MINISTRY AI AND I
PRIMAL DATING ADVICE
Part 1 Dr T’s Lesson (Tips) for Sincere Singles
Part 2 Single’s Word, Christ, Pharisees, Puritan American History,
Ministry Attitude, LP Patriarchy About Men and Women, “Sex”
and Christian Ministry Double Standard
Q. WAS JESUS EASILY HORRIFIED?
(c) 2025 Taveau D’Arcy All copyrights reserved under international copyright laws, in conjunction with AI
PART 1: DR T’S WORD FOR GENUINE SAVED MATURE SINGLES
“Whoso finds a wife finds a good thing and obtains favor of the LORD.” — Proverbs 18:22
This teaching centers on the phrase “He who finds a wife finds a good thing…“
Taveau Point: A Singles Aside: A Teaching for Those Who Desire Marriage
The Faith And Patience Stance: “Faith and patience inherit the promises”
Better to have NO ONE that the WRONG ONE.
Paul I Timothy 6:6 ‘Godliness with contentment is GREAT GAIN”
Means Be Contented “while you wait, even if it is forever” If No Worthy Candidate Appears
MEANS: YOU WILL LIVE WITHOUT BEING FULL OF REGRETS
This is brief but essential teaching for singles who desire marriage, yet remain content in God’s timing.
SINGLE’S BIBLE LESSON:
“Whoso FINDS A WIFE finds a good thing and obtains favor of the LORD.” — Proverbs 18:2
The Key Takeaway: MAIN POINT” is “whoso FINDS a wife ..”
POINT IN THIS BIG VERSE
A godly man, led by the Holy Spirit, is prayerfully searching for the wife that God has chosen for him.
MAIN POINT: However, the God following pure woman who desires a godly husband is not out actively hunting for a man or marketing herself, and/or “flaunting it” in the world, in the church or online… in bars, clubs, or any type of singles scenes.
Instead, the Saved Women is secure in God’s timing.
POINT: But what Should the Woman Be Doing..while the man is searching??
- She is preparing—not chasing. She is getting ready for the next phase of her Life, and her Future (but this points: with or without someone,for SHE has a concept of GOD, HER OWN DESTINY HIGH CALL and living her life out each and every day before the Audience of ONE..the Father ..and ETERNITY
- She uses the “waiting time to to get strong, to not have to please anyone, to dominate anyone ,or to be controlled by any other.
- She spends plenty of time taking personal inventory, she knows the her calling it it will me MIGHTY ..if she doesn’t get distracted, settle for 2nd or 3rd best or give up
- She finds out about HER PRIZED SELF: her likes, dislikes, her loves and her hates.
- She does not feel pressured, or accused for not being married,having children, NO. She holds out for the PRIZE..which is Christ first, and natural human people, comfort and earthly prized second.
- She has a big sense of “self value” and contented righteous satisfaction.
- Her esteem does not come from having a mate beside or possessing jewels or fame.It comes from the Lord and because she knows her worth, she refuses to rush, to stop her goals, to settle for less..in her calling, her ministry, her finances or her Freedom to Love Christ,
- She and God and choice , prayerful friends, hang out and pray.
- She exercises and enjoys fitness.
- Her trust in God gives her a sense of His peace that HE CAN bring someone along WHEN HE feels SHE is ready or “HE IS”hence, she does not give up, settle or give in to backsliding, to settle (compromise)
- She understands, before the Lord that the BEST GIFT she can give to a mate or to HERSELF is HER TRUE BEST VERSION OF THE GOD CALLED HER”
- Be this in ministry, business with people in her networks, She does not get sidetracked in self pity, doubt or mood swings,
- She is not willing to come down from her high calling in business, ministry, or life just to settle for less than God’s best.
Here is how she chooses to wait “spirit directed and actively
- Honing her skills, craft, and calling, her big gift.
- Expanding her interests, her life, developing her character, and pursuing personal excellence.
- Trusting in God, not pushing or forcing relationships.
POINT: When, IF, AS the right man comes along, he will see her for who she truly is. And underestimate her, devalue her or grows competitive, or jealous later ..when, if HER CALL is BIGGER than his. . And
POINT:Therefore, in order to quality and to TEST HIM she must be HER FULL REAL DEAL so that HE nor SHE will shocked, horrified and have struggles later (unequal yoke or no respect for the other is SHE earns more money or respect)
MAIN CHOOSING POINT SHE must make sure that HE is able to “handle ” what he is getting (mature enough emotionally, spiritually, financially) and MAN ENOUGH in Christ to respect and handle the Real Woman God has designed, called her to be.
POINT: The Standard for Choosing a Mate
A godly woman may have to pass on certain men who cannot handle the responsibility of walking alongside a strong, purpose-driven woman. Even if it takes years, she will continue to uphold a spirit of excellence in her provision, ministry, and business.
She does not need to:
- Settle for less than a man who values and honors her.
- Lower herself to meet the standards of peers, online trends, or worldly expectations.
- Allow herself to be disrespected, devalued, demeaned, used, owned, or dominated.
The A Balanced Approach: The Role of Men and Women
- Men are called to be prayerfully searching (hunting) for a godly wife.
- Women are called to raise their game to the best of their ability, continually improving and growing in Christ.
Thus, when the right man appears, the woman will not feel the need to lower herself or compromise just to be in a relationship. She will stand firm in her identity and calling.
Final Word: Dodging the Bullet
As King Solomon advises in Song of Solomon, women should “dress like a wall, not like a door.” Godly men—those who are pure, mature, and discerning—are drawn to women they can genuinely respect and cherish.
A godly woman does not hunt for a man, nor does she compromise her values to attract one. Instead, she remains steadfast in who God has called her to be, trusting that the right man—one who truly respects and values her—will recognize her worth.
Spread this message and encourage women to walk in their God-given confidence!
Taveau says unto Chat GPT
Please discuss the Following In Modern Day Christ Following about this
Chat Replies;
The Holy Spirit-Led Pursuit vs. Modern “Hunting”: A Biblical Perspective on Relationships
In today’s world—where dating has become a game of packaging, performance, and persuasion—it is critical to distinguish between godly pursuit and worldly hunting. Dr. Taveau D’Arcy speaks to the hungry crowds of today, calling attention to how real, mature, and Holy Spirit-led relationships contrast sharply with the ego-driven, conquest-based mindset promoted by Hollywood, social media, and dating culture.
1. Biblical “Finding” vs. Worldly “Hunting”
Proverbs 18:22 states:
“He who finds a wife finds a good thing and obtains favor from the Lord.”
The word “finds” in Hebrew (מָצָא – matsa’) means to encounter, secure, or attain after searching with discernment. It suggests:
*God’s leading rather than self-driven effort.
*A respectful, patient process, not an impulsive, dominating pursuit.
*Seeking someone to honor, not just to possess.
Godly Pursuit: Holy Spirit-Guided, Respectful, and Mutual
A godly man seeking a wife should:
- Be patient and led by the Holy Spirit—not desperate or forceful.
- Consider the woman’s needs, calling, and boundaries, just as Christ considers the Church.
- Seek a partner, not a trophy—valuing substance over surface-level attraction.
- Be well-prepared, mature, and capable of providing, both spiritually and practically.
A godly woman being pursued should:
- Recognize the difference between genuine interest and manipulation.
- Be discerning about motives—whether a man is pursuing out of honor or just for conquest.
- Never feel pressured to lower her standards or compete with flashy, shallow attention-seekers.
2. The “Caveman” Mentality vs. Christ-Centered Love
In modern dating culture, men are often encouraged to be “hunters”—relentless, aggressive, and dominant in their pursuit of a woman. This caveman mindset stems from worldly ideas of masculinity that are about:
++Conquering rather than connecting
++Chasing rather than cherishing
++Winning rather than serving
This is NOT biblical manhood.
Christ as the Model for Pursuit
Instead of a testosterone-driven “bagging of a female,” men are called to pursue in the mature, thoughtful, other-centered way Christ loves His Church. Ephesians 5:25 states:
“Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself for her.”
*Christ’s love is patient, sacrificial, and kind.
*He leads but does not dominate.
*He provides but does not control.
*He waits for the Church to respond willingly, never forcing love.
A godly man does not hound, stalk, overstep emotional or physical boundaries, or relentlessly pressure a woman into submission. Instead, he is secure in his own calling and seeks a partner who willingly reciprocates his love and respect.
3. The Impact of Hollywood & Social Media Packaging
The modern dating industry—fueled by Hollywood, social media, and online marketing—has distorted relationships into “playtime fantasy.”
How Today’s Culture Promotes Superficial Relationships
++Hollywood: Romance as a High-Speed Chase
- Movies and TV shows portray love as a wild, emotional rollercoaster, where men “win” women through grand gestures and women fall for relentless pursuers.
- This teaches obsession, not healthy commitment.
++Social Media: The Illusion of Perfection
- Packaging is everything—carefully crafted profiles, filters, and highlight reels sell an illusion of love.
- Many pursue a lifestyle rather than a relationship, seeking partners who “look good” online rather than build a real foundation.
- People are trained to compete for attention, rather than develop character and true connection.
++Modern Dating Apps: Gamification of Love
- Endless swiping reduces people to options, rather than seeing them as God’s creation with purpose.
- Many approach dating with a consumer mindset, always looking for a “better deal” instead of cultivating real relationships.
4. A Call to Biblical Maturity in Relationships
**Men: Pursue with wisdom, maturity, and patience, honoring the woman’s purpose and calling.
**Women: Focus on becoming strong in the Lord, not chasing validation through self-marketing.
**Both genders: Seek God’s timing rather than forcing a relationship out of fear or loneliness.
Real Love Requires Spiritual & Emotional Maturity
- No desperation. A mature man does not need to “hunt” aggressively; he is already a provider and leader in his own life before seeking a wife.
- No manipulation. A godly woman does not need to compete, sell herself, or compromise her standards.
- No chasing a fantasy. Both parties should be grounded in reality, not just pursuing romance based on social media illusions.
Final Word: Holy Spirit-Led Love Over Worldly Methods
Modern culture pressures people to package themselves for attention, chase validation, and force relationships. But Proverbs 18:22 calls for a different approach—one of spiritual discernment, patience, and maturity.
POINT:Men are to seek wisely, with honor, self-control, and purpose.
POINT Women are to be found in the fullness of their calling, not in desperate self-promotion.
POINT In God’s timing, the right relationships will form—not by hunting and chasing, but by walking in purpose and letting Him lead.
MAIN POINT
Taveau asks Chat GPT to make a point about the religious Church today:
Please Breaking Free from Fear-Based Morality: A Call for Biblical Maturity in the Church
Chat GPT replies:
For generations, the Church has struggled with a fear-based approach to morality, particularly regarding sexuality, gender roles, and relationships. From the rigid legalism of Puritan-era patriarchy to today’s purity culture extremes, many Christian circles have replaced biblical wisdom with shame, control, and accusatory moralism. This imbalance has created a cycle of suppression, hypocrisy, and judgment that does more harm than good.
Historical Roots: Fear, Control, and Double Standards
The Puritan era, along with Levitical Patriarchy (LP), set a precedent for rigid, fear-driven morality. Women were often scapegoated as seductresses, while men were excused for their desires. Literature like The Scarlet Letter reflects this double standard, much like the biblical account of the woman caught in adultery—where religious leaders were quick to condemn her but let the man go free. This mindset still lingers today, where certain sins (especially those related to sexuality) are harshly judged, while others (like pride, gossip, or greed) are ignored or justified.
The Problem with Legalism and Shame-Based Teaching
Instead of fostering healthy, biblically grounded relationships, many Christian communities have promoted extreme approaches:
- Hyper-Legalism: Fear-based rules that shame natural human desires and avoid honest conversations about relationships, intimacy, and boundaries.
- Moral Accusation Culture: Labeling women as “Jezebels” or “seductive threats” while excusing male irresponsibility, entitlement, and unchecked dominance.
- Reactionary Liberalism: On the flip side, some reject biblical values altogether, seeing any discussion of standards as oppressive.
Neither extreme reflects Christ’s model. Jesus did not shame or suppress; He brought truth and restoration. Instead of casting stones, He offered wisdom and a call to live righteously.
A Better Way: Relationships Over Rules
The Church must shift from rigid control and accusatory culture to teaching wisdom, responsibility, and relationship-based morality. This means:
- Teaching biblical responsibility for both men and women—rejecting double standards and emphasizing mutual respect.
- Encouraging honest discussions about relationships, attraction, and healthy boundaries without fear or shame.
- Replacing judgment with discipleship, helping people grow in wisdom rather than condemning them for struggling.
Rigid, patriarchal moralism has driven many away from the Church and fueled the very rebellion it seeks to prevent. The way forward is not fear or suppression but biblical maturity—grounded in truth, grace, and wisdom.
Taveau asks Chat GPT
Please expound upon Historical and Modern America, Jesus, the Puritans Culture and Pharisees, modern LP spirit in our Many Churches Today
Jesus vs. WELP: The Pharisaical Spirit in Modern Relationships & Ministry
The Western Evangelical Levitical Patriarchy (WELP) system has, for generations, misrepresented Christ’s approach to women, relationships, and morality by enforcing rigid rules, fear-based purity culture, and legalistic double standards. Jesus Christ, however, defied these oppressive structures, engaging with women in ways that broke cultural norms, offering dignity rather than condemnation.
This discussion explores how Jesus’ ministry, biblical history, and even cultural references like The Scarlet Letter, the Salem Witch Trials, and modern church purity culture reveal deep-rooted religious legalism—and how Christ provides the true model for healthy, biblical relationships.
1. Jesus and the Woman at the Well (John 4) – Breaking Religious Barriers
Jesus, a single male minister, broke religious and societal taboos by speaking publicly with a Samaritan woman known for her past. This directly challenges WELP’s modern fear-based purity culture that isolates men and women rather than teaching mature, respectful relationships.
- Cultural Law: Jewish men, especially rabbis, were forbidden from speaking with women in public—especially a Samaritan, and especially a woman with a sinful reputation.
- Jesus’ Response: Instead of avoiding her, He engaged her in conversation, offering her living water (salvation) rather than judgment.
- John 4:9 – “How is it that you, a Jew, ask for a drink from me, a Samaritan woman?”
WELP vs. Jesus
| WELP Culture | Jesus’ Example |
|---|---|
| “Avoid women at all costs to maintain purity.” | Talks with women publicly and respectfully. |
| “Women with a past are threats to holiness.” | Ministers to women with dignity, offering redemption. |
| “Women’s morality must be policed.” | Calls everyone to righteousness, without double standards. |
2. The Woman Caught in Adultery (John 8) – Exposing Religious Hypocrisy
The Pharisees dragged a woman caught in adultery before Jesus, demanding her execution. Their hypocrisy is identical to WELP legalism today, where women bear the brunt of sexual shame while men often escape accountability.
- Jesus Exposes the Double Standard:
- John 8:7 – “Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone.”
- He never excused sin, but He addressed the unjust way it was enforced.
- WELP and Purity Culture Today:
- Women are often shamed for their pasts, but men get “boys will be boys” leniency.
- Pharisaical leaders today still police women’s bodies, attire, and behavior while excusing men’s failings.
3. Salem Witch Trials, The Scarlet Letter, and Modern Church Shaming
The Salem Witch Trials (1692) and Nathaniel Hawthorne’s The Scarlet Letter both illustrate how religious legalism and patriarchy dehumanized women by defining them only by their perceived sins.
- Salem Witch Trials: Women were falsely accused of witchcraft based on hysteria, paranoia, and unfounded “spectral evidence”—much like how WELP calls women “Jezebels” and accuses them of using “seduction” to manipulate men.
- The Scarlet Letter: Hester Prynne is branded with an “A” for adultery—but the man who fathered her child faces no consequences. This mirrors:
- Churches that shame single mothers but ignore absent fathers.
- Ministers who police women’s attire while excusing male lust.
- Communities that gossip about female “moral failures” but excuse male leadership sins.
Jesus, however, never shamed or labeled people. Instead, He offered mercy, correction, and transformation.
4. The “Boys’ Club” in 1 Samuel – How WELP Protects Power, Not People
Eli and His Corrupt Sons (1 Samuel 2:12-25)
In 1 Samuel, the high priest Eli enabled his wicked sons, Hophni and Phinehas, who abused women and desecrated God’s house. Yet, rather than taking firm action, Eli merely gave them a weak warning.
- 1 Samuel 2:22-25 – “Now Eli was very old, and he heard all that his sons were doing to all Israel, and how they lay with the women who were serving at the entrance to the tent of meeting.”
- God’s Judgment (1 Samuel 2:34-35): Because Eli refused to hold corrupt men accountable, God removed him and his lineage from the priesthood.
Parallels to WELP Today
- Church Cover-Ups of Sexual Abuse
- Many churches protect male leaders who abuse power while blaming or silencing victims.
- The “Boys Will Be Boys” Mentality
- Men’s sins are excused as human nature, while women are branded as seductresses or moral threats.
- Fear of Addressing Sex and Relationships in a Healthy Way
- Instead of teaching maturity, respect, and biblical love, WELP enforces rigid laws that drive people into shame or rebellion.
5. The Solution: Biblical Relationships Over Religious Rules
The modern church needs to stop enforcing Pharisaical purity codes and start modeling Jesus’ approach to relationships.
What Jesus Taught About Men and Women:
- People Are Not Their Sin – Jesus restored sinners instead of labeling them.
- Men and Women Can Interact With Maturity – He showed that relationships should be about honor and respect, not fear and restriction.
- Lust is an Internal Issue, Not a Woman’s Responsibility – Matthew 5:28 states, “Whoever looks at a woman with lust has already committed adultery in his heart.”
- Women do not “cause” men to sin—sin comes from the heart.
- Real Holiness Is About Love and Self-Control –
- Galatians 5:22-23 – The fruit of the Spirit includes self-control, meaning men are called to discipline their thoughts and actions, not control women.
6. Final Thoughts: Moving Beyond WELP and Pharisaical Legalism
- The church must move past its obsession with controlling women’s morality while excusing or hiding male sin.
- We need a return to Jesus’ model: engaging both men and women with dignity, accountability, and transformation—not shame and legalism.
- Instead of policing clothing, attraction, and “perceived seduction,” the church should be teaching biblical maturity, respect, and healthy relationships.
- No more Salem Witch Trials. No more Scarlet Letters. No more religious fear-mongering.
Jesus saw individuals, not labels. He called people by name, not by their sin. It’s time the church does the same.
ChatGPT said:
Jesus vs. WELP: The Pharisaical Spirit in Modern Relationships & Ministry
The Western Evangelical Levitical Patriarchy (WELP) system has, for generations, misrepresented Christ’s approach to women, relationships, and morality by enforcing rigid rules, fear-based purity culture, and legalistic double standards. Jesus Christ, however, defied these oppressive structures, engaging with women in ways that broke cultural norms, offering dignity rather than condemnation.
This discussion explores how Jesus’ ministry, biblical history, and even cultural references like The Scarlet Letter, the Salem Witch Trials, and modern church purity culture reveal deep-rooted religious legalism—and how Christ provides the true model for healthy, biblical relationships.
1. Jesus and the Woman at the Well (John 4) – Breaking Religious Barriers
Jesus, a single male minister, broke religious and societal taboos by speaking publicly with a Samaritan woman known for her past. This directly challenges WELP’s modern fear-based purity culture that isolates men and women rather than teaching mature, respectful relationships.
- Cultural Law: Jewish men, especially rabbis, were forbidden from speaking with women in public—especially a Samaritan, and especially a woman with a sinful reputation.
- Jesus’ Response: Instead of avoiding her, He engaged her in conversation, offering her living water (salvation) rather than judgment.
- John 4:9 – “How is it that you, a Jew, ask for a drink from me, a Samaritan woman?”
WELP vs. Jesus
| WELP Culture | Jesus’ Example |
|---|---|
| “Avoid women at all costs to maintain purity.” | Talks with women publicly and respectfully. |
| “Women with a past are threats to holiness.” | Ministers to women with dignity, offering redemption. |
| “Women’s morality must be policed.” | Calls everyone to righteousness, without double standards. |
2. The Woman Caught in Adultery (John 8) – Exposing Religious Hypocrisy
The Pharisees dragged a woman caught in adultery before Jesus, demanding her execution. Their hypocrisy is identical to WELP legalism today, where women bear the brunt of sexual shame while men often escape accountability.
- Jesus Exposes the Double Standard:
- John 8:7 – “Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone.”
- He never excused sin, but He addressed the unjust way it was enforced.
- WELP and Purity Culture Today:
- Women are often shamed for their pasts, but men get “boys will be boys” leniency.
- Pharisaical leaders today still police women’s bodies, attire, and behavior while excusing men’s failings.
3. Salem Witch Trials, The Scarlet Letter, and Modern Church Shaming
The Salem Witch Trials (1692) and Nathaniel Hawthorne’s The Scarlet Letter both illustrate how religious legalism and patriarchy dehumanized women by defining them only by their perceived sins.
- Salem Witch Trials: Women were falsely accused of witchcraft based on hysteria, paranoia, and unfounded “spectral evidence”—much like how WELP calls women “Jezebels” and accuses them of using “seduction” to manipulate men.
- The Scarlet Letter: Hester Prynne is branded with an “A” for adultery—but the man who fathered her child faces no consequences. This mirrors:
- Churches that shame single mothers but ignore absent fathers.
- Ministers who police women’s attire while excusing male lust.
- Communities that gossip about female “moral failures” but excuse male leadership sins.
Jesus, however, never shamed or labeled people. Instead, He offered mercy, correction, and transformation.
4. LP PHARISEEISM: The “Boys’ Club” in 1 Samuel – How WELP Protects Power, Not People
Eli and His Corrupt Sons (1 Samuel 2:12-25)
In 1 Samuel, the high priest Eli enabled his wicked sons, Hophni and Phinehas, who abused women and desecrated God’s house. Yet, rather than taking firm action, Eli merely gave them a weak warning.
- 1 Samuel 2:22-25 – “Now Eli was very old, and he heard all that his sons were doing to all Israel, and how they lay with the women who were serving at the entrance to the tent of meeting.”
- God’s Judgment (1 Samuel 2:34-35): Because Eli refused to hold corrupt men accountable, God removed him and his lineage from the priesthood.
Parallels to WELP Today
- Church Cover-Ups of Sexual Abuse
- Many churches protect male leaders who abuse power while blaming or silencing victims.
- The “Boys Will Be Boys” Mentality
- Men’s sins are excused as human nature, while women are branded as seductresses or moral threats.
- Fear of Addressing Sex and Relationships in a Healthy Way
- Instead of teaching maturity, respect, and biblical love, WELP enforces rigid laws that drive people into shame or rebellion.
5. The Solution: Biblical Relationships Over Religious Rules
The modern church needs to stop enforcing Pharisaical purity codes and start modeling Jesus’ approach to relationships.
What Jesus Taught About Men and Women:
- People Are Not Their Sin – Jesus restored sinners instead of labeling them.
- Men and Women Can Interact With Maturity – He showed that relationships should be about honor and respect, not fear and restriction.
- Lust is an Internal Issue, Not a Woman’s Responsibility – Matthew 5:28 states, “Whoever looks at a woman with lust has already committed adultery in his heart.”
- Women do not “cause” men to sin—sin comes from the heart.
- Real Holiness Is About Love and Self-Control –
- Galatians 5:22-23 – The fruit of the Spirit includes self-control, meaning men are called to discipline their thoughts and actions, not control women.
6. Final Thoughts: Moving Beyond WELP and Pharisaical Legalism
- The church must move past its obsession with controlling women’s morality while excusing or hiding male sin.
- We need a return to Jesus’ model: engaging both men and women with dignity, accountability, and transformation—not shame and legalism.
- Instead of policing clothing, attraction, and “perceived seduction,” the church should be teaching biblical maturity, respect, and healthy relationships.
- No more Salem Witch Trials. No more Scarlet Letters. No more religious fear-mongering.
Jesus saw individuals, not labels. He called people by name, not by their sin. It’s time the church does the same.
Sr pastor Taveau asks Chat GPT
I’m curious about the Levitical patriarchs, Pharisees, and the attitude of “boys will be boys” and “burn the witches at the stake.”
-
Where does this mindset come from in history? Does it trace back to Adam and Eve?
-
What about the witch inquisitions, the Salem witch trials, the Scarlet Letter, and the Puritans? How do these relate to male misogyny?
-
How does the Shepherding Movement fit into this? What about minister men who harbor animosity toward their mothers, ex-girlfriends, or women in general?
And finally, where in the Bible and history is there evidence of a Christian patriarchal double standard for men?
Chat answers:
1) Origins of the Patriarchal Mindset:
-
From Adam and Eve: The idea that men and women have separate roles originates with the early biblical story of Adam and Eve. In Genesis 3:16, after the fall, God tells Eve, “Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you.” This has historically been interpreted in some circles to establish a hierarchical structure where the man is seen as the leader or authority figure. Over time, interpretations of this passage fueled the concept of male dominance in both spiritual and societal spheres. However, other theologians argue that this wasn’t a divine command but a description of what would happen in a fallen world.
-
Patriarchal History in the Bible: Throughout the Bible, we see the patriarchal structure reflected in the roles of men as leaders, warriors, and decision-makers. But it’s crucial to note that the Bible also contains strong women leaders (e.g., Deborah in Judges, Esther, and the women around Jesus) and passages like Galatians 3:28, which stresses the equality of men and women in Christ.
2) The Witch Hunts and Misogyny:
- Witch Inquisitions: The witch hunts were most prominent in Europe during the 15th to 18th centuries, largely fueled by a combination of religious fervor, fear, superstition, and misogyny. The Catholic Church and later Protestant reformers were instrumental in promoting the idea that witchcraft was a serious threat, especially to the patriarchal order. Women, particularly older, single women or those who were marginalized, were often scapegoated as witches. The idea of “burning witches at the stake” was a tragic manifestation of these beliefs.
- Salem Witch Trials: In 1692, the Salem Witch Trials in colonial Massachusetts epitomized the intersection of religious zeal, patriarchal authority, and gendered violence. A combination of Puritan belief, mass hysteria, and the targeting of women, especially those who challenged social norms, resulted in the deaths of 20 people, mostly women. The trials reflect how religious dogma, patriarchy, and fear of female power were used to justify violence against women.
- Puritans and the Scarlet Letter: Puritans were known for their strict moral codes, and women who broke these codes (often for sexual reasons) were publicly shamed. The “Scarlet Letter” in Nathaniel Hawthorne’s novel represents the historical practice of punishing women who were seen as having violated patriarchal moral codes, such as adultery. Men who committed similar offenses were often given lesser punishments or none at all.
3) The Shepherding Movement and Male Misogyny:
-
The Shepherding Movement (1970s-1980s): This movement, also known as the “Discipleship Movement,” emphasized strict hierarchical authority within the church, often placing male leaders in positions of control over both men and women. While it didn’t necessarily promote overt misogyny, the structure often reinforced traditional gender roles where women were subordinated to male authority figures. The movement was criticized for its authoritarian control, particularly in how it limited the freedoms and autonomy of women, keeping them in submissive roles under male leadership.
-
Minister Men Who Hate Their Mothers, Old Girlfriends, and Women in General: This reflects a deeper psychological and sociological issue where some men in power may develop bitterness toward women due to unresolved personal issues. This manifests in controlling, demeaning behavior towards women, especially in religious settings where their power is unchecked. The projection of hatred toward women could stem from unresolved personal trauma or a deep-rooted sense of insecurity about their masculinity, which they seek to assert through dominance over women.
4) Christian Patriarchal Double Standard for Men:
-
Male Privilege and Double Standards: There’s a history of double standards where men’s behavior, especially in terms of sexuality or leadership, is often overlooked or forgiven, while women’s behavior is harshly judged. For instance, a man who takes multiple wives or engages in adultery might not face the same level of judgment or punishment as a woman who does the same. This is seen in many historical religious practices where the rules for men and women are not the same, despite claims of biblical morality. One example is the way King David’s adultery with Bathsheba (2 Samuel 11) was handled. Despite his sin, David maintained his kingship, while women who broke similar laws often faced death or extreme punishment.
-
Patriarchal Teachings in the Bible: Throughout history, some Christian traditions have used the Bible to justify a double standard. In particular, the interpretations of Paul’s letters, such as 1 Timothy 2:12 (where women are told not to teach or have authority over men), have been used to place limits on women’s roles in the church, while similar or worse behaviors by men were often overlooked or excused. This double standard is evident in how men, even in religious leadership, have often been allowed to continue in ministry despite moral failings (adultery, financial scandals), while women were either silenced or punished.
-
Patriarchal Influence in Early Church History: In the early centuries of the Church, certain patriarchal structures were deeply rooted. The exclusion of women from leadership roles (e.g., bishops, priests) and the emphasis on male authority were solidified over time. Yet, we also see in Scripture that women played vital roles in the early church, such as Phoebe, Priscilla, Junia, and others.
Conclusion:
The origins of patriarchal structures, especially those that have led to misogyny and double standards, can be traced to both theological interpretations of Scripture and broader societal patterns. While certain biblical passages have been used to justify male dominance, there is also a wealth of scripture that promotes equality and values the contributions of women (e.g., Galatians 3:28, Proverbs 31). The Salem Witch Trials, the Shepherding Movement, and the Scarlet Letter represent dark chapters in history where misogyny and religious zealotry intertwined. Understanding the Christian patriarchy’s double standards for men requires reflecting on both historical and contemporary realities, as well as the ongoing struggle to correct and promote an egalitarian view of the body of Christ, where all are equal in Christ.
RESEARCHING CHRISTIAN DOUBLE STANDARD FOR CHRISTIAN MEN IN MINISTRY, LAY VS GIRLS, WOMEN
Sister Taveau asks Chat GPT
Please determine using Bible scripture, USA,Christian History if there is a double standard of character for Christian men, boys, vs girls, women
Chat GPT answers
The question of a double standard in behavior for Christian youth and men versus girls and women has been a topic of theological and historical discussion for centuries. In both biblical and American Christian history, we can identify examples where men and women were held to different standards, often in terms of behavior, leadership roles, and sexual ethics. Let’s explore some biblical and historical instances that support this idea.
1) Biblical Double Standards:
- Sexual Ethics: In the Old Testament, men and women were often judged differently for the same sexual offenses. For example, King David‘s adultery with Bathsheba (2 Samuel 11) was condemned, but he retained his throne and continued his leadership role. In contrast, Bathsheba was left in a position where the consequences for her actions were severe. In many ancient cultures, including biblical times, men were often allowed greater leeway in matters of sexuality, while women were expected to maintain strict chastity and modesty.
- Leaders and Authority: In several parts of the Bible, men were given authority in leadership, while women’s roles were limited. For example, in 1 Timothy 2:12, the Apostle Paul writes, “I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet.” This has often been interpreted to mean that men have authority over women in the church, even though women like Deborah in the Old Testament were recognized as leaders and judges. In this case, men were often given roles that allowed them power and authority, while women were largely excluded from such positions, creating a double standard.
- Gendered Expectations: The New Testament also contains references that have historically been interpreted as maintaining a double standard. For example, 1 Corinthians 7:2-4 emphasizes that husbands have authority over their wives’ bodies, while wives are expected to submit. Meanwhile, in the same passage, there is no equivalent mention of wives having authority over their husbands. This reinforces an unequal dynamic in marital relationships, where men are seen as the head of the household, often leading to a double standard.
2) Historical Examples in U.S. Christian History:
- The Puritans and the Scarlet Letter: The Puritans in colonial New England were known for their strict moral codes, particularly concerning sexuality. Women who were suspected of adultery, such as the character in Nathaniel Hawthorne’s The Scarlet Letter, were publicly shamed and forced to wear a scarlet “A” as a symbol of their sin. Men who engaged in similar behaviors were often not subjected to the same level of punishment or public humiliation. This created a gendered double standard that held women to much stricter standards than men.
- The Salem Witch Trials: During the Salem Witch Trials, the overwhelming majority of those accused, convicted, and executed for witchcraft were women. While men could be accused of witchcraft, it was far less common, and they were typically not punished as severely. The trials reflect a deep-rooted misogyny in society, where women who were perceived as threats to the patriarchal system (e.g., widows, strong-willed women, or those who were outside of social norms) were especially vulnerable to accusations and punishment.
- The Shepherding Movement (1970s-1980s): This movement promoted hierarchical authority structures within the church that placed men in positions of power, particularly as spiritual leaders, while women were often relegated to supportive roles or silenced in ministry. The Shepherding Movement led to the idea of spiritual authority being tightly controlled by men, often to the detriment of women’s autonomy in the church. Women were expected to submit to the authority of male leaders, creating a gendered double standard in the treatment of men and women in ministry.
3) The Christian Patriarchal Double Standard:
- Male Authority in Ministry: Historically, many Christian denominations have restricted women’s roles in leadership positions within the church. For example, in many conservative Protestant traditions, only men are allowed to serve as pastors, elders, or bishops, while women are often excluded from these positions. This creates a clear double standard in the treatment of men and women in ministry, where men are seen as the primary spiritual leaders while women are expected to support or remain passive.
- Sexual Morality and Men: Men in the church, particularly in the past, were often allowed more leeway in terms of sexual morality. A man who engaged in sexual immorality (adultery, fornication, etc.) could sometimes continue in leadership positions, while a woman who committed the same sins would face severe punishment or be ostracized. For example, Jimmy Swaggart and Jim Bakker, two prominent televangelists, were involved in sex scandals but continued to maintain their positions in ministry after their public fall, while women in similar situations would likely have been disqualified from ministry altogether.
- Misogyny in Leadership: Some leaders in Christian history, particularly in more authoritarian movements, have shown a deep-seated misogyny, which affects how women are treated in ministry. This often extends to the idea that women’s voices in the church, especially in leadership or teaching, are not as valuable or authoritative as those of men. Such a mindset has historically created an environment where men are given more freedom, authority, and credibility, while women are expected to submit to male leadership, regardless of the actions or behaviors of the men in power.
Conclusion:
There is ample evidence, both in biblical interpretations and historical church practices, that points to a double standard when it comes to the behavior and treatment of Christian men and women. This double standard has often been rooted in patriarchal structures that view men as the primary authority figures, both in family and ministry contexts. Women, on the other hand, have been subjected to stricter moral codes, excluded from leadership positions, and often judged more harshly for similar behaviors. Understanding this historical and biblical context can help illuminate the ongoing struggles for gender equality within Christian circles today.
Taveau says,
I forgot one major important group. Discuss this same double standard in ministry in I Samuel Temple Priest Eli and Both Sons, Hophni and Phineas
Chat GPT replies;
In the Book of 1 Samuel, the story of Eli and his sons (Hophni and Phinehas) is a key example of spiritual leadership gone wrong, and it is often used as a cautionary tale regarding the responsibilities of those in positions of authority within God’s house. Eli, a high priest and judge of Israel, and his sons, who served as priests, illustrate a troubling dynamic of corruption, abuse of power, and the consequences of failing to uphold God’s standards. Here’s an overview of the relevant passages and their implications:
1) Background of Eli and His Sons (1 Samuel 1-2):
- Eli’s Role: Eli served as both a high priest and judge over Israel. He was responsible for the spiritual leadership of the nation, and his sons were positioned to serve as priests under him (1 Samuel 1:9).
- Eli’s Sons, Hophni and Phinehas: While Eli was a man of faith, his sons were corrupt and wicked. They were priests, but they abused their position by engaging in sinful behavior. In 1 Samuel 2:12-17, it is stated that:
- Hophni and Phinehas were “sons of Belial,” meaning they were wicked and godless. They took advantage of their priestly role for personal gain.
- They violated the sanctity of the offerings by taking the best parts of the sacrifices for themselves rather than following the proper procedures set by God. When worshippers offered sacrifices to God, the priests were supposed to receive a portion of the meat, but Hophni and Phinehas took the meat by force, even before it was properly offered.
- They also engaged in immoral sexual behavior with the women who served at the entrance of the Tabernacle (1 Samuel 2:22). Their actions were a stark violation of the holiness required of priests.
2) Eli’s Failure to Correct His Sons (1 Samuel 2:22-25):
- Eli’s Response: Eli was aware of his sons’ corrupt behavior but failed to take strong action to stop them. In 1 Samuel 2:23-25, Eli confronts them, saying:
- “Why do you do such things? … No, my sons; for it is not a good report that I hear” (1 Samuel 2:23). While Eli expresses concern, his reprimands are weak and lack the necessary authority to change their behavior.
- Eli’s failure to act decisively suggests that, despite his position, he did not provide proper spiritual leadership in his own household. He had authority over his sons, but he did not exercise it in a way that could bring them to repentance and proper conduct.
- This lack of discipline and correction contributed to the ongoing degradation of the priesthood and the spiritual state of Israel.
3) The Consequences of Eli and His Sons’ Actions (1 Samuel 2:27-36):
- A Prophecy of Judgment: Because of the corrupt actions of Hophni and Phinehas, God sent a prophet to deliver a message of judgment to Eli (1 Samuel 2:27-36). The prophet rebukes Eli for honoring his sons above God and allowing their sinful behavior to continue without proper discipline. The key points in this prophecy include:
- The end of Eli’s family line: God tells Eli that his family will no longer serve as priests. This is a significant judgment because Eli’s family had held the priesthood for generations. God declares that the priesthood will be taken from his descendants, and a faithful priest will be raised up to replace him (1 Samuel 2:30-35).
- The death of Hophni and Phinehas: God foretells that both of Eli’s sons will die on the same day (1 Samuel 2:34), and this comes to pass in 1 Samuel 4 when the Israelites lose the Ark of the Covenant in battle with the Philistines, and Hophni and Phinehas are killed.
- A curse on Eli’s house: Eli’s failure to properly discipline his sons and honor God’s holiness leads to the destruction of his family’s legacy. The line of Eli will be cut off, and his descendants will suffer disgrace (1 Samuel 2:31-36).
4) Spiritual and Leadership Lessons from Eli and His Sons:
- The Responsibility of Leadership: The story of Eli and his sons highlights the serious responsibility of those in positions of spiritual leadership. Eli, as both priest and judge, was held accountable for the actions of his sons. His failure to exercise proper authority and discipline led to significant consequences, not just for his family, but for the entire nation of Israel. Leaders are called to maintain holiness and integrity within the house of God.
- The Importance of Holiness in Ministry: Hophni and Phinehas’ actions underscore the seriousness of maintaining purity and holiness in ministry. Sexual immorality, abuse of power, and greed were rampant in their behavior, and these sins were not taken lightly by God. Ministry is meant to reflect God’s holiness, and corruption in leadership brings judgment upon the people they lead.
- God’s Justice and Mercy: Despite Eli’s personal faith, his inability to correct his sons and his leniency towards their behavior resulted in the withdrawal of God’s favor. God’s justice is not swayed by familial ties, and even the most established spiritual leaders are subject to God’s judgment if they fail to uphold His standards. However, in God’s mercy, a faithful priest will eventually arise from another line (Samuel), who will bring restoration to the spiritual leadership of Israel.
- Discipline and Accountability in the Household: Eli’s failure in holding his sons accountable is a reminder of the importance of discipline, especially in the family. As a priest, Eli’s first responsibility was to ensure that his family honored God’s commands. Spiritual leaders are called to model godly behavior, particularly in their own households, and they are accountable for the behavior of those they lead.
5) Eli’s Judgment and Replacement:
- After the death of his sons, Eli himself dies upon hearing the news of the Ark’s capture and his sons’ deaths (1 Samuel 4:18). His death marks the end of his family’s priestly lineage. God’s judgment is carried out because Eli did not correct his sons, despite knowing their evil deeds.
- The rise of Samuel: In contrast to Eli’s failure, Samuel, a godly man who was raised up by God, becomes the new prophet and priest, restoring spiritual integrity to Israel. Samuel is a picture of faithful leadership, in stark contrast to the corrupt leadership of Eli’s household.
Conclusion:
The story of Eli and his sons in 1 Samuel is a sobering example of the dangers of failing to discipline those in leadership, particularly in spiritual matters. Eli’s failure to hold his sons accountable for their immoral and sinful behavior led to the downfall of his family and the judgment of God on the priesthood. This narrative serves as a warning for all leaders in ministry to uphold God’s standards of holiness, exercise authority righteously, and ensure that their leadership is marked by integrity and justice. It also highlights that spiritual leadership is not a privilege to be abused, but a responsibility to be taken seriously, with consequences for those who fail to honor it.
DR T CLOSES
She asks Chat
ChatGPT said:
Yes, the story of Eli and his sons can provide insight into how double standards might emerge in Christian ministry, especially when leadership fails to address issues of accountability and integrity within families, and within their organizations. Based on the biblical principles we observe in Eli’s family and other leadership examples in scripture, here’s how a double standard might emerge, particularly in contexts of Levitical Patriarchism (LP), family dynamics, authoritarian leadership (Big Boss mentality), and specific Christian movements:
1. Levitical Patriarchism (LP) and the Double Standard:
- Levitical Patriarchism (LP) is a hierarchical structure where male leadership, often within the context of patriarchal family structures, is seen as divinely ordained and untouchable. This system may be associated with domineering control over the lives of others, especially women and children. Leaders may emphasize obedience and submission to the patriarchal authority in both church and family settings.
- In LP, there can be a double standard where men, especially in leadership positions, are given more leeway or privileges, while women, children, or those lower in the hierarchical structure are expected to be obedient, subservient, and without room for correction or flexibility. The failure to hold men, especially male leaders, accountable for their actions can be justified by this patriarchal structure, as seen in Eli’s case. Eli’s failure to correct his sons could be viewed as a parallel to leaders failing to confront the sinful behavior of men in their circles due to their own complicity in the patriarchal system.
2. Family Men in Leadership:
- In some authoritarian or patriarchal church environments, family men in leadership may be seen as untouchable or above reproach, even when they fail to uphold biblical standards of integrity. This can lead to double standards where a man’s sins or failures are overlooked, excused, or minimized, while women or lower-ranking members of the church are held to stricter standards.
- The attitude of “boys will be boys” can emerge in these settings, where misconduct, such as inappropriate behavior, abuse of power, or sexual misconduct, is dismissed as minor or even normalized within the culture of the church. In these environments, men’s sins might be tolerated, while women’s behavior is scrutinized under a microscope, leading to unequal treatment.
3. Big Boss Mentality and Authoritarian Leadership:
- A Big Boss mentality in ministry often refers to a leadership style where the leader is viewed as the final authority—untouchable and unquestionable. These leaders are often at the top of the hierarchy, with little accountability to others, and their decisions may be treated as absolute.
- In such systems, a double standard often develops where men in power are given privileges and amnesty for their actions, while women or subordinates may be punished more severely for the same or lesser offenses. This is particularly harmful in patriarchal church environments where the men at the top may have significant influence over the spiritual and even personal lives of those beneath them.
- The authoritarian approach in certain church movements can lead to men being placed on a pedestal, their mistakes ignored, and their actions justified, while others (particularly women) are held to unreasonably high standards or punished for minor infractions.
4. Misogynistic Church Movements:
- Misogyny in church contexts often intersects with these power structures, where male leaders or members may foster a culture that demeans women, dismisses their contributions, and minimizes their role in leadership or ministry.
- This may also manifest in women being blamed for the failures or sins of men, often leading to shaming (similar to the way the Puritans shamed women with the Scarlet Letter), even when the male leaders’ actions are far worse. This can be seen in movements that justify oppression or marginalization of women within ministry by focusing on the “weaknesses” of women or their role in the fall (echoing the story of Eve in Genesis).
- Leaders who hold these views might tolerate abuses of power by men or even minimize them (i.e., tolerating men’s moral failures or sexual misconduct) while expecting women to be perfectly pure and obedient.
5. The Shepherding Movement:
- The Shepherding Movement (also known as the Discipleship Movement) that emerged in the mid-20th century within some Pentecostal and Charismatic circles also had elements that promoted authoritarian leadership, with leaders often assuming complete control over the lives of their followers.
- This movement could foster a double standard by exerting excessive control over women’s behavior while allowing men to act with more freedom. The strong male leadership in such movements might result in men being granted more leeway, while women were often required to submit unquestioningly to both the spiritual and practical leadership of men.
- In such settings, abuses of power or unaccountable leadership could go unchecked, and a culture of control over women’s roles in ministry could develop, with spiritual leaders failing to correct or address their own failings.
6. Ministerial Men Who Have Issues with Their Mothers or Women:
- Sometimes, male leaders who have unresolved issues with their mothers, or previous relationships with women, may transfer these issues into their ministry. This can create a hostile or disrespectful environment for women in ministry, as these leaders may see women as inferior or attempt to control their behavior as a form of compensating for past hurts or rejections.
- These dynamics can foster a culture of misogyny, where men in leadership are given power, even if they exhibit unhealthy behaviors, while women are held to a stricter moral or behavioral standard. Leaders may view women’s contributions or spiritual authority as secondary or even threatening to their own positions, reinforcing patriarchal values and the idea that women should be submissive in all areas.
Biblical and Historical Evidence:
- Eli and His Sons (1 Samuel 2): Eli’s failure to correct his sons demonstrates the consequences of failing to hold male leaders accountable. Eli’s leniency allowed his sons to sin without consequences, reflecting the dangerous effects of a lack of accountability within male-dominated leadership structures.
- 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1: Paul’s qualifications for church leaders emphasize moral integrity and accountability. These qualifications apply to men in leadership, and failure to uphold them should result in removal from leadership. However, in some contexts, double standards arise where male leaders who fail to meet these standards are allowed to remain in positions of authority.
- Genesis 3 and Male/Female Dynamics: The story of Adam and Eve has been used throughout history to justify patriarchal structures, where the fall of man is sometimes interpreted as women’s fault (through Eve’s disobedience). This narrative has led to misogynistic teachings that place the blame for sin disproportionately on women, while men’s failures are more easily excused or overlooked.
Conclusion:
A double standard within Christian ministry, particularly in patriarchal or authoritarian contexts, is not just a modern issue—it has deep historical and scriptural roots. Male leaders often operate with unchecked authority, and their failures may go uncorrected, especially in systems that prioritize their role as patriarchal figures. Meanwhile, women and subordinates can be subject to harsher scrutiny, punishment, or marginalization. The story of Eli and his sons can be seen as a warning against the failure of leadership, where a lack of accountability and moral failure in male leadership can lead to spiritual decline and judgment for the broader community. It’s essential for modern Christian leaders to hold themselves to the same standards of righteousness and accountability, regardless of their gender.
TO SUPPORT: [wpedon id=”1106″]
(C)2025 Taveau D’Arcy All copyrights reserved under international copyright laws, in conjunction with AI
Discover more from The Ministry AI + I
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
