A few days ago, Blarg wrote a fantastic post on MRP, which I just got around to reading (it challenges even my ineptitude at brevity). Someone commented:

he seeks not compliance or submission by his wife to his frame, but a wife with her own strong, independent frame that's well aligned and compatible with his.

... to which Blarg replied: "Exactly."

This is explained in his "black box" section - that MRP often views wives as a mechanical input where you act a certain way and get a certain response, but we ignore what happens inside the black box to get that response ... because, you know, trying to figure it out requires entering the frame(work) of the black box. He proposes, instead, that wives should be understood as independent entities who are viewed as more than a series of inputs - that a man can maintain his strength, if he has already developed it, even while elevating his wife's status beyond "slave to bio-psychology and genetics."

The entire post is fascinating and I recommend you read it - but only AFTER you figure out the basics.

What I really want to comment on here, though, is the way this concept is much easier understood if operating from a biblical foundation. Before reading his post, I'd just put up another one where I noted:

It's a beautiful thing that our God doesn't merely say, "Live in my frame," or, "Idolize me." He says, "I have made you like me and I will make you like me again so that YOUR OWN internal point of origin - your own frame - is already what I would have you do in the first place, because I am in you and we are one." This is sanctification and it is much, much deeper than the mainstream churchianity concept of behavioral modification, which is little more than Judaism 2.0.

It was ironic, then, to read immediately after this someone attempting to convey the same concept from a secular world-view. But I think it is worth expanding on, for those who require the biblical foundation.

Judaism 1.0 - Old Covenant

Judaism 1.0 operates under the old covenant, which is, in essence: "Obey my laws and I will bless you." Beginner-level red pill teaching inherently begins with an old covenant mentality. Just as the old covenant treated God's relationship with his people on very clear black box terms (as Blarg references), defined by a series of inputs and outputs, so also does beginner-level MRP instruct men to begin understanding the basic inputs and outputs of intergender sexuality. Most of Rollo's work, for example, is dedicated to establishing what those inputs and outputs are - and this is ESSENTIAL to know. Likewise, just as God decided that the old covenant was a necessary precursor to pave the way for the new covenant, so also will I continue to tell men in the early phases of their red pill journey that they must first become fluent with and implement in their homes the basic concepts in this "old covenant" view of relationships: know and master the basics of what triggers female sexuality before trying to go much further. Young Christians will always need to know the law and how to live under it before they can comprehend what it means to be free from it.

Judaism 2.0 - Old Covenant Plus Jesus

But some so-called believers never actually live as ones free from the law - in part because they don't understand what happens inside the black box and it's too confusing to figure it out, so they prefer to stick by the series of inputs and outputs they've come to rely on. They just change the terminology to make it palatable to a cursory skim of NT Scripture. That is, they acknowledge that Christ died to save us from the consequences of the law, but somehow believe that they are not free from the obligation to the law. Instead of Mosaic Law, they look to "New Testament Commands." The letter of the law is replaced with the principles of the law. Instead of blessing being tied to obedience, it's God's love tied to Jesus (which is right, until we add), but we can't say we love Jesus if we don't obey his commands, so John 14:21 is misused to re-up the idea that our obedience is still somehow tied in some way as a condition to our relationship with God.

In this view, just as the OT Law was an EXTERNAL code of conduct, so also does the entirety of the Bible (particularly the NT, or principles from the OT) become an EXTERNAL source of dictating behavior for how a "good Christian" ought to live. In this view, "grace" is added as a means of giving us flexibility when we still end up breaking the commands in the Bible.

In MRP terms, if this is how God interacted with his bride, then we would say that a wife's behaviors toward her husband are what define whether the relationship is good or bad. If she is submissive, helpful, sexually satisfying, etc. then we call her a "good wife," even if we are ignorant of her internal motives. If she is not these things, then she is a "bad wife." Our assessment of her is directly tied to her outputs - her behaviors.

Christianity 1.0 - New Covenant (and I don't expect there to be a 2.0 - ever)

Judaism 2.0 is, of course, a silly notion when we look at all the passages that explain how we are no longer under the law, and that we are no longer slaves to sin. The guy who disciples me wrote up a more thorough post on this on r/TrueChristian (right here). In short, Hebrews 8:13 makes clear that the old covenant is obsolete, as there's a new covenant in place. Jeremiah 31:31-34 prophesied about this new covenant, saying, "For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people." So why do people still try to treat the Bible (EXTERNAL) as a source for mandating behavioral conformity? That's not how the Bible was intended to be used. In short, the new covenant is that instead of operating on EXTERNAL behavioral modification in conformity to the law, we have an INTERNAL compulsion fueled by love that comes from the fact that God (who is love) is one with us in Christ with his Spirit.

This is the essence of the Gospel. We were originally created in God's image. The fall shattered the image of God in us. The law proved to us that we could not be restored to that image on our own from external means and effort. Because of Jesus, we are free from the external law (old covenant) and are sanctified toward internally becoming like Christ because we are one with Christ (new covenant). Ezekiel 36:26 summarizes this nicely: "I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will remove from you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh." Instead of trying to manufacture internal change for ourselves through behavioral modification, we let internal change from the Spirit project outward through our behaviors (hence verses like Galatians 3:3). While many people under a Judaism 2.0 mentality will agree with this on technical terms, they will still, in practice, quote verses at people as if the external commands are still somehow a judge over them.

New Covenant in Practice

Notice in this new covenant mentality that God is not merely after our obedience. He is after our hearts - and this not merely as to the emotions we feel toward him, but our devotion to the entirety of who he is, what he stands for, and what he intends to accomplish on this earth. For instance, he has told us plainly that it is his goal for us to make disciples of all nations. Having his heart and Spirit within us inherently means a compulsion toward fulfilling his purposes, and not merely avoiding the things he doesn't like. That is, if God's Spirit is in us and our Spirit is conformed to his likeness, then our natural desire will be to make disciples of all nations (and, along with it, a broader disinterest in the sin that would hinder this purpose).

Those who live under a Judaism 2.0 mentality will argue that obedience is what shapes our hearts. The new covenant responds that our hearts are what shape our obedience. But that "new heart" is one of a baby who has freshly been born again. As with all muscles, it must be fed and exercised before it is strong enough to function independently. This is the sanctification process. This is what I meant when I quoted myself saying, "This is sanctification and it is much, much deeper than the mainstream churchianity concept of behavioral modification, which is little more than Judaism 2.0." And when this sanctification progresses, we see that when God's Spirit meets our autonomy, rather than doing things to keep God happy, we do things because we want to do them ... and it just so happens to be that because we are one with God, as a husband is with his wife, the things we want to do are the exact things that please him. This is not "living in God's frame" (though at times it is easier to explain things in those terms). This is living in your own frame out of the "new heart" that God gives us.

NC - Going Deeper: The Judaism 2.0 people will argue, "I do operate out of desire. My desire is to please God. I look to the Bible to see what pleases God, then I do it." This is still living by an external code. There's a difference between:

  • OC: "I hate doing x, but I love pleasing God, so I'll do x anyway," and

  • NC: "Because God is in me and God loves x, I strangely find that I love doing x also, even though I used to hate doing x when I was a non-Christian/younger believer." And as we move into sanctification, we find that "x" encompasses more and more aspects toward the totality of our lives, which will be made complete in heaven.

Notice that in Judaism 2.0, the operative aspect of the "heart" is toward God without any actual change in the disposition of one's heart toward the things of God. That is, the person isn't actually becoming more like Christ in their heart/spirit. They are simply conforming their behaviors to look like Christ while claiming that their heart is in the right place because they profess a motive of wanting to "please God," generically. On the other hand, one who is being transformed by the Gospel increasingly loves the things of God and the purposes he has for the world, independent of the commands God gave about them. At this point, the commands serve primarily as a guide and confirmation of the direction we should be moving, not some static picture we're trying to live up to. u/Deep_Strength is known for emphasizing this point quite well - and I recommend you all skim through his comment history, as he talks about it here a LOT, as this is something many guys here seem to miss.

Christian-MRP 1.0

To take the "Christian 1.0" bit and explain this in MRP terms, we get a beauty like Blarg's post. We reach the conclusion that we do not truly desire a wife whose behaviors are merely conformed to our expectations. Even battered wives will conform their behavior while hating their spouse. Some will argue, "Who cares, as long as the sex is good?" And to each their own. But my guess is - whether it's innate drive from God or blue pill conditioning that hasn't yet been eradicated, I really don't care - most of you probably prefer a wife who genuinely loves you, if you could have one, over one who merely obeys you. Such a wife doesn't do things merely because it keeps you happy and she likes to see you happy. She does it because she has lived in your frame and LOVED it long enough that as she grows and matures as a wife she develops her own internal sense of self that flows harmoniously with all that you are. [Notice again that this takes time and is not something to start with.]

I am firmly persuaded that those who live merely by what they ought to do are no better off than those live by what they should not do. If we look at sin the way u/ruizbujc references in the post I linked above, taking the Romans 14 approach to understanding how God now works through our heart and motives instead of our rote behaviors, we recognize that our desires are what define the relationship we have with God and Christ, as their bride (Isaiah 54:5; 2 Cor. 11:2, for example). And the beauty in this, then, becomes what every MRP man projects toward his wife: "Make me your greatest desire and I'll give myself to you" (Psalm 37:4).

Non/Young-Christian Christian-MRP 1.0

Now, there's one more aspect that's ESSENTIAL to applying any of this, which Blarg appropriately hit on: once you open yourself up to your wife and embrace the notion that she is an actual person with thoughts and feelings and cognitive capabilities that go far beyond slavery to her bio-psychology - after this, you must be willing to accept the reception you get.

Notice that God gave Jesus as the light who shines over everyone (John 1:9), yet many reject him. Even among believers, he freely gives his Spirit to all, and not in partial measure, yet many people never progress in their faith or choose to allow him to sanctify them. Others will move at a much slower pace. Still others will have significant periods of growth and regression.

In other words, what Blarg described as the risk - that your wife may not immediately do with your gift of yourself (your spirit) to her what you'd like, and you have to be unshaken by that - is the same risk God readily embraces among non/young-believers who ignore/reject the gift of himself (his Spirit) and young believers who won't consistently follow him (when prompted by his Spirit), and yet God is unshaken by this.