If anyone still checks this...

It's been almost a year since I posted here, so I don't know if anyone even checks it anymore. If you do, and you're interested in my rantings, you can check out my new-ish blog over at mindofmachel.blogspot.com.

Later.

Currently Reading The Supremacy of Christ in a Postmodern World see related

This entry brought to you by the letter 'H'

Homeward Bound

Hoped to get on an earlier flight back to Chicago tonight. That didn't work out, so I get the pleasure of being on both the first flight out this morning (hooray for 4:00 alarms!) and the last flight back.

Hoping that the impending snowstorm in Chicago doesn't negatively affect this flight. It would be really, really nice to make it home tonight. [Update - they just pushed the flight back 45 minutes. Please, please, please don't cancel it!] [Update 2 - they might have a small window allowing us to take off on time - oh please oh please oh please...]

[Update 3 - we're going to board. I'll have to post this Wednesday, although most of it's done now. Later.]

By the way, today I've been in rural Kansas. As opposed to booming, metropolitan Kansas. I caught a flight to KC, then drove about 2.5 hours to Girard, KS (not even the Girard where I could visit family), and worked all day in the middle of a cow pasture. I don't think the cows liked me too much. Maybe they can sense how many of them I've eaten. It's a lot, and they were all delicious.

House

We bought a house yesterday! Now, some of you may be wondering whether I'm getting yesterday confused with October 27th. Nope. We had to back out of that deal for various reasons - we had been getting a bad feeling about it and prayed that the decision would be blindingly obvious, then the next day we found out it has a major mold problem and was just re-designated as a flood plain. Well, there's your answer!

So we went back to looking. We looked again at a house we'd loved but had ruled out because of cost, namely the ridiculously high taxes on it. But some more digging revealed this interesting tidbit - the taxes listed were too high by well over a thousand bucks a year. Now that makes a big difference! With the correct taxes and a lower interest rate (it dropped a bit since we first applied for the mortgage - woohoo!), this superior house will only cost about $40 a month more than we'd planned on spending on the first one. The inspection is Friday, and if everything goes well (it was last sold in 2004 and a lot of improvements have been made since, so we don't expect any deal-breaker issues), we close on December 28th. Nice.

Health

We've had some adventures here recently, mostly regarding my dad. He's been undergoing chemotherapy for his cancer for several weeks, and there have been some complications. When we visited my family over Thanksgiving, he was in the hospital for the second time since he started chemo. What happens is, chemo wreaks havoc on the immune system, and he gets these infections in his legs. They get red and swollen and painful (which is saying something - with his diabetes and all, he barely has any feeling in his legs) until he goes to the doctor and they check him in. They have to suspend chemo until they get the infections under control, but it seems like they come back every three weeks or so. If they keep up the chemo, he could die from the infections or at least lose his legs; when they suspend the chemo, it majorly reduces its effectiveness. Not a good position to be in. Being severely diabetic (since he has no pancreas), his legs are always in danger, and we had to seriously talk that weekend about what would happen if they had to amputate.

Oh, then there's the other issues with him. The first time we went to visit, we noticed his hand was about thrice the size of the other. The IV in it had popped out of the vein and had been just pumping fluid into his hand for a while. So we waited while they tried to replace the IV... and waited... and waited... and successfully managed to avoid assaulting the irritating chick who has no business being in health care... and waited... It seems they tried putting it in about six places in both arms before they finally found a spot just beneath the shoulder that could hold it. Everywhere else, the veins kept collapsing. Not good. Now, they're talking about putting in a port so this shouldn't be an issue any more (this time). The thing is, he's already had four or five ports, and so much of his chest and abdomen is scar tissue already. There may not be much place to actually put it where it could hold. So he needs all kinds of medication at any given moment, and may not have any way to actually receive it. Yikes. Oh, and apparently he just had a CT scan on his head because he's had a bunch of balance issues recently (the cancer is in his pancreas, kidneys, and liver - shouldn't be affecting his head, this is not good). So.... yeah....

HBible Study (the H is silent)

I could've gone with Home Group or something, but that's just not how I roll. My group has been going through a study that's not studying a Biblical book directly - and it's one of the few like that which I've actually though was worthwhile. It's called I Really Want to Change... So, Help Me God by James MacDonald. It's all about that least popular of subjects, repentance, and although it's not about one particular Biblical book, it's so thoroughly Scripturally-soaked and exegetically based, it comes as close as you can get. I highly, highly recommend this study if you're looking for something in the workbook/DVD style.

Huckabee

I don't want to get into political stuff right now. I have no idea who I'm voting for. All I'm saying is, this is by far the best campaign commercial of all time.

Holidays

This site has a pretty thorough list of holidays great and obscure. Hope everyone is enjoying Wear Brown Shoes Day! Ooh, look, tomorrow is both Repeal Day - celebrating the end of Prohibition - and Bathtub Party Day. So, be sure to get all liquored up and throw a party in your tub! Now, who wouldn't enjoy that?

Hope, Hannah, Hayden, and Baby to be H-Named Later

Over Thanksgiving, we got to spend a bit of time with my brother's girlfriend and kids/kinda-step-kids. It's complicated. Anyway, we didn't see Randy at all, which is a good thing. But before I get into that, I need something happy. So here's my ultimate favorite picture from the wedding:

That's Hannah, pining for the swimming pool. These girls had never stayed in a hotel before, and they were so incredibly excited about staying at a place with a swimming pool. The whole reception, they kept asking Tricia and me if we'd go swimming with them after the party. Ummm.... how do I explain this, kid? We, uh, got things to do... Anyway, when I saw this picture the first time, I can't even describe how hard I laughed. Ain't she adorable?

So now that I got that out of the way, it's time to talk about this situation. It's not good. Background - Jen has two girls, Hope and Hannah, from a previous marriage. She'd been shacking up with my brother Randy for a while, and they have two kids, Hayden (born February 22, six days after we got engaged) and a boy on the way. Randy has a long history of drug problems, legal problems, stealing from family, never being able to keep a job, that sort of thing. So, they had their house they were renting, and they weren't paying things like 'rent' and 'utilities' (Jen's ex is a real winner who hasn't paid his child support for a few years, not that it would fix everything, of course). They had a few minor things shut off, like 'water' and 'electricity', so for a few days they all slept in the living room on the floor, using candles for light. The kids ate nothing but school breakfast/lunches, Randy and Jen ate nothing. Also, about this time, we found out Randy was doing crack. Yep, crack.

So... my mom found out about this when Jen asked to borrow some candles. Why would they need so many candles, she axed? And that's how my parents went from Empty Nest to Brady Bunch. Randy was allowed to stay on a day-by-day basis, as long as he was in rehab and a methadone clinic. Jen and the kids were allowed to stay indefinitely, as long as Randy was either under control or out of the picture. Everything was going OK for a week or two - as OK as it can be going in that situation, I guess. And then, something really, really bad happened.

Short version - Randy started doing crack again. Jen saw him buying while they were out somewhere, and drove off, leaving him stranded. By the time he'd hitched a ride home (a state trooper picked him up as he was walking on the interstate and drove him to my parents'), my mom and Jen had packed up his stuff and kicked him out. They offered to take him to a shelter, he refused and said he'd rather sleep in his truck. That night at about 4 AM, he broke in and tried to steal my mom's car, Jen got in the way, and he attacked her. He ran off after knocking her out. When the police came and took his description, they realized that he was the guy they saw standing across the street when they pulled up (what can I say, my brother's brilliant). They went out to him, and he punched one and ran away. Because he hadn't done enough, and wanted to add resisting arrest and assaulting a police officer to his charges, or something.

So, he went to jail for a bit. Now, you'd think that breaking and entering, assault and battery, possibly attempted murder, burglary, attempted grand theft auto, and all kinds of drug possession/use charges, plus the punching a cop thing, plus various suspended sentences he has piled up - well, you'd think that would add up to at least three weeks in jail. You'd be wrong. He was released the day before Thanksgiving after serving all of 18 days - and my mom had to pull some favors to keep him in for that long. So he's out now, and that's where things get really complicated.

See, Jen doesn't have a very good record of making decisions. And like far too many abused women, she keeps going back to the abuser (if you need an illustration of how badly sin has distorted our nature and perverted our designed roles, there you go). The first week of his freedom consisted of her wasting money taking care of him, going to visit him in violation of the restraining order she argued so hard against (fortunately she couldn't take the girls with her because he's not their father, unfortunately she could take Hayden), that sort of thing. Then someone - we're not sure who, possibly her ex-husband - called children's services and tipped them off. Finally, that got her attention. She stopped seeing him (hopefully for good, or at least until he actually changes), settled in with my parents again (she's allowed to stay as long as he isn't involved), and has welcomed the social workers in for a few visits. My parents are loving the grandparent role, and things have been somewhat stable for almost a whole week (a new record!).

So, you may have noticed that this section has been all about Randy and Jen, but it's named after the kids. The reason is, in all this mess, the kids are the ones I'm most concerned about. I can't imagine what it must be like growing up in that kind of environment - the girls having a deadbeat dad and a stepdad-ish guy they seriously wish was a deadbeat, the boy(s) probably not knowing their father at all. So for all the prayer needed in this situation - and honestly I've not known exactly how to pray for Randy for over a decade now - I am most inclined to pray for these kids, and to love them as much and as practically as possible (being seven hours away and all). We would really like some wisdom here - what should Jen and my parents (her parents have very little to do with her) do? What can and should Tricia and I do? How can we best support the kids and Jen and my parents through all of this? And how do we handle it if/when Randy comes back and claims to have changed?

Anyway, that's what's been going on here. How about y'all?

Currently Reading Luther's Ninety-Five Theses By Martin Luther see related

One of my favorite holidays!

Ah, yes. It's that time of year again. Reformation Day! Was it really 490 years ago? Oh, how time flies. To celebrate, you might want to dress up as your favorite German monk, which conveniently could easily become a Jedi outfit if you want candy.

Yep, we bought a house Saturday. We have the inspection Friday morning, and if everything goes well, we'll be closing on December 27th. Our lease is up at the end of January, so we have about a month to do some painting, change out some old carpets, replace some windows, and get moved in. Should be a fun, crazy month. The house is in Wheeling, IL, about 20 minutes north/northwest of O'Hare. It should be an easier commute for Tricia (and for me it doesn't really matter), and it's the type of place we can stay a while or sell easily when the time comes to head out. So that's exciting.

This video really made me laugh. And this one is simply amazing. Better than Cal/Stanford from 1982? If you combine the two of them, sure (until I remember that involved John Elway losing on a last-second miracle, then it's almost impossible to top). But does it top the amazing roller coaster ride that was Saints/Jaguars? Hmmmm.

Tricia and I recently took steps towards getting more formally hooked into ministry at our church. We had a meeting with the lady in charge of finding a place for people that matches their gifts/passions. She told me to look into getting started doing... exactly what I've already been doing. So that was pointless for me, anyway. The fun part was when they had us take spiritual gift surveys and personality/leadership style profiles (always a better idea than just blindly plugging people in somewhere). We found out that Tricia is 100% heart and no head; we both think the test was wrong because it showed me as 20% heart and 80% head. What's up with that? I insist that I'm completely heartless. There was one question that had me laughing very, very hard. It was one of those 'rate how strongly this applies to you' questions: "Some have viewed me as "too critical", but I simply feel a duty to help protect the biblical purity of Christ's Church." Nooooo.... that doesn't apply to me at all......

Speaking of which, it's time for some awexome links! And - whaddya know - pretty much all of 'em are related to the church!

First, a general link to a very, very, very useful and enlightening blog. Between Two Worlds is the theology links blog run by Justin Taylor, a theologian I respect very much (he's written and co-edited many of the more challenging books on my shelf). It's worth a look every now and then to see what the current trends and controversies are - and to be really challenged in the process. Recent issues that have been discussed there include the exchange between Grudem and Piper over baptism and church membership, and the big debate between David Instone-Brewer, Piper, and Andreas Kostenberger over the huge issue of divorce and remarriage (started by a Christianity Today cover story by Instone-Brewer which, possibly due to poor editing, seemed like he was claiming divorce for almost any reason would be legitimate). For those who wonder why I get so 'critical' about things, these threads are a good example - changing how you interpret a few words or phrases has huge pastoral implications.

Next, we have a summary of a message from Tim Keller, regarding the emerging church's challenge to evangelicalism. Keller points out as well as anyone something that often gets swept away in this controversy - the emergents are correct in a lot of their critiques and protests. Now, their proposed solutions may be (pick your favorite: naive/misguided/silly/illogical/heretical/counterproductive), and it's easy to focus just on those, but that should in no way shield us from acknowledging where they are correct, mainly in the field of practice not matching belief. Keller's proposed solution - hey, look at that, it's quoting Luther! - "When our Lord and Master, Jesus Christ, said 'Repent,' he called for the entire life of believers to be one of repentance." Read on for a description of what that entails - but only if you're ready to be challenged and convicted.

Then there's this extraordinarily challenging article by Russell Moore, about the relationship between Christians and pop culture. There are two reasons I'm linking to it. First, the intro is a very piercing challenge into how we 'use' pop culture - I found some parts of it particularly cringe-worthy. But the main reason is his treatment of Acts 17, which is one of the most-misused passages of scripture today. I've written up a similar summary in a yet-unpublished work (and at this rate, it may never get done!), but this one deals with it in more depth and a lot better than I had. So just read this one instead, not that you have a choice. Anyway, it deals with the misconceptions built around Paul's "building bridges" at Mars Hill in Athens. With roughly a billion new churches in America named Mars Hill, and 99.9999% of them based on "building bridges" that lead nowhere, especially not towards a call to repentance, this article proposes a sorely needed remedy - reading the whole chapter and looking at what Paul actually did.

This little blog discusses the connection between the Old and New Testaments. How exactly do they relate - how do we, living in the new covenant, relate to the old? What impact does the Law have on us today? Pretty important questions, and some good answers are found here.

Could you imagine what would happen if there was a company that got really big, and was very open about promoting their business model, and thousands of small businesses started imitating that model, believing it to be the key to success? And after investing millions of dollars in that business model, and spawning thousands of imitators, that company did an internal audit and found - its business model didn't really work, and was actually quite counterproductive in that it ignored the real needs of its customers? What would the response be when they went public with the results, letting out a giant "Whoops! Hey everyone who's been modeled after us - yeah, that wasn't such a good idea. Sorry about that."?

Well, that's happened recently in the church. I'm sure most everyone is familiar with Willow Creek, the giant mega-church just outside o' Chicago that runs a whole association of imitators, and has been copied to some degree by many churches and parachurches outside their association. Well, they recently did a massive internal audit of their methods, seeing how well their programs resulted in spiritual growth and maturity. Their answer: yeah, not so much. As you might expect, this comes as a bit of a shock to those churches that are most highly influenced by Willow. Anyway, there are a few responses to this news:
1) Give a ton of credit to Willow not just for doing this study, but for making it public and admitting their error. It would've been so easy to say "The church is full, it's obviously working!" and not looked into it at all. It would've been just as easy to see the results, and sweep them under the rug or make excuses. Instead, they're openly admitting a huge mistake. This shows tremendous integrity on their part, and confirms that they are first and foremost interested in producing Christ-followers, but just got their methods/practices/principles (majorly) wrong. There is a huge amount of grace available to those who are pursuing the right ends, but screw up the means. As much as I've criticized Willow over the years, this makes it even more clear that their hearts are right.
2) How will churches that have modeled themselves after Willow respond? This news should be a call for all churches (but especially them) to engage in serious reflection and examination - is what we're doing actually working? Or is it just increasing numbers? Perhaps the main effect of this news will be to inform many people that there's actually a difference.
3) The lingering question is, what will actually change at Willow? Already some have begun to pick apart statements from Hybels and other Willow leaders, questioning whether they've actually gotten the point, or whether they've just found that "these programs don't work, so let's try new and different ones!". I lean towards extending grace and having patience on this, but it will be very interesting to see the results.

Speaking of mega-churches, but not necessarily ones that acknowledge fallibility, it seems that Joel Osteen has been in the news a lot lately. He has a new book out, and by all accounts it's just as worthless and harmful as his last. So, I thought I'd take this occasion to link to a series of articles by Michael Horton about Osteen's teachings. The five articles present a very penetrating look at Osteen and the prosperity gospel he preaches, which is also very applicable to other word/faith and prosperity preachers.

Finally, I would like to close with two articles from the (former) leader of Desiring God's online ministry. Not long ago, he was responsible for starting their new policy - put all of their material online, for free, without registration or hindrance. Every sermon, conference message, blog entry, radio show, that they have (about 25 years of stuff!) is going online in as many forms as they have it (audio, video, text). Most of Piper's books are already online, for free, and others are being added as fast as they can be formatted. Here he gives an explanation of why they took this step (and encourages others to do the same), and here he answers the most common objections to doing so. A couple thoughts.

This corresponds very well with Desiring God's view of ministry, as seen in their book policy. One of the greatest things about Piper's books (and DG's other materials) is that they're all available on a "pay-what-you-can-afford" basis. This means exactly what it sounds like. If you can't afford something, they'll give it to you. All they ask is that you're reasonable and don't re-sell; don't ask for a crate of books for your new bookstore, for example. Now why would they do this? It's real simple. They view these books and materials as a ministry, as something useful towards bringing people into fellowship with God, and the last thing they want standing in the way is money. So they're constantly giving things away or selling for below cost, because this is a ministry, not a business (although sound business practices and financial accounability are very important). I must admit that I was first attracted by Piper's preaching and theology; when I saw this policy, it was just confirmation that they really get it, and practice what they preach.

For those who still think it's a bad idea to "give it away" like that, consider the model of the local church. Could you imagine charging admission for someone to listen to the sermon on Sunday? Would you go to a church that had a cover charge? Of course not! How do churches survive financially, then? Through donations and gifts, of course. So why should the online ministry be any different? Yes, these things cost money to produce, and people should be paid for their time (unless it's done on a volunteer basis). That doesn't go against posting content for free, anymore than we would think the pastor preaches "for free" just because there's no cover charge and donations are voluntary. If the content is truly spiritually beneficial, remove as many obstacles as you can to get it to those who need it.

I think a few examples from Paul's ministry are very instructive. Nobody was more insistent than Paul about the apostle's rights and the duty to support ministry leaders (see 1 Cor 9:1-12a, 1 Tim 5:17-18). But nobody was more willing to give up his rights in order to present any obstacles to his preaching (see 1 Cor 9:12b-27, 1 Thes 2:5-12). He didn't charge the people he was trying to convert, but was gladly supported by those who had come to the faith. For example, when he first arrived at Corinth (Acts 18:1-11), Paul worked as a tentmaker to self-support (unfortunately, from this passage many wrongly conclude that all ministries should be 'tentmaking', but that's for another day), and preached once a week. But when his coworkers arrived with a gift from the Macedonians, he quit working and preached every day. So he didn't seek support from those he was reaching, but gladly accepted it (and profusely praised it - see 2 Cor 8, Philippians) from those who were already reached. I submit that all ministries should be the same model. Remove any obstacle - most especially money - that would stand between the unreached and the gospel. And the reached should generously support the ministry. If it really is a ministry and not a business, it's the only way - both theoretically and pragmatically.

Sorry about the abrupt ending. I just thought that since my last post was so long, I needed to cut this one really short.

Anxiety is... pride?

I don't remember what exactly brought these thoughts on this week. Maybe it was something in Bible study, or the whole job/house search, or something I read in some article. Whatever it was, I thought to myself, "Self, you need to write up a blog entry about how anxiety and worrying is an expression of pride." Then I put it off. But seeing Lisa's entry on it, I thought now would be a good time to go ahead and do it. So here we go, plus maybe some bonus stuff afterwards.

There's an odd sentence towards the end of 1 Peter. It's one that's easy to miss in some translations, such as the NIV, that split the sentence up and make it seem like two unrelated clauses, but in others like the ESV, it really stands out. And here it is.

Humble yourselves, therefore, under the mighty hand of God so that at the proper time he may exalt you, casting all your anxieties on him, because he cares for you. 1 Peter 5:6-7

OK, we start off with a command to be humble. This flows from Peter's previous instructions to open the chapter, including the scripture he quotes, "God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble". Therefore, be humble. Makes sense. He also throws in that we are to be humble under God's mighty hand - God is of such transcendent greatness, pride is a completely inappropriate response. And the point is that God will exalt you at the proper time - we are not to exalt ourselves or seek to be exalted among other people, but to seek the praise that comes from God. Compare this with Jesus's piercing question in John 5 - "How can you believe, when you receive glory from one another and do not seek the glory that comes from the only God?" Pride, and the desire to be exalted and glorified by men, is completely incompatible with faith! So the command to be humble is not just an optional extra, something we might learn as we grow mature - it's essential to salvation itself. This command is not to be taken lightly; it's a matter of life and death.

So then Peter tells us a way to be humble. He says to humble ourselves by "...casting all your anxieties on him". Be humble by not worrying. Hmmm. This... it just doesn't seem right. Isn't worry a sign of weakness? Is it not a confession that my problems are too much for me? How could that be a form of pride? Isn't it actually a sign of humility, to admit weakness like that? Actually, no, it's not. Peter has it exactly right here. Perhaps an illustration from Isaiah will help show why.

I, I am he who comforts you; who are you that you are afraid of man who dies, of the son of man who is made like grass, and have forgotten the LORD, your Maker, who stretched out the heavens and laid the foundations of the earth, and you fear continually all the day because of the wrath of the oppressor, when he sets himself to destroy? Isaiah 51:12-13

So what is going on here? God is speaking to Israel - well, more like reaming them out. Why? Because they're afraid. They're afraid of some other nation - probably Babylon or Assyria or Egypt - that is threatening to attack them, and Israel knows they're not strong enough to win that battle. So they're shuddering in terror. So God severely castigates them for their... pride? Yes, pride. "Who are you that you are afraid of man?" Who do you think you are? This seems like a strange reprimand for a people that is cowering in fear. Yet there it is - God is tearing into them for their incredible pride, shown through fear. What is going on here?

Think about God's covenant with Israel. Of all the times God had risen up to defend them - by destroying enemy armies, causing walls to fall before them, sending natural disasters and plagues and confusion among the enemy. They were his people, and he would fight their battles for them. He'd done it before, and he would no doubt do it again.

But Israel, in their pride, had turned away from God. They had decided they'd rather fight their own battles, they'd rather have their own king than have God be king over them, they'd rather not have anything to do with God and see how they could do on their own. And that is the essence of pride - turning away from God to self. Now, this is how extreme their pride was. They turned away from God, choosing (among other things) to fight for themselves. And now that an enemy had come along that they knew they couldn't defeat, they still - in their pride - decided to keep rejecting God, and face their fate on their own, and be terrified of the certain outcome. They would rather cower in terror and fight a guaranteed losing battle on their own, than humble themselves and trust in God. That is how their fear revealed a deep, deep pride. And to that God could reasonably and logically ask, "Who are you to be afraid of man?"

Of course, this type of pride is in no way reserved for ancient Israel. No, we do it as well, which is what Peter is addressing. We have a God who has promised to provide for us (Mat. 6:19-34), among many other incredible promises. Yet, we worry. And this anxiety is no doubt an expression of pride. We are telling God we would rather deal with it on our own, even though we're inadequate for the task. We would rather be self-determining, even if we know we'll screw it all up, than trust in God. So we worry, and we tell God, "Yeah, that provision you promised? I'm really not so interested. I think I can do better on my own, thanks anyway. Oh, and I guess I'll probably screw it up, and I'm completely inadequate for the task, but I'd rather spend my life worrying about it than embrace you and your promises. I'd rather be on my own, even when I know I'm inadequate, than have anything to do with you, God. So please go away, and let me worry about this. Thanks." And it's hard to think of anything that is more arrogant, more evil, and more ultimately foolish. But that's what we do. And that's what Peter is warning about here. So he tells us to be humble, and the way to do that is to stop worrying. Trust God. Cast your anxieties on him, and his mighty hand (which is actually, you know, able to solve your little problem) and the great care he has for you (so he actually will solve your problems).

So that's that.

Now how does that all apply to us right now? Well, Tricia's been searching for a job - actually, trying to decide between several offers. We're starting to look at houses, and trying to figure out the best place to live. We've got a thousand adjustments to make, and at times it can seem quite overwhelming. Well, yeah, it would be if we had to do it all ourselves. But are we certain God brought us together or not? Are we sure He led us here? Yeah, everything really points that way. So why would God abandon us now, and not lead us to the right house, the right job, the right answer with a "Bible study" question (more on that later), the right time to make other major life changes in the coming years? Do we believe He loves us, and is sovereign and powerful enough to provide for us, or don't we? What do we believe? How does it affect how we live and work through problems and decisions? Do my choices and attitudes reflect the glory of God as the all-sufficient provider, the loving father, the gracious redeemer, the all-satisfying treasure? Or do they reflect my pride, my pursuit of temporal wealth and power and esteem, and my uncertainty in my own abilities yet stubborn refusal to submit to the one who is surpassingly able?

How about you?

I mentioned a "Bible study" question. I use the quotes because it's not really a Bible study, per se, but more of a small group. I'm fairly sure what the right answer is on this, but I'd like some input anyway, seeing as how God can correct us through godly counsel and all. So here's the situation.

I've been in a Bible study for the past eight months or so. It's a great group, I've gotten fairly close to some of the guys, no real complaints. When Tricia moved out here, we obviously wanted to get her hooked into a group as well, one that met on the same night as mine (we're also doing a couples group together, and didn't want to have three nights of the week committed to small groups, especially with two of them having us not being together). Anyway, there's only one women's group that meets on that night. She's gone to it once so far.

So here's the first issue. It's not so much a Bible study - they're currently going through a book. This isn't a horrible thing by itself, of course, but it's not the ideal of actually studying scripture, and the amount of scripture study and discussion in a "book study" will be heavily leader-dependent, and is often sorely lacking. But that's one yellow flag, but not necessarily a red one. The big issue is, the particular book they're going through is, well, awful. To avoid getting sidetracked into a discussion of that particular author, I won't disclose who it is (I will say it's not Rob Bell, for anyone wondering - that would actually be a significant improvement), because I would like feedback on the situation itself. Here are the options as I see them:

1) She could find a group on a different night. I stay in my group. This - it's not so much of an option.

2) She finds a group on a different night, and I leave my group for another group. This has some obvious cons (I don't want to leave my group, there's a chance my new group could wind up even worse, she couldn't act as a correction to the error), and some pros (like not having my wife be exposed to that teaching and having the frustration of fighting it every week). Or...

3) She doesn't go to any group. Um, again, not so great of an option. Connecting with people is a very, very high priority right now. So I don't see this one happening. Or...

4) We both stay where we are. For my group the pros are obvious. For hers? Well, maybe that's why she's there, to act as a beacon of truth among a mess of half-truths or worse. She's certainly strong enough to be a faithful witness, and it can stretch her in some areas which will no doubt come in handy (we're not always going to be in an environment where we agree with everything, after all). The cons - do we really want to send her into a group where we know the material is highly errant? Yeesh.

I know what I'd do if it was me - but keeping in mind how different our gifts and temperaments are, it's not quite as much of a no-brainer. It's one thing to think what I would do, another thing entirely to think what I want my wife doing. Anyway, we talked it through tonight, and we're pretty solid in our decision - but without revealing it, I'd like some input. What do you recommend, and why? What am I missing here, if anything?