give her life to help another..." Why are women the only ones required to give their lives? Why force a woman who doesn't want to, to act a certain way? Why does Michael say men aren't all the same, but turn around an assume women are? Head/wall.
It is your job to make her long to fulfill her position. It is her job to do her duty even if it doesn't seem to be personally fulfilling.This book is for you, to help you steer her into becoming your most suitable help meet. Earthly marriage is a picture of the great mystery of Christ and his bride, the church. Therefore it is of eternal significance that you bring your marriage into conformity to it's heavenly pattern.
I am having trouble computing the sheer evil of this man. Make your wife long to fulfill her position. Even if she isn't personally fulfilled, it's her job. The man is required to "steer" his wife to be whatever is convenient for him. We've already seen from his analogies that he doesn't consider women to be human. But this is just awful stuff.
Also, it might be just me, but I snickered a bit when I read "Make her long to fulfill her position".
Marriage can be glorious. Mine is and has been for many years. I know of only two couples married for over ten years who claim to never have had a fight They commenced marriage wise in personal relationships and with knowledge of how to make a marriage work, and from observation, I think their natural strenghts and weaknesses complemented each other while not creating contrast.
Isn't the very nature of complementarinism contrast? I'm thinking of complementary angles in geometry class. It means 2 different angles, when added together, from 90 degrees. Isn't that contrast? (Unless they're both 45 degrees, which might be Michael's point). Personally, I think a marriage without contrast would be really dull.
One of my Mormon church teachers was fond of saying he and his wife (married like 30 years) have never had a fight, never had an argument. A lot of people thought this was great, and wanted their marriage to be the same. But I hated the idea. People argue and fight because they have different ideas, opinions, needs, expectations, etc. The only reason for there not to be a fight-ever, is because one person doesn't assert their needs. Because no couple is going to agree on everything 100% of the time. Fighting and arguing is natural and normal in a relationship.
The vast majority of my readers cannot testify to a frictionless marriage, but, I assure you, a beautiful marriage is attainable for those of you who are now at the end of your rope with the last grip unraveling in your hand. I have seen countless married couples, even those who have already divorced and lost all hope, find the path back to repentance and restoration. And now, many years later, they testify of experiencing and interrupted joyous marriage.
I repeat: WHY WOULD YOU WANT A FRICTIONLESS MARRIAGE? In a vacuum, which is a frictionless environment, nothing changes. An object that's moving stays moving (until acted upon by something else), and an object that's stationary stays stationary. What kind of a marriage would that be?
Most couples simply lack knowledge of how to relate to and understand each other. God tells us in Hosea 4:6, "My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge." It is also true that marriages are destroyed for lack of knowledge. God says, "Wisdom is the principal thing; therefore get wisdom: and with all thy getting get understanding. (Proverbs 4:7)". We have a wonderful promise from God, "If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally...(James 1:5)". So seek and ye shall find!
I fail to see how Michael's advice to "steer your wife into being your perfect helper" is a good way to relate and understand another person. It sounds like it's a good way to relate to yourself; causing all around you to orbit you like a ginormous sun. I also think it's funny that he claims people should get knowledge, but only accepts pieces of the Bible that he likes. So, apparently, knowledge is OK, as long as it agrees with him. The sheer amount of arrogance in this man is revolting.
Well, what have we learned today? Women don't have a type, unless their some sort of abominable woman who was either married too late or isn't a good help meet. But not to worry, men can still affect change in those stubborn, imbalanced women!