Duggar Family

[John of Japan]

I read this thread with great interest. When we got married we decided we wanted a dozen kids. God in His wisdom only gave us one, maybe because He was sending us to live in the most expensive city in the world at the time, Yokohama/Tokyo (really all one city). The important thing in having kids is, they are from God (Ps. 127:3), so He should decide how many we should have. As God helped us, our one son turned out fine, we saw all his childhood Japanese friends come to Christ, and our hearts are fully of joy as he follows and serves Christ.

But back to the Duggers. They remind me of another family. See if you can guess what woman who bore 19 kids (alas, only 10 lived past childhood) wrote this:

”In order to form the minds of children, the first thing to be done is to conquer their will and bring them to an obedient temper. To inform the understanding is a work of time and must with children proceed by slow degrees as they are able to bear it: but the subjecting the will is a thing which must be done at once; and the sooner the better. For by neglecting timely correction, they will contract a stubbornness and obstinacy which is hardly ever after conquered; and never, without using such severity as would be as painful to me as to the child. In the esteem of the world they pass for kind and indulgent, whom I call cruel, parents, who permit their children to get habits which they know must be afterward broken. Nay, some are so stupidly fond as in sport to teach their children to do things which, in a while after, they have severely beaten them for doing.

This was just an excerpt. Guess who you think it was (and how her sons changed Christianity), then read the rest here: http://notesfromdaniel.blogspot.com/2007/09/susanna-wesley-on-child-rearing.html

 

[Aaron]

"there is nothing that more debilitates females than frequent childbearing." —John Calvin, Commentary on Genesis 12:11

The quote in context:

I know that thou art a fair woman to look upon It is asked whence had Sarai this beauty, seeing she was an old woman? For though we grant that she previously had excelled in elegance of form, certainly years had detracted from her gracefulness; and we know how much the wrinkles of old age disfigure the best and most beautiful faces. In the first place, I answer, there is no doubt that there was then greater vivacity in the human race than there is now; we also know, that vigor sustains the personal appearance. Again, her sterility availed to preserve her beauty, and to keep her whole habit of body entire; for there is nothing which more debilitates females than frequent parturition. I do not however doubt, that the perfection of her form was the special gift of God; but why he would not suffer the beauty of the holy woman to be so soon worn down by age, we know not; unless it were, that the loveliness of that form was intended to be the cause of great and severe anxiety to her husband. Common experience also teaches us, that they who are not content with a regular and moderate degree of comeliness, find, to their great loss, at what a cost immoderate beauty is purchased.

​

 

[Aaron]

I have little use for john calvin. he was a murderer and a bigot from what i have read about him.
so that statement does not surprise me.

It appears you have little use for knowledge and wisdom, and the diligence to attain them.

 

[annsni]

Jim Bob and Michelle refer to themselves as Baptistic in their faith. Yet they do not attend a Baptist Church. Instead, they hold religious services in their home.

I am not against home churches, per se, but wonder of his credentials in matters of the Baptist faith. Is he ordained? Has he attended any Baptist colleges that qualify him as being able to preach or teach the Word of God effectively?

Some may think I am trying to belittle the Duggar family, but I do believe these are valid questions. If not, then there would be nothing to stop anyone, new convert or old saint, from distancing themselves from fellowship with other believers and staying home... which could prove to be dangerous for some.

Scripture tells us to not forsake the assembling of ourselves together, so sometimes I have to wonder about 'home churches' that have only immediate family members as the only members of the church.

Is the home church valid if one is not learned in the Word? Is home church valid if there is no fellowship with believers outside of one's immediate family?

Well, I will disagree with you on the "training" part - I don't think a godly man needs to have gone to seminary to be able to lead his family even in home church. However, I fully agree with you on the "meeting together" thing. God gives us gifts for the edification of the church and I do not see how we can use them outside of the church. I would recommend any family be involved in a church body to be able to not only be ministered to but to minister to others.

 

[Salty]

My goodness, if they have "home church" with just the family - they are larger than many "official" churches with only a dozen or less in membership:smilewinkgrin:

 

[freeatlast]

My goodness, if they have "home church" with just the family - they are larger than many "official" churches with only a dozen or less in membership:smilewinkgrin:

You are correct and they do meet the gathering together as scripture commands.

 

[Salty]

You are correct and they do meet the gathering together as scripture commands.

But are they increasing the Kingdom - are they leading souls to the Lord and encouraging others to attend services. Are they baptizing and celebrating the Lords Supper?

Salty

ps, I won't even touch Business meetings:smilewinkgrin:

 

[Winman]

Baloney! This is a stereotype that has no true statistics to back it up. (you find some let me know) Children in one and two child homes get neglected all the time and no one blames that on family size. Family size is rarely the problem. Usually its selfish parents that are to blame, not the number, sex or ages of their children.

Since several member here have more that the typical one/two children(and one member that doesn't post here often but I know irl, has 8! gasp!), you've just insulted a whole lot of people for nothing more than the number of children they have. Just because you can't imagine having more than a couple doesn't mean there aren't those of us here who can not only imagine, but can follow up successfully raising bright, intelligent, children who are a glory to the Lord and a blessing to those around them. I'm raising 4 myself.

I am the one with eight kids, they never missed a meal, had good clothes on their back, and a warm bed to sleep in. The older ones have all gone to college albeit a local community college. They are good kids who stay out of trouble.

There is a commandment to have kids, God said be fruitful and multiply. If your apple tree has only two apples, would you say it was "full" of fruit?

Kids from large familes are seldom selfish. They learn to share and know they don't always get their way. They learn responsibility early, helping with laundry, dishes, and taking care of their younger siblings.

Never had any of my daughters be boy crazy and in a rush to have children like many young girls today, they know what taking care of children involves.

 

[Steadfast Fred]

Well, I will disagree with you on the "training" part - I don't think a godly man needs to have gone to seminary to be able to lead his family even in home church. However, I fully agree with you on the "meeting together" thing. God gives us gifts for the edification of the church and I do not see how we can use them outside of the church. I would recommend any family be involved in a church body to be able to not only be ministered to but to minister to others.

God does not call the qualified, He qualifies the called.

That said, I believe there should be some training background for any pastor because of the requirements set forth for pastors set forth in Paul's first epistle to Timothy. Paul states that the one leading must not be a novice. This indicates that he must be rooted and grounded in the faith, and have been learning the Word for some time. Also, Paul said he must be 'apt to teach.' If a man does not know the Word of God, how can he teach i effectively?

 

[Winman]

I read this thread with great interest. When we got married we decided we wanted a dozen kids. God in His wisdom only gave us one, maybe because He was sending us to live in the most expensive city in the world at the time, Yokohama/Tokyo (really all one city). The important thing in having kids is, they are from God (Ps. 127:3), so He should decide how many we should have. As God helped us, our one son turned out fine, we saw all his childhood Japanese friends come to Christ, and our hearts are fully of joy as he follows and serves Christ.

But back to the Duggers. They remind me of another family. See if you can guess what woman who bore 19 kids (alas, only 10 lived past childhood) wrote this:

This was just an excerpt. Guess who you think it was (and how her sons changed Christianity), then read the rest here: http://notesfromdaniel.blogspot.com/2007/09/susanna-wesley-on-child-rearing.html

That was Mrs. Wesley, mother of John and Charles Wesley.

 

[Gina B]

Whether you like it or not, it's much tougher now to have a big family, although it really should be easier with all our machines and other technologies.

Crazy world.

Anyhow, huge families are cool when they can be provided for.

I have absolutely no reason to believe though, and no scriptural basis to believe that God expects this of me. I know others that do it in faith and feel called. That's THEIR calling, not mine. The earth is already replenished and the Bible says that you're a big fat loser if you don't provide for your family.

So there's no reason to knock any choice a person bases on faith, prayer, and conviction on this topic because the Bible doesn't say to keep reproducing until your uterus falls out and it DOES say to provide for your own, but makes no promises of helping you out if you make unwise choices.

 

[Jerome]

But back to the Duggers. They remind me of another family. See if you can guess...

Susannah Wesley, like Jim Bob Duggar, organized a "family church" of her own on Sundays:thumbs:

"When her husband was away from the parish, and some of the parishioners complained of the dry morsels the curate preached in Samuel's absence, Susannah began to hold services, reading sermons, and preaching (she called it "exhorting" so that no one would complain of a woman preaching). Pretty soon the parsonage was full, and the people spilled onto the grounds to hear her clear and insightful words on Bible-living."

Susannah Wesley, Mother of Methodism

 

[Salty]

Whether you like it or not, it's much tougher now to have a big family, although...
...no scriptural basis to believe that God expects this of me. I...That's THEIR calling, not mine. The earth is already replenished and the Bible says that you're a big fat loser if you don't provide for your family.

So there's no reason to knock any choice a person bases on faith, prayer, and conviction on this topic because the Bible doesn't say to keep reproducing ...

Gina, I agree with everything you said-
One reason it is harder to raise large families is that previously children were an asset, not a liability.

I would agree that we should not knock someone for what they do for scriptural reasons. However, I would want to ensure that scripture has been properly interpreted. We often make a doctrine out of one verse - which may have been taken out of context.

SALTY
PS - FYI the Duggar Family endorse HUC-PAC

 

[StefanM]

God does not call the qualified, He qualifies the called.

That said, I believe there should be some training background for any pastor because of the requirements set forth for pastors set forth in Paul's first epistle to Timothy. Paul states that the one leading must not be a novice. This indicates that he must be rooted and grounded in the faith, and have been learning the Word for some time. Also, Paul said he must be 'apt to teach.' If a man does not know the Word of God, how can he teach i effectively?

Not all training must be formal. One can be mature and knowledgeable in the Word without formal preparation.

 

[Jerome]

From an episode on Youtube:

[Jim Bob and Michelle are in New York appearing on "The View"; watching the telecast back in the Ozarks are the Duggar children, who have dug out and crowded around a seldom-used small television]

Cameraman: Grandma, what is Joy doing right now? Why is her hand on the TV?

Grandma Duggar: Oh, she's covering up the immodest dress. She's been trained to do that for the boys.

Little Joy: Because they have low-cuts.

Cameraman: Why did you cover up the television with your hand for the boys?

Little Joy: Because it was defrauding.

Cameraman: What does that mean?

Little Joy: It means, like, they're not dressed very good. I mean, like, it's like, I don't know how to explain it, though.

Sister-mom Jana: Our little ones sometimes, like, take it to the extreme, like, where if a girl's sleeveless

Cameraman: And why can't the boys see that?

Little Joy: Mmm. . .cause it's bad?

Sister-mom Jana: If we're walking past a girl that is immodestly dressed, we'll call out "Nike!" and all the boys will immediately put their heads down and just walk past quickly, like that. And then we'll say, "All done", you know? It's our code word.

Well bless their heart

 

[jaigner]

Sweet mercy...that's the way to ensure a positive self-image.

 

[Steadfast Fred]

Sounds like they are programmed like robots. From the girl with no sleeves conversation, I think the Duggars may go a little too far.

And little Joy apparently was not told why low cuts were bad, only that they were bad. They apparently don't tell the children that God's Word teaches that women are to dress modestly. They are just told to dress modestly.

 

[Gina B]

Seriously? The most you can use to "condemn" this family is that the boys are trained not to look at immodestly dressed women and that one of the little girls in her childish effort to do right takes it a little far by thinking sleeveless may not be okay?

If that's the most horrid thing that can be dug up on this family (and really, why are you bothering to dig anyhow?) than they're my new heroes. I pray earnestly for my family and we actually SIN sometimes, not just take propriety a little further than others would like. LOL I'd tell you but if you react to a sweet little girl like you just did, I'm afraid of irreparable damage to your heart!

I haven't seen the show often, but from what I've seen of it, I admire the way they live. Older helping with younger, being raised with Godliness, good budgeting, great values, cleanliness, and order. I can't even manage that half as well and there's a lot less of us!

 

[Steadfast Fred]

Seriously? The most you can use to "condemn" this family is that the boys are trained not to look at immodestly dressed women and that one of the little girls in her childish effort to do right takes it a little far by thinking sleeveless may not be okay?

If that's the most horrid thing that can be dug up on this family (and really, why are you bothering to dig anyhow?) than they're my new heroes. I pray earnestly for my family and we actually SIN sometimes, not just take propriety a little further than others would like. LOL I'd tell you but if you react to a sweet little girl like you just did, I'm afraid of irreparable damage to your heart!

I haven't seen the show often, but from what I've seen of it, I admire the way they live. Older helping with younger, being raised with Godliness, good budgeting, great values, cleanliness, and order. I can't even manage that half as well and there's a lot less of us!

Gina,

It is wonderful that they are teaching their children not to look at immodestly dressed women. But if that is the only thing they are being told and they are not being told who it was that says this, it is doing nothing for that child at all but teaching him good moral.

I am reminded of the movie, "Time Changer" where a young boy was told it was wrong to steal marbles. He was not told why it was wrong. It was explained later that you can clean up a persons morals and that person can be the kindest person on earth. But if you teach good morals without Jesus Christ, your teaching is in vain.

 

[Winman]

Not to change the subject, but I once worked for a man, his father was one of fifteen children, his mother was one of twenty-five!

Anyway, when he was in High School he met a girl he liked and went over to her house. When her father heard his name he said, "You can't date my daughter young man." He asked her father why. To which he replied;

"BECAUSE SHE IS YOUR COUSIN, THAT'S WHY."

He had so many uncles, aunts, and cousins he didn't know them all.

True story.