An epiphany about the Pearls
(resulting from their latest newsletter)
I hear the following frequently about Michael and Debi Pearl's materials:
"Well of course there are things I disagree with. But there is a lot of good in there too."
I don't buy the 27% fat ground beef for a reason. It may have been made from a younger cow, but it's pretty much a waste of my time and energy to buy it because it so full of fat. I am paying for all that fat that just drains out of the beef. My "pound" of ground beef isn't as meaty as my pound of ground beef from say, 12% fat beef. So I don't buy it.
The same goes for the Pearls' materials. There may be some good in them. I don't deny that one bit. But there is just so much bad that it becomes a waste of time and brain power to read them.
If I want to get wheat out of a bag of wheat, do I choose the bag that is mostly chaff? No.
Related Tags: Michael Pearl, No Greater Joy, Created To Be His Help Meet
lucyricardo wrote,
Good post today!!!!
Link | July 20th, 2006 at 7:16 pm
Maura wrote,
AMEN! I’m going to remember this the next time I hear the “but there is some good in there (the Pearls teachings) too”
Link | July 20th, 2006 at 7:54 pm
Scrappitydoodah wrote,
Yay!!!! I’m so glad to read this.
Link | July 20th, 2006 at 8:34 pm
Susan wrote,
Excellent point!!
Link | July 20th, 2006 at 9:38 pm
Carrie K. wrote,
Well said.
Link | July 20th, 2006 at 9:39 pm
And the truth is, there are many good parenting books out there that aren’t troublesome. It isn’t like this is the only one out there so you HAVE to take the good with the bad.
I am so glad I travel in circles where this isn’t even an issue. I had never heard of them until blogging at homeschooljournal.
Blessings,
Faith
Link | July 21st, 2006 at 3:12 am
Heather * wrote,
What a terrific analogy! You are so right!!!
Link | July 21st, 2006 at 12:01 pm
Spunky wrote,
Their latest newsletter and the answer by the “friend of the ministry”the about the Lydia story was too much for me. My sister (a Pearl fan) finally hit the breaking point with that answer. Her husband wrote and cancelled their sub. I still receive letters weekly from readers who tell me their stories.
I think your analogy is excellent.
Spunky
Link | July 21st, 2006 at 1:34 pm
Spunky,
That is precisely the part of the newsletter that prompted this post.
Another excuse I often hear is that they are bearing fruit and that their children are bearing fruit. I’m sorry. Thinking it’s OK to call someone a sl*t based on her wearing shorts is NOT my idea of good fruit. I know that the Pearls didn’t say that themselves - it was a “friend of the ministry.” But they put their stamp of approval on that sort of behavior when they printed that letter.
Link | July 21st, 2006 at 4:32 pm
Julie G. wrote,
Amen Keer! Great analogy, and you know I agree
Link | July 21st, 2006 at 7:01 pm
Phyllis wrote,
I can’t even read their stuff…
Link | July 21st, 2006 at 7:29 pm
Oh my word. Sheesh!! I read Spunky’s comment then Keer’s response and about swallowed me teeth.
(on a side note, did you know Maura up there is my aunt?)
Link | July 23rd, 2006 at 7:17 pm
dollymama wrote,
You know, on the subject of their children “bearing fruit” I would have to say that unless you personally KNOW these people, you don’t know squat. Anybody can sound great on paper. It doesn’t mean that the entire package is that way.
So far the things I have observed (from their writings) about some of their children is that they are quite like their parents, in many unflattering ways. Just because they’re Christians, married, and famous because of their parents doesn’t give any indication of actual fruit.
if anything, I think we might say that the Pearls trained their kids to be a certain way, and at least most of them have followed that. There’s a lesson I can accept. (be the way you want you kids to be)
Link | July 24th, 2006 at 11:17 am
TOTALLY agree DM!!!!!!!
Link | July 24th, 2006 at 11:23 am
TulipGirl wrote,
Vivid analogy, Keer! (And I almost always by the lowest fat ground beef just because of the crud that just gets drained away. . .)
Link | July 24th, 2006 at 6:30 pm
Beth wrote,
So glad someone else came to the same conclusion!
Link | July 25th, 2006 at 6:48 am
Zan wrote,
This is the first blog I’ve come across that actually says bad things about the Pearls. I have seen their web site and they always seemed weird to me. I have never read any of their books, so I just trusted what other people were saying about them. Growing up, I was exposed to a lot of cult-like groups and have always been wary of people who look or sound like them. Based on what you guys are saying about them, I think I will stay away from their writings. Besides, I am wearing shorts as I write this.
Link | July 25th, 2006 at 2:39 pm
Cyndi wrote,
Just a couple thoughts on the above comments. I would not say I am in the least a “Pearl Fan”, but I do agree with much of their teaching. I guess I have not read in their books/newsletters, etc. that they do not agree with the wearing of shorts on women. I did go back and look through a few newsletters to look at the pictures and found their female children/grandchildren to be wearing pants. I, however, could not find a picture of a female that was showing the legs to be able to tell what they were wearing.
I would have to agree with the Pearl’s “Friend of the Ministry” when he spoke about what women wear affects the thinking, “daily thinking”, of a man. If you do not agree, you are blind to the world and the human behavior of men. The Bible even teaches this in Mark 7:20-23. I think that the main idea of the article had to do with the lust of a mans eye, not the calling of names.
I guess I say all this to say we need to examine ourselves and know that we all have flaws. I do wear shorts, but I try to be very concious of how short they are, how wide the legs on them are, or even how tight they are. I would not and try very hard to not be a person that leads a man astray in anyway whatsoever, nor do I enjoy seeing other women out there with such clothing on, knowing how visual men are and my husband is a man living in such a world.
I do think the author of that article was a bit wordy calling such women sl*ts, but I do wonder what goes through such a women’s head when she dresses herself of a morning and goes out into this world. I like to feel femanin and in doing so, I tend to try to be somewhat in with the styles, doing my hair or getting it cut with the times, wearing make-up, painting my finger and toenails to match outfits, and such. However, I do think there is a Biblical way of doing such things and an immodest way of doing such things.
Another verse I think of is in Proverbs 31 verse 22, she was beautiful and her clothing was silk and purple, she made fine linen. I don’t think of a mini skirt or short shorts, but a very well covered woman of very stylish type clothing.
I don’t mean to degrade anyone in their thinking or comments above, but I would just like them to think things through and know we are all human with a sinful nature. We need to keep this in mind in our daily living. I really liked what was mentioned above in one of the threads that it taught her a lesson she can accept, “We need to be the way you want you kids to be”, I totally agree!! This is one of the main reasons we homeschool, and this is one of the top thoughts in my mind each day!!
We can only try our best to be as Godly as we can be and search the scriptures to learn such teachings!! There is an answer to everything in the Bible including how we are to dress
Sorry this is so long, I would love to hear what other thougts are out there!!
Cyndi in Iowa
mirrors93@iowatelecom.net
Link | July 25th, 2006 at 7:58 pm
Cyndi,
I agree with the concept of modesty (naturally, since the Bible does too
). What I do NOT agree with is the name-calling that the Pearls both practice and approve of. A point can be made in a MUCH more tasteful and appropriate manner. This man’s letter was in direct contradiction to the way the Lord Jesus taught His believers to act. But since it has the Pearls’ stamp of approval and is discussing how visual men are, it’s OK? NO.
THAT is the problem I have with the Pearls’ material. THAT is the chaff and the fat I speak of. I can get the same basic premise elsewhere, without all the extra, unbiblical garbage that they add.
Link | July 25th, 2006 at 8:52 pm
Cyndi wrote,
I agree their words are not always what you would think of as being wholesome, but are they actually unbiblical? Looking in Matthew 12, it also talks about us giving account on Judgment Day for every word we speak. We will either be justified or condemned. I would say you are right to just not put such teachings into your head if you are not in agreement with them or you are not wanting to live the way they teach, but we need to align everything up with the Bible. It could cause you to not only think unwholesome thoughts since there are disagreements, but could cause you to fall into sin depending on the situation. They will be judged by our Maker when the time comes if they are sinning, as will we if we are saved.
I think of my own life and the things I say and I know I have room for improvement!! As I am sure all of us do. However, I would not want for myself to listen to or read such things that could lead me astray.
We have a friend that questions every teaching in every church he attends, he is pretty judgmental. BUT then when he is living everyday he is watching things on TV that I would think are unwholesome, he listens to Country music (I personally don’t know many songs that are wholesome in the Country music industry), he believes it is ok to drink alcohol as long as he is not getting drunk since the Bible teaches “in excess of”, I just wonder how he can live each day doing what he does? His wife believes as he does and so lives the same way and are bringing up their 4 children the same. The word hypocrite comes to mind many times, we question them, but he always has a “comeback”. I guess I say all this to say if the Pearl’s material is something to be laid aside, what other area’s of our lives shall we lay aside also. I try to keep in mind that others are watching me and waiting for me to “mess up” as a christian.
I am glad you opened my eyes to the Pearl’s, I think that is why I was led to your blog. I was looking on the Homesatfriends site for helpful tips in schooling this year and when I saw you had a blog, I read it more out of curiosity. I like to think things like that happen for a reason in my life. I will have to watch as I read their newsletter to really be sure they align every word and article up with the Bible. I think there are times in my life I tend to just, over time, trust and accept teachings or people and we need to be on the look out for evil lurking around.
Thanks for the great discussion and the response back!! I mark this up as growth in my spiritual life!!!
Cyndi Mears
mirrors93@iowatelecom.net
Link | July 26th, 2006 at 6:58 am
The man’s letter was a modern-day version of the way the Pharisees acted.
The Pearls are teaching others that it is OK to act in this sort of manner, when it’s not. Teachers are held accountable for things like that. At the very least, they could have put a disclaimer on it, i.e. “While we don’t agree with the language this man chose or with the judgmental attitude he portrays, we agree with his warning to women about dressing in a lewd manner.” I don’t know…SOMETHING. But they did not do that in any form or fashion. In fact, they labeled him a “Friend of the Ministry.” (And really their writings are full of this sort of language, so I’m not surprised.)
The issue at hand is not whether it’s OK to view/hear unwholesome things. The issue is the manner in which the Pearls’ approach these subjects.
Link | July 26th, 2006 at 7:13 am
Zan wrote,
Hey, There are plenty of wholesome songs in country music. : (
I also drink wine (without being drunk) and I don’t think this is hypocrisy.
However, if that guy is picking on different churches and still going to them that is hypocritical. I know a lot of people who do that. Ugh!
Oh, the shorts I wear are not Daisy Duke shorts. They are pretty baggy.
Is there anywhere that I can read that Pearl article online?
Link | July 26th, 2006 at 7:43 am
dollymama wrote,
Keer is on the right track. The messages so often come across in such a meanspirited or even worldly and inappropriate way, it is overwhelming.
In this recent issue of the magazine we have not only been told that wearing regular clothes makes us look like “sluts” but that our male dinner guests are probably excusing themselves to masturbate in our bathrooms because of how we look. Frankly, a man with that kind of issue is one that would probably have a problem with any woman in the room. Hopefully none will come to my house for dinner.
Interestingly, we are supposed to do what our husband’s want us to do (according to the Pearls) yet if he wants us to wear jeans or shorts or whatever, we are at risk of being called sluts. Huh. My husband does not want me wearing dresses all the time. I wear the clothes that he likes to see me in, and I daresay that most of them would not pass the Pearl Test. oh well. What am I to do?
Another issue that came up in the recent edition of NGJ was that men and boys are sissies if they are not big on outdoor life. Wow. What an insult. Not only do they insult every man reading that who does not enjoy killing things or hanging out in swamps, but this sort of thing often breeds discontent in the hearts of women who buy into the idea that their men should be different than they are. NGJ is not the only publication to do this. Places like Vision Forum and Quit Ye Like Men and Patriarch magazine are big on promoting home businesses, agricultural pursuits, and so forth. Not that those are bad things, just that not every guy fits into that setting. What about the man who is a mild-mannered accountant? I guess even though he is a loving and faithful husband and father he is actually sissified and somehow not really measuring up to some imaginary ideal for a Real Man. What a bunch of garbage.
From what I have gathered over the years, the Pearls believe they are sinless and that what they do is what we all should do. It was interesting to me to read the item from one Pearl daughter stating that her father never assured them of their salvation because he knew he had a very strong personality and could easily sway them if he used it wrongly. So, he was careful to not falsely sway his own children, but is willing to throw his weight around all over the world through his opinions. Huh.
also, just for kicks, some of the most wholesome, family and marriage-oriented songs I know are country music. And consuming alcohol without drunkenness is within the bounds of scripture.
(Ah, Keer-don’t you love a good conversation?!)
Link | July 26th, 2006 at 8:17 am
Anne wrote,
Interesting point, Keer! Nothing like a Pearl-post to get the comments going, huh? Lol
DollyMama- I think you make an excellent point about the way some of these organizations portray “manly” men. I know this used to be an issue for me before I started thinking more critically about certain teachings. I avoid romance novels for the same reason. If one is not careful, these things can breed discontent in one’s life.
Link | July 26th, 2006 at 11:43 am
Donna Jean wrote,
Way to go, Keer! Love the analogy!
Link | July 26th, 2006 at 2:19 pm
Donna Jean wrote,
Dollymama, thank you for your comments! While we do *mostly* dresses, we aren’t 100% and some of our clothing wouldn’t pass the Pearl test, either.
Regarding their view of mild-mannered men… THANK YOU for the affirmation that mild-mannered accountants can be Godly, too! In fact, what of the examples from Scripture comparing Cain and Abel, Jacob and Esau? The Scripture describes these men in great detail — their looks, their personalities, their career choices — and which brother in both cases did God love and bless? That goes against everything that Vision Forum and the Pearl’s teach about “godly men”, doesn’t it?
My dh is one of those mild-mannered accountant-types — he HATED all the dirtiness of driving a truck when he did that for a few years to put food on the table, and he can’t STAND bug bites or the insect repellant to prevent them! He likes to fish, but hates putting the worm on. But he loves God, he loves me, and he loves our children. He has a passion for the Word. He’d rather sit and discuss good books over mowing the yard ANY day, but guess what. He works hard for a living, too. Does it really matter WHAT he does for a living? Does it really matter that he isn’t 6′ tall and 200 lbs? I married this man because he desires to serve God, not because of what he chooses to do during his free time.
I love most of what comes from Vision Forum, but this is one view of theirs that I just don’t understand.
Link | July 26th, 2006 at 2:31 pm
dollymama wrote,
You know, ANOTHER thing that irked me in this issue (and in other publications that use the term “sissified”) is that boys that are homeschooled are supposedly being turned into sissies apparently because of spending too much time with their mothers. Again, we are apparently supposed to be homeschooling, yet criticized if our sons are not spending their time being “manly” per some cave man standards. It is the mother’s fault, I suppose. Of course, if the fathers were manly enough to work from home doing woodwork or farming or being extremely poor then of course they would have time to shlepp through woods and swamps weekly and make sure their sons turn out manly enough. Right?
Again–you can’t win with some people unless you do things *just like* they do.
(and, just so you all know, my husband actually has a macho job, and my kids go hunting, etc. This is not about whether or not my family is into manly things, this is about being irked that people are not accepted and are actually called rude names if they are different from the Pearls or whoever happens to be holding the magic conservative Christian homeschooler measuring stick)
Link | July 27th, 2006 at 1:26 am
LOL DM, your dh has the epitome of a “macho job!”
I hear ya totally.
Link | July 27th, 2006 at 1:38 am
Cyndi wrote,
Great information! Thanks for all the above thoughts! I agree with many of your points, but some I just can’t agree with… I mark it up as differences in people and personalities
It sounds like we agree with the main point in life of salvation and living a godly life!
I also agree that a man/boy does not have to “fit in a mold”! My husband has an office job, this means he has to use his brain more than his muscles, and no I do not see him as any less of a man. Nor do I see our friends husbands that are in the construction business/farmers/auto mechanics as any more of men
Like it was mentioned, he is no less “manly” than the next man just because of his occupation! I praise God for the differences in people, can you imagine if all men we hunters/farmers 
Have a great day!!
Cyndi
Link | July 27th, 2006 at 6:26 am
B.J. wrote,
My theory on the Pearls: Give them enough rope and they’ll eventually hang themselves with it.
At one point in my life (I’m embarrassed to admit) I was able to overlook the “fat” in order to eat the meat (based on reading “To Train Up a Child”) although I wondered how any normal adult could douse a kid in ice cold water from a garden hose in order to discipline them for wetting themselves…eee gad!
Upon reading “Created to Be His Help Meat” (har har love that little typo and gonna leave it since you started it by talking about hamburger) I will never be the same again…I have never read anything so obnoxious in all my life. Talk about twist the beautiful into something morbid, not to mention all the added insults! I kept thinking about the poor woman who works at the local hardware store who she called the “ugly hillbilly” and hoping she is never unfortunate enough to read the book!
I have a young friend who is just married less than a year who read it. I think she hit the nail on the head with this comment, “I think I would rather have an honest relationship with my husband than having to resort to her kind of manipulative methods of getting her control freak, immature husband to do what she wants him to.”
Sigh…such a waste of paper…my dear husband has suggested we use it for starting the fire this winter.
Link | July 27th, 2006 at 2:32 pm
Hello Keer and the rest of you smart ladies!
Thank you for sharing your thoughts here, great discussion. My two cents on the Pearls? They just plain creep me out, don’t get me started (there’s so much fodder just in the one book of theirs I read, and on their website), they’re SO out there, off, pious, sanctimonious, obnoxious, unBiblical, etc., etc.
Slanderous? No, as you said Keer, just sounding the alarm. False teachers should be called out, by name.
Thank you for calling it like it is. Imo, it’s not JUST how they say it, but also much of WHAT they say!
Yipes, I could not handle receiving their newsletter, though curiosity has tempted me, wouldn’t be good for me. LOL I’m certain that my blood pressure went way too high just reading CTBHHM.
Link | July 27th, 2006 at 9:17 pm
Beth, good to “see” you again!
I do want us all to be careful that we separate the teachings from the people. Let’s do our best to approach things Scripturally and not resort to name-calling (especially since that’s one of the main problems I am referring to with this post LOL!).
We do need to proclaim the truth of Scripture and examine things in the Light of Scripture, but we must do so in such a way that would point everyone (including the one in error) to the Truth.
Link | July 27th, 2006 at 10:40 pm
Hey Keer~
You’re so right. I just get so irked and flabbergasted by these particular folks, and I was careful to use adjectives only *hehehe*, well… besides the false teachers bit. I agree that we shouldn’t call names, and I apologize if my comment took that tone. You handle the subject so graciously, thank you.
Link | July 29th, 2006 at 5:34 am
Monica W. wrote,
I was like B.J. - it wasn’t until after I read Created To Be His Help Meet that I became REALLY disturbed about the NGJ ministry. Most of my feelings about that book have already been addressed on this blog, Spunky’s blog and Sparrow’s blogs.
Someone gave us a copy of To Train Up a Child several years ago and we thought it was a nice little book with some good training ideas, written by some quaint, tell it like it is, down to earth folks. (although I never could go along with switching BABIES) We used to get their newsletter, until we read CTBHHM and then we wrote to be removed from their mailing list.
Over this past year, it seems more and more prideful comments have been written in their newsletter, too and it just really turned me off. Specifically one time Micheal bragged that HIS children would NEVER divorce. Okayyyyyyyy. (Of course, he could be correct seeing that in another previous newsletter he bragged that none of his daughters had legal state marriage licenses. I guess if you’re not legally married, you can never get legally divorced.)
Link | July 29th, 2006 at 10:01 am