中文书名：《妻子，荣耀的帮助者》
作者：黛比·珀尔
书评：（亦见amazon.com的同一书评）。
按：这篇书评提到了“牧者运动”——一个引起很大争议的灵恩运动。这个运动大约发起于1970年代，现在美洲和澳洲已经式微，但似乎通过韩国背景的”University Bible Fellowship“（大學生研經宣教會）影响到中国教会。
历史是个迷人的主题。没有什么”新“事物凭空出现，毫无传统。我从前在韩国宣教士背景的Logos教会，所教导的内容无非也是”绝对顺服、完全顺服、立即顺服、不明白也要顺服、牧师的错误由牧师向神交账，顺服的成员因为顺服而蒙福……“。
从这个意义上观察，我对于这一类的教导高度警惕，十分怀疑。把这个翻译视为2021年的年终个人反思吧。
按照惯例做法，译而不述，述而不作，具体对岸，不批本土。
翻译过程中，书评的引文，我都尽量参考了中文版的翻译，为此，在对照和校对互译文本上耗费了大量时间。对翻译质量简单说几句。我觉得译者翻译很好，只是在个别关键概念上大大软化了英文版的cult之处，比如Mr. Commander，译为”领袖型男人“，有点误导为基督徒圈内常见的”仆人式领袖“概念（Servant-Leader）。在书中（和书评中），Commander大体上是个军事术语，概念上也强调所谓”Command Chain“。Mr. Visionary翻译为”异象型男人“，不如译为”空想型男人“——在圣经里，随便用异象唬人，是会被石头打死的。
书中有句重复了几遍的核心口号： Dominance and control are always masculine characteristics. 中译为” 统治与管理总是男人的特性。“也许珀尔的意思是，”支配和控制完全属于男性特质。“（意思是，女人不能支配和控制，只能被支配、被控制。）当然，把control译为”管理“，我还是觉得有软化的意思。
顺便指出一个小错误。 One Visionary will campaign for the legalization of pot, while another will be an activist to make abortions illegal. Most will just sit around the house and complain, but in their souls they are Visionaries. 异象型男人会为了合法的东西而战斗，会积极参加反堕胎运动，但大多会待在房间里抱怨，但他们的灵魂深处是充满盼望的。
这里的legalization of pot，指的是”大麻合法化“。译者和编辑大概缺乏近期的美国生活经验，没看懂这个口语化的习语。另外，从上下文看，最后一句话译为”但他们的灵魂深处是充满盼望的“，略微有些出戏。看起来，珀尔的写作自相矛盾，让译者也不知道怎么反应了。
Debi Pearl’s “Created to be his help meet” — a review by Avid Reader
Guest ♦ 12th June 2017 ♦ 175 Comments
This book goes way off the deep end in craziness but the root problem is that Michael and Debi Pearl are violating God’s law of sowing and reaping. (Galatians 6:7-8) They want one spouse to sow to the flesh without reaping any consequences because they won’t allow the other spouse to set any boundaries. 这本书的想法极其疯狂，但根本问题在于迈克尔和黛比-珀尔违反了神的播种和收获的法则。(加拉太书6:7-8）他们想让夫妻中的一方顺着情欲撒种而不收获任何后果，因为他们不允许另一方设定任何界限。
Debi Pearl writes,
Never demand a man love and cherish you because he ought to. (p. 31) 绝不能以为一个男人应该爱你、珍惜你，你就这样要求他。
Your husband will be selfish, he will be unkind….not respect your rights…foolish….cruel….actually walk in sin…… (p. 55) 你的 丈夫可能自私自利，不够善良，不尊重你的权利，也有点傻， 还无情，……生活在罪恶之中。
In most marriages the strife is not because the man is cruel or evil; it is because he expects obedience, honor and reverence and is not getting it. Thus he reacts badly.”(p. 79) 大多数斗争不是因为他的狠心或者邪 恶，而是因为他希望得到你的服从和尊重。如果他得不到这些，他的反应会很糟糕。
If some worthless men had wives who were more ______, you fill in the blank, they would not be so worthless. (p. 278) 但是，如果有些“不怎么样”的男人，他们的妻子若更（你 来填这个空白吧），他们可能不至于这么糟。
The further you read in this book the more you find real hatred for women. Debi is so focused on blaming women that she will contradict herself in the process. Then she turns around and tries to portray God as an abusive father! 你读得越多，就越能发现作者实在是仇视女人。黛比过于用心地指责妇女，以至于有时会变得自相矛盾。后来，她转过身来，把上帝描绘成一个虐待人的父亲！
**Reflecting God’s nature 反映上帝的本性
Debi writes, 戴比写道：
There are basically three types of men. The different types are just as marked in one year olds as they are in adult men. It seems that God made each male to express one side of his triad nature.”(p. 75) 并不是所有男人都一样。不同的个性其实在他们只有一岁大的时候就已经显出来了。看起来，三位一体的上帝创造每个男人都突出了三个位格中一个的特点，但是没有哪个男人能 完全地表现出上帝的全部形象。
Wait a minute. There’s only ONE man who reflects God—Jesus Christ. (Hebrews 1:3) But Debi claims that these three types reflect God’s nature: Mr. Command man, Mr. Visionary and Mr. Steady. 等一下。世上只有一位反映上帝的形象–耶稣基督。(希伯来书1:3）但黛比声称这三种人反映了上帝的本性：领袖型男人、异象型男人和稳固型男人。
Mr. Command is actually the type of abuser known as the Drill Sergeant. Listen closely to Debi’s words. 领袖型男人实际上就是虐待型男人，一般人称“新兵训练军士”（Drill Sergeant）。仔细听听戴比的表述：
Command men…..are known for expecting their wives to wait on them hand and foot…..She is on call every minute of her day. Her man wants to know where she is, what she is doing and why she is doing it. He corrects her without thought. For better or for worse it is his nature to control…… A woman married to a Command Man wears a heavier yoke than most women but it can be a very rewarding yoke….her walk….is easier because there is never any possibility of her being in control…. Command men have less tolerance so they will often walk off and leave their clamoring wife before she has a chance to realize that she is even close to losing her marriage… The Command man feels it is his duty and responsibility to lead people and he does whether…they want him to or not. (p. 77-78) 领袖型男人期望妻子从头到脚服侍自己，不希望妻子做与服侍丈夫无关的事。……她处于随时待命的状态。因为丈夫需要知道她在何处，在干什么，为什么要做那件事。他会不假思索地纠正她。无论对错，这是天性使然。……一个女人若是嫁给了领袖型男人，她要比其他女人受到更多的束缚，但所得的回报也是巨大的。从某种程度上讲，她做起他的帮助者来更容易，因为无论怎样她决不会处于主导地位。……领袖型男人通常不够宽容，他们会在妻子还没有意识到婚姻的裂痕之前，就离开了大吵大叫的妻子，等到妻子回过神来，她已变成了单分母亲，不得不为独自抚养孩子长大成人而忧虑不已。……领袖型男人觉得他的责任和义务就是领导他人，无论别人是否想让他来领导，都是必需的。
That’s supposed to reflect God’s nature? This is so far from the heart of God. Jesus stands at the door and knocks. He doesn’t kick the door down. Plus, Jesus NEVER leaves us. 这就反映出神的本性？这离上帝的心太远了吧。耶稣站在门口敲门。他不会把门踢倒。此外，耶稣永远不会离开我们。
Now would Mr. Command ever allow another man to walk in and take control of his life? Of course not. That’s the double standard. He feels entitled to usurping authority over whole groups of people but would never allow another man to control him. Yet the irony is that Mr. Command is NOT controlling the only thing that God actually commands him to control — himself! SELF-CONTROL is God’s will for our lives not letting Mr. Command do whatever he pleases, trampling on everyone else’s boundaries. 现在，领袖先生会不会允许另一个人走进来，控制他的生活？当然不会。这就是双重标准。他觉得自己有权掌握整个群体的权力，但绝不会允许另一个人控制他。然而，讽刺的是，领袖先生并没有控制上帝实际命令他控制的唯一东西——他自己！这就是上帝的命令。节制（self-control）是上帝对我们生活的旨意，而不是让领袖先生为所欲为，践踏其他人的界限。
Then there’s the other two types. Debi describes Mr. Steady as a loyal husband who works hard and takes care of his family. On the other hand, Mr. Visionary is lazy, refuses to work, and hops around the country, chasing empty frivolous things. Exactly what the Bible warned us NOT to do. (Prov 12:11) 然后是另外两种类型。黛比描述稳固先生是一个忠诚的丈夫，努力工作，照顾家庭。另一方面，异象先生是懒惰的，拒绝工作，在全国各地跳来跳去，追逐空虚轻浮的东西——这正是圣经警告我们不要做的事情。(箴12:11）。
Debi describes him as so irresponsible that “if our husbands are visionaries they will yell and make our life miserable until we run back to mama and end up sleeping in a cold bed and living on food stamps.” (p. 97) 黛比形容他是如此不负责任，”如果我们的丈夫是异象型男人，他们可能会大喊大叫，把我们的生活弄得非常可怕，直到我们跑回妈妈的身边，最后在孤枕难眠、指望救济中了此一生。”(p. 97)
“They are often the church splitters….they can be real jerks who push their agendas, forcing others to go their way.” (p. 80-81) 他们通常是教会的分裂者，要求教义要纯正， 会众在教会里举止仪表要得体。……非但自己不按规矩办事，也要求别人和他 一样。【翻译错误。意思和原文相反】
They will easily pick up and relocate without any idea of what they are going to do for a living at their new location. They are often the church splitters and the ones who demand doctrinal purity and proper dress and conduct. Like a prophet, they call people to task for their inconsistencies. If they are not wise, they can be real fools who push their agendas, forcing others to go their way. One Visionary will campaign for the legalization of pot, while another will be an activist to make abortions illegal. Most will just sit around the house and complain, but in their souls they are Visionaries. 他们会很随便地搬家，根本不考虑新环境的生存压力。他们通常是教会的分裂者，要求教义要纯正，会众在教会里举止仪表要得体。他们一旦失去智慧就变成彻头彻尾的傻瓜一一非但自己不按规矩办事，也要求别人和他 一样。异象型男人会为了合法的东西（大麻合法化）而战斗，会积极参加反堕胎运动，但大多会待在房间里抱怨，但他们的灵魂深处是充满盼望的（译注：Visionaries = 充满盼望的？太美化了吧。）。
Why is Debi totally fine with allowing this guy to disobey God’s command “to settle down” and work to earn his own living? (2Thes 3:12) Meanwhile, Debi won’t allow the wife to work outside the home so this guy is allowed to destroy the family’s finances, while the wife is supposed to watch helplessly! And then Debi shifts the burden of responsibility to God, saying that God will clean up all the messes that this guy is creating. The irony is that while God will hold this guy accountable for his sin, Debi won’t. 为什么黛比完全同意这人违背上帝 “安静做工，吃自己的饭”的命令？(帖后3:12)同时，黛比不允许妻子外出工作，任凭这个人破坏家庭的财务状况，而妻子只能无助地看着！然后黛比把责任推给了上帝，说上帝会收拾这个人制造的所有烂摊子。讽刺的是，虽然上帝会让这个人对自己的罪负责，但黛比不会。
This whole book revolves around the sin of showing partiality (James 2:9) by consistently making excuses for the willful sin of one spouse while blaming the other spouse for everything. On page 207, Debi blames Bathsheba for David’s sins but never holds David himself accountable when she says that Bathsheba’s “lack of discretion cost her husband his life.” (p. 207) 这整本书多处犯下偏袒的罪（雅各书2:9），即不断为配偶一方的故意犯罪找借口，而把一切都归咎于另一方。在第207页，黛比将大卫的罪行归咎于拔示巴，指责拔示巴的”不谨慎使她的丈夫失去了生命 “，却从未要求大卫本人承担责任。(p. 207)
No! David murdered her husband. Then God sent the prophet Nathan to confront David not her. Even when David repented, he took full responsibility for his sins without ever blaming her. 不! 大卫谋杀了她的丈夫。然后，上帝派先知拿单来与大卫对质，却不是来定罪她。即使大卫本人忏悔时，也为自己的罪行承担了全部责任，并没有责备她。
Throughout this book, Debi Pearl twists Scripture to fit her opinion then rejects actual verses that she doesn’t like. For example, she slams women for working outside the home but won’t accept how God raised up Deborah to judge the entire nation of Israel. And she ignores where the Apostle Paul actually commends women for laboring with him in Philippians 4:3 (also see Romans 16:1-2). 在这本书中，黛比-珀尔扭曲经文以适应她的观点，拒绝她不喜欢的经文。例如，她抨击妇女外出工作，但却不接受神兴起底波拉为士师，领导整个以色列民族的事实。她还无视使徒保罗在《腓立比书》4:3中对一起同工的妇女之称赞（也见《罗马书》16:1-2）。
Meanwhile, Debi keeps disregarding God’s commands to keep her tradition when he writes, “Women are simply deceived.” (p. 111) 同时，黛比一直无视上帝的命令，坚持己见地说：”女人只不过是上当了”。 (p. 111)
The Bible says that women “have the mind of Christ.” (1Cor 2:16) All the “treasures of wisdom” are in Christ who dwells in us. (Colossians 2:3 & 1:27)圣经说，女人“有基督的心”（林前 2:16）。“所积蓄的一切智慧知识”，都在那住在我们心里的基督里藏着。(Colossians 2:3 & 1:27)
Debi: “It is NOT God’s will for your husband to reverence you.” (p. 137) “神的旨意不是要丈夫尊敬你。”
God commands husband to reverence their wives in 1Peter 3:7 and warns that their prayers will be hindered if they don’t! 神命令丈夫敬重妻子，甚至警告他们，若不如此，祷告不蒙垂听（彼前 3:7）
Debi: “You were created to make (your husband) complete, not to seek personal fulfillment parallel to him.” (p. 21) “你受造是为了让男人 得以完全，不是寻求与男人同等的个人成就。”
God says, “The desire of the righteous is granted.” (Proverbs 10:24) “Delight yourself in the Lord and He will give you the desires of your heart.” (Psalms 37:4) “义人所愿的，必蒙应允。” （箴言 10:24）**(Ps 37:4 [Cuv/S]) 又要以耶和华为乐，他就将你心里所求的赐给你。
Debi: “Dominance and control are always masculine characteristics.” (p. 115) 统治与管理总是男人的特性。(翻译有些软化)
No! God commands women “to be self-controlled.” Titus 2:5(NET) 不是的！神命令女人“谨守（节制，self-controlled）”(提多书 2:5)
Debi: “A woman’s calling is not easy. To allow someone else to control your life is much harder than taking control of it yourself.” (p. 50) 女人回应上帝的呼召往往不 容易，让别人控制自己的生活，远比自己管理自己要难得多。
Nope! Since there’s no law of God against self-control (Galatians 5:23), Debi doesn’t get to make up rules that take away our ability to make our own personal choices. You can’t function in self-control if someone else is making all your decisions. Jesus commanded us not to allow anyone to take away our ability to say “yes” and “no,” warning us that “anything else comes from the devil.” Matthew 5:37(CEV). Yet page after page of this book tries to eliminate people’s ability to say “no” in their own lives. And this book doesn’t even try to hide the vileness of teaching people to submit to abuse.呸！既然在节制上面没有律法禁止（加 5:23），黛比怎能编造规矩，剥夺我们做出个人选择的能力。你不可能一方面允许人为你做决定，一方面有是一个有“节制”的人。耶稣命令我们不要让任何人夺取说“是”或“不是”的能力，并警告我们，“若再多说，就是出于那恶者”（太 5:27）然而此书充斥着剥夺人说“不是”的教导。而且，这本书毫不掩饰地教导人顺服施虐者。
Listen to what Debi’s husband, Michael Pearl, writes,请看黛比的丈夫迈克尔如何说：
Wives…are not prone to be balanced or wise. 但做妻子的……难以做到平衡与智慧。
A husband has authority to tell his wife what to wear, where to go, whom to talk to, how to spend her time, when to speak and when not to, even if he is unreasonable and insensitive. (p. 260-261) 丈夫有权力告诉他的妻子穿 什么，去哪里，和谁讲话，如何使用时间，什么时候可以说 话，什么时候不可以，即使荒谬不得体，他也确实有这个权 力。
That violates God’s command in 1Cor 7:23b(NET) “Do NOT become slaves of men.” Yet Michael actually likens wives to slaves when he writes,这违背了神在哥林多前书 7:23下的命令，“不要作人的奴仆”。然而，迈克尔实际上的确将妻子和奴隶联系在一起：
Many women disobey their husbands on grounds that they are obeying God instead. (p. 259) 许多女性以顺服上帝取代了顺服丈夫
The wife is to obey her husband in all things. (p. 261) 妻子要在所有事情上顺服自己的丈夫
The servant is not given the option of deciding that the master is not acting within the will of God and therefore should not be obeyed. It is acceptable with God—God’s will—for the underling to suffer wrongfully and take it patiently. You will surely wonder, ‘Why is it the will of God for the underling to suffer at the hands of an unjust and perverse authority?’ 即使一个掌权者令他权下的人不正当地受苦、悲伤，上帝还是命令仆人去承受，并且心有忍耐地去面对。仆人没有被赋予一种选择权，即主人若不按上帝的旨意而行便 可因此不顺服他，在上帝的旨意中，仆人承受本不应有的痛苦，并且忍耐面对，这是理所应当的。你必定要问：上帝的旨意为什么要让仆人在不义、刚愎的权 柄下受苦呢？ ”
Two reasons are obvious….First the chain of authority must remain intact, even to the point of allowing some abuse. The other reason is….lady, you were created to give glory to God. When God puts you in subjection to a man whom he knows is going to cause you to suffer, it is with the understanding that you are obeying God by enduring the wrongful suffering. And when you suffer wrongfully, as unto the Lord, you bring great glory to God. (p. 262-263) 有两个明显的理由，……首先，即便有人滥用权柄，权柄链也是不可破坏的。另外一个理由……女士们，你们受造是要把荣耀归给上帝。当上帝 把你放在一个男人的权下时，他知道他会令你受苦，其用意是让你在忍受这个不义的苦难时，学会顺服上帝。并且，当你忍受这不义的苦难如同顺服上帝时，你就给天父上帝带来 大荣耀。
Did God tell the Israelites to submit harder to Pharaoh’s abuse because the chain of authority can’t be broken? NO! Here’s what God actually told Moses, 神是否告诉以色列人要更努力地服从法老的虐待，因为权威的链条不能被打破？不是的! 以下是上帝对摩西的实际说法。
I have seen the troubles my people have suffered in Egypt, and I have heard their cries when the Egyptians hurt them. I know about their pain. Now I will go down and save my people from the Egyptians. I will take them from that land and lead them to a good land where they can be free from these troubles. It is a land filled with many good things. Exodus 3:7-8a (ERV) 7耶和华说：我的百姓在埃及所受的困苦，我实在看见了；他们因受督工的辖制所发的哀声，我也听见了。我原知道他们的痛苦， 8我下来是要救他们脱离埃及人的手，领他们出了那地，到美好、宽阔、流奶与蜜之地，……
That’s the heart of God which this book totally misses. Jesus said it best, “Get behind me, Satan: for it is written, You shall worship the Lord thy God, and HIM ONLY shall you serve.” (Luke 4:8) Yet this book keeps trying to usurp God’s authority. Debi says, 这是书中完全错失的神的心意。耶稣说得好，“撒旦，退去吧。因为经上记着说，当拜主―你的神，单要事奉他。” 而此书则试图僭越神的权威。黛比说：
When you obey your husband you obey God. (p. 22)顺服丈夫，就是顺服神。
Like Eve we imagine that we can disobey……God’s Word and our husband’s word.就像夏娃一样，我们想象自己可以不顺服……神的话语和我们自己丈夫的话语。
(p. 129)
Right there Debi just tried to seat man on God’s throne — the devil tried that and got kicked out of Heaven. This is pure idolatry — trying to put man’s words in God’s mouth which Jesus warned us about in Matthew 15:9.在这些地方，黛比想要把男人放在神的宝座上——魔鬼曾经这样做，于是被赶出了天堂。这是纯粹的偶像崇拜——试图把人的话语放在神的口中——耶稣在马太福音 15:9警告过我们，不可这样做！
The Bible distinguishes between obeying God and obeying man. (Acts 5:29) Consider Romans 13, which tells us to submit to civil authority because “the person who resists such authority resists the ordinance of God.” Romans 16:2 (NET) Resists the “ordinance” NOT God Himself because civil authority is not the same thing as God Himself. Remember when King Herod tried to stand in the place of God, he was immediately struck down. (Acts 12:22-23) 圣经明确区别了顺服神和顺服人的不同（徒 5:29）。或者参考罗马书 13章，顺服政权，因为“抗拒掌权的就是抗拒神的命”。抗拒神的“命”，不是抗拒神，因为政权与神不是一回事。不要忘记，希律王曾经想要僭越神的地位，立刻被击杀了（徒 12:22-23）。
Debi Pearl is actually teaching the same twisted theology from the 1970’s Shepherding Movement that caused tremendous damage. The founder of the Shepherding Movement, Derek Prince wrote, 黛比·珀尔所教导的扭曲神学，实际上与1970年代造成巨大伤害的牧人运动（Shepherding Movement）相似。牧人运动的创始人叶光明（Derek Prince）曾写到：
“Christ doesn’t rule in every area directly, in His own Person. He rules through delegated authority.” 基督并不在每个领域都直接亲自掌权。他通过委派的权柄来统治。
Whenever God’s delegated authority touches our lives he requires us to acknowledge and submit to it just as we would to him in person….. Our attitude towards those whom God sets in delegated authority over us is….our attitude towards God.
(Discipleship, Shepherding, Commitment, p. 19-20) 无论何处，若神所委派的权柄临到我们，我们都当顺服，如同顺服神一样……我们对待那些神所委派、赋予权柄之人的态度……当像对待神一样。（门训、牧者与委身，19-20页）
It is the same thing that Debi Pearl teaches, when she says that “the degree to which you reverence your husband is the degree to which you reverence your Creator.” (p. 22) 黛比·珀尔教导一样的事情，“你敬畏丈夫的程度就是你敬畏创造主的程度；你服侍了丈夫，就是服侍了上帝。”
Michael Pearl even uses the same terms from Shepherding, when he says, “In those areas where God has delegated someone to be in authority he has relinquished a certain amount of control to that authority—for better or for worse. God doesn’t micromanage all spheres of authority. He allows certain latitude for the authority to be wrong and still retain the office.” (p. 259) 迈克尔·珀尔甚至直接使用牧人运动的措辞，“在各个领域里，上帝已经分派人员负责，并把一定的调控权下放给当权者，无论他们是好是坏。上帝不会压缩各领域的权力，他给予各领域的当权者犯错误的权柄，并继续保留当权者。”
When Saul became abusive, did God tell David to stay at the palace and pray for Saul to change? No! God repented of making Saul king and revoked his authority. 但扫罗滥权时，神告诉大卫留在宫里，为扫罗的改变而祷告吗？不！神后悔选立扫罗为王，收回了他的权柄！
Meanwhile, this book continues teaching Shepherding theology. Michael Pearl writes, “The authority God gave to your husband is his alone and God will not interfere and take back to himself that power even if your husband abuses his powers…” (p. 260) 与此同时，这本书继续教导牧人运动神学。迈克尔·珀尔写到，“上帝给丈夫的权柄单单 属于你的丈夫，即使你丈夫在某种权攻上滥用他的权力，上 帝也不会干涉，不会从他收回这个权力。”
“As a divorcee, she maintains the image of the persecuted and abused victim but in many cases it was her standards that created the rift that led to divorce.” (p. 261) 由于离了婚，她始终保持着受害者的形象，是被虐待的牺牲者，但在许多时候，是她的“标准”制造了距离和嫌隙，从而导致离婚。
Same thing taught by another founder of Shepherding, Bob Mumford: 牧者运动的另一位创始人，鲍勃·蒙福（Bob Mumford），教导同样的事情：
Your higher power may not be doing it right according to your standards…..but there’s not a thing you can do about it but submit. (Problem of Doing Your Own Thing p. 67) 按照你的标准，在你之上的权柄可能做错了事……但除了顺服，你没有别的办法（自行其是的问题，p. 67）
Too often we want our ministry directly from God. We want personal attention. We aren’t about to receive what we need through some delegated representative. (Problem p. 73) 我们经常希望自己的事工直接来自于神。我们希望受到神的亲自关注。通过神委派的代表，有时我们无法得到自己需要的。（问题，p. 73）.
I know of a church where the members took the stand that our pastor is right, even when he is wrong.”(Problem p. 85) 我知道一个教会，无论牧师对错，都无条件支持自己的牧师（问题，p. 85）
The error of Shepherding theology was: 牧者运动神学的错误在于：
1) Disregarding 1Timothy 2:5 by trying to put a mediator between you and God 不承认提摩太前书 2:5，而是在你和神之间安插一位中间人
2) Teaching idolatry by seating man on God’s throne 教导偶像崇拜，把（男）人至于神的宝座上
3) Disobeying Jesus by taking away the ability of people to say “yes” and “no” 不顺服耶稣，剥夺人“是就说是，不是就说不是”的能力
Sound familiar? That is Debi’s book in a nutshell. 听起来很熟悉？这就是黛比这本书的精髓。
**Boundaries 保持界限
To better understand how Debi tries to destroy personal boundaries let’s review what boundaries actually are. In the book, Boundaries In Marriage, Dr. Cloud and Dr. Townsend write, 为了更好地理解黛比怎样摧毁人际关系中的界限，我们可以回顾一下什么是界限。在《婚姻中的界限》一书里， “云和唐僧”两位博士写到：
Couples have a duty to set limits on each spouse’s destructive acts or attitudes. For example, if a husband has a gambling problem, his wife needs to set appropriate limits, such as canceling his credit cards, separating their joint accounts….to force him to take responsibility for his problem. (p. 43) 夫妻之间有义务为配偶的破坏性行为和态度设限。例如，若丈夫沉迷赌博，他的妻子需要设置合适的限制，例如取消他的信用卡，把联合账户分开为独立账户……以迫使他为自己的问题负责。
Another problem may occur when a wife stands up for the right thing, and her husband tells her she is not being submissive. She may confront her husband’s attitudes or addiction or lying or some other ungodly behavior and then she is called “unsubmissive. (p. 245) 还有一个问题需要讨论，就是当妻子坚持做正确的事，而丈夫说她乃是不顺服的情况。她可能面质丈夫的态度、上瘾、说谎或其他不敬虔的行为，却被称为“不顺服”。
What submission doesn’t mean is that a husband just tells a wife what to do……The idea of submission is never meant to allow someone to overstep another’s boundaries. Submission only has meaning in the context of boundaries for boundaries promote self-control and freedom. If a wife is not free and in control of herself she is not submitting anyway. She is a slave subject to a slave driver and she is out of the will of God. If a wife is being put under some law that says she is “bad” if she doesn’t submit to her husband’s cruelty and problems then she is not free at all. Likewise, if she is not free to say no without being deemed “bad,” then she is not free at all. A free person is the only one who can submit. 顺服不是丈夫单方面告诉妻子做什么……顺服不是让另一个人践踏了你的界限。顺服仅仅意味着界限以内的顺服，因为界限可以保护你的节制和自由。如果妻子不自由，无法控制自己的生活，她绝不可能是顺服的。她乃是服役在奴隶主之下的奴隶，脱离在神的旨意之外。如果妻子被强加了某种律法，告诉她若不顺服丈夫的虐待与问题就是“坏”女人，那么她完全没有自由。同样，如果她不能自由地说“不”而不用背负“坏”名，她也是不自由的。唯有自由人才是可以顺服之人。
(p. 245-247)