Dangers of Feminism

Loveneverfails · Dec 6, 2013

I'm rather indifferent to feminism. It has its pros and cons (and its modern incarnation has a lot of cons, in my opinion). My plan is to obey and follow my Lord Jesus. This may lead me to do things that may or may not line up with feminism. It's Christ I long to please, not the feminists (or anti-feminists).

proverbs35 · Dec 6, 2013

Presidente said: There are several ways in which Feminism has hurt Christian marriages and families and society. Original sin hurt marriage and family. Because of Adam and Eve's sin in the garden, God's original design for marriage was perverted. With that being said, divorce (especially frivolous divorce) was originally instituted by men and not women (Deut 24:1). Some like to put extra emphasis on the female initiated divorce, but they usually fail to talk about those divorces initiated by professing Christian men who divorce the "wives of their youth" in order to marry younger, sexier ones. Thank God that Solomon in all of his wisdom addressed this issue (Pro 5:15-23). Male initiated divorces happened in the OT and have continued to happen throughout history, although those stats often get de-emphasized and/or omitted.

Presidente said: The Bible teaches that the husband is the head of the wife, and that wives are to submit to their husbands and to reverence them. The Bible also teaches that a husband should reverence his wife.

In the same way, you husbands must give honor to your wives. Treat your wife with understanding as you live together. She may be weaker than you are, but she is your equal partner in God's gift of new life. Treat her as you should so your prayers will not be hindered (1 Pet 3:7 NLT).

One of the synonyms listed for the Greek word honor (time' 5092) is reverence, yet many of those who emphasize a wife's duty to reverence her husband fail to emphasize a husband's duty to reverence (honor) his wife. Although I must acknowledge that there are different kinds of reverence, Peter addressed the duty of both husband AND wife as it relates to reverencing each other.

Presidente said: I've even heard of a certain couple who do marriage conferences redefining 'submit' to mean 'adapt'-- of course with no support from ancient Greek.
According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, adapt means "to change your behavior so that it is easier to live in a particular place or situation." Therefore, it shouldn't be hard to comprehend how a submissive wife (or any subject under an authority) would have to change her behavior so that it is easier to live with her husband. That's very Biblical.

Presidente said: I haven't seen anyone come up with a way to explain away the word 'obeyed' from I Peter 3, a difficult passage for feminists who want to believe scripture, too. Peter and Paul both taught about wifely submission. Thankfully, they were not hypocrites. Paul told us to follow him as he followed Christ (1 Cor 11:11). Paul also said, "Though I am free and belong to no one, I have made myself a slave to everyone, to win as many as possible (1 Cor 9:19). Likewise, it's also a husband's duty to "win" his wife if necessary, although that concept (husband winning wife) isn't emphasized nearly as much. Thankfully, Paul didn't omit the importance of Christian leaders winning those around them.

Presidente said: So the pastor kind of glosses over the part about wives submitting to husbands, mentioning it briefly, and focuses on the men, and then goes into 5 or 10 minutes on how important communication is, or some other marriage issue. The pastor mentions all those sermons everyone has heard on submission, but I'm wondering if his audience has ever heard such a thing. Maybe if they went to church in the 1950's.
You say that the pastor glosses over and briefly mentions wifely submission, and focuses on men. However, husbands are commanded to love their wives as Christ loved the church and gave up his life for her, which you "glossed over and briefly mentioned." As we know, love is the greatest commandment and concept in the Bible. Biblical writers and leaders spent a lot of time and effort on the subject of love. However, all too often, the opposite happens and certain ones like to de-emphasize love and briefly gloss over it. They make love a secondary issue and submission the primary one. However, that's not how the NT handles the subject of love or how Jesus role modeled it.

Presidente said: The churches aren't really pointing out the widespread rebellion in the home as many wives rule the roost.
The Bible says that, "We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to our own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all (Is 53:6). Men AND women have and do rebel against God. Rebellion is not something exclusive or primary to women. Those who like to constantly point out "rebellious women" usually omit and/or de-emphasize the kind widespread rebellion (and hypocrisy) that takes place in many homes as some husbands selfishly rule their wives and children rather than provide God-submitted, servant-leadership and the resulting trouble such husbands bring upon their families.

Presidente said: Feminism has conditioned men to be passive and not take up their leadership role.
Adam was passive in the garden of Eden when he ate of the fruit that Eve gave him rather than sticking to and submitting to the instructions that he was given directly from God. That happened in the beginning way before the term feminism was ever coined.

Presidente said: Many women crave their husbands to lead--something innate that Feminism hasn't erased-- but Feminism has conditioned them not to submit, either.
Like Is 53:6 indicates, men AND women are both rebellious due to the sin nature. Men and women are also image bearers and have the capacity to learn Godly submission. People (men or women) aren't born craving leadership. Godly submission and Godly leadership are not innate, but rather learned by "renewing" the mind.

Presidente said: Then the woman may complain that her husband isn't leading because he isn't doing all the things she has in mind and leading the way she thinks he ought to.

It's true that some women complain about their husbands. Likewise, some men complain about their wives. Like any other work of the flesh, complaining isn't exclusive or primary to women. Thankfully, Solomon in all of his wisdom wrote about the contentious wife AND the contentious man. He didn't just single out women. The important thing should be whether the husband is leading his wife like Christ led the church. Christ should be the benchmark and example.

Presidente said: Of course, women are encouraged to stay away from their abusers. The Bible does teach about the importance of separating one's self in certain situations.

Don’t befriend angry people or associate with hot-tempered people, or you will learn to be like them and endanger your soul (Pro 22:24-25).

Don’t do as the wicked do, and don’t follow the path of evildoers. Don’t even think about it; don’t go that way. Turn away and keep moving. For evil people can’t sleep until they’ve done their evil deed for the day. They can’t rest until they’ve caused someone to stumble. They eat the food of wickedness and drink the wine of violence! (Pro 4:14-17).

A quick-tempered man acts foolishly (Pro 14:17A). Stay away from a fool, for you will not find knowledge on their lips (Pro 14:7).

In the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, we command you, brothers and sisters, to keep away from every believer who is idle and disruptive and does not live according to the teaching you received from us. For you yourselves know how you ought to follow our example. We were not idle when we were with you, nor did we eat anyone’s food without paying for it. On the contrary, we worked night and day, laboring and toiling so that we would not be a burden to any of you. We did this, not because we do not have the right to such help, but in order to offer ourselves as a model for you to imitate. For even when we were with you, we gave you this rule: “The one who is unwilling to work shall not eat.” We hear that some among you are idle and disruptive. They are not busy; they are busybodies. Such people we command and urge in the Lord Jesus Christ to settle down and earn the food they eat. And as for you, brothers and sisters, never tire of doing what is good. Take special note of anyone who does not obey our instruction in this letter. Do not associate with them, in order that they may feel ashamed. Yet do not regard them as an enemy, but warn them as you would a fellow believer (2 These 3:6-14).

Presidente said: Of course, this isn't consistent with Christian thinking, where God can transform and sanctify people. There are Christians who, before they became Christians, physically abused their wives, but repented and their marriages were healed.
People MAY repent and be transformed. That is a possibility, but it's not a guarantee. There is absolutely no Biblical evidence that this WILL happen in all or even most situations. Jesus teaches us to know a tree by it's fruit whether it be good or evil (Lu 6:43-45).

Presidente said: But abused men have no network to rely on
That's not true. Abused men have at least 1 major org they can go to if they need assistance.
Help for Abused Men: Escaping domestic violence by women or domestic partners
Many faith based orgs that serve men like local homeless shelters do address abuse if necessary because they understand that men are victims too and may have suffered abuse from various sources.
The likelihood that adult men will be abused by women isn't as great, and abuse against men gets underreported for various reasons. With that being said, abuse (against men, women, children, elderly or the disabled) is a tremendous problem that should always be addressed and taken seriously.

Presidente said: Quoting scripture about wives submitting to their husbands is also listed among 'abusive' behaviors. Quoting scripture is not abusive. However, taking scripture out of context and/or cherry picking it in order to promote one's own selfish agenda and/or to take advantage of others is abusive and sinful.

Presidente said: When we look at the Old Testament, we see that God gave many patriarchal laws, such as laws related to fathers giving daughters away in marriage, and husbands and fathers being allowed to cancel wives' and daughters' vows.
Patriarchal supporters like to point out the OT law where husbands were allowed to cancel wives' and daughters' vows. I would suppose that this law came about to ensure that husbands and families didn't suffer do to some rash vow made by a wife or daughter. I'm seen that pointed out a lot on various threads and forums. As usual, those who constantly refer to this fail to point out the fact that there's Biblical evidence where men have made rash vows and caused themselves and their families to suffer. Case in point, Saul put his people under a strict oath that almost cost Jonathan (Saul's very own son) his life. Jonathan even acknowledged how troublesome his father's decision was (1 Sam 14:29). King Herod vowed to give the daughter of Herodias the head of John the Baptist (Mark 6:23). Some Jewish men vowed not to eat or drink until they had killed Paul (Acts 23:12). Jephthah made a vow that had a drastic effect on his daughter (Jud 11:30). Solomon also teaches about the dangers of making rash vows, and those scriptures are for men AND women. In other words, men are also capable of making rash vows that cause suffering, but that's also one of those facts that gets de-emphasized and/or trivialize.

Presidente said: If we want to have marriages that please God, we need to follow His word. That's just plain truth - HIS word and not ours. Amen to that!

Toska · Dec 6, 2013

I honestly do not have a problem submitting to my husband. He is a loving and caring man. He knows that the Lord is first in my life and I will follow His Word, he completely understands and agrees with that. One thing our pastor brought up a couple of weeks ago has stuck with me. He said that my husband is to love me like Christ does. He also said it is my husband's duty to study me and learn what will make me happy in life (that is not verbatim). I feel like it is actually harder on the men who are following God's word. Being the spiritual leader of the home cannot always be an easy thing. Trying to love an imperfect woman the way Christ does is probably difficult at times. I know there are times when my emotions get in the way and my poor husband is at a loss as to what has upset me. Just like every other part of being a Christian, being a Godly husband does not seem so easy to me. Just my two cents, take it for what it is worth

presidente · Dec 6, 2013

Proverbs35,

Thanks for your response. I notice a theme... 'but this is what men are supposed to do.' I realize that men sin. My purpose for the thread was to deal specifically with the problems caused by feminism.

proverbs35 said:

Of course it is wrong to divorce frivilously. Malachi calls men divorcing their wives as they were treacherous. And Jeremiah mentioned the problem of the wife treacherously departing from their husbands. Radical feminist authors have seen marriage as a type of slavery, and Feminist thought has supported the change in legal systems that enable easy divorce. Now men and women can divorce each other easily. As far as filing no fault divorces go, at least that fit in that legal category, I've read studies where women file upwards of 65%. It may be the case that the typical frivilous divorce is filed by a woman who is not happy who knows there is a good chance that the legal system will reward he for breaking covenant by giving her half the estate, the kids, and child support from her husbands. The real result is a greater chance of poverty for the whole family, though. But some of the no-faults could be cases of a passive man telling the wife, "Why don't you handle the paperwork?" And no fault is easier if there was adultery or some other issue, so it's hard to say. You can read on the Internet and see plenty of cass of wives who divorced just because they weren't happy or wanted to go out and find someone else for true love, or whatever other reason. And there are men who leave their wives for the secretary still, too.

I don't think your translation of 'time' that you came up with is accurate. ('Time' is pronounced something like 'tea May' without the diphthongs that we English speakers aren't conscious of anyway.) That word has to do with valuing, honoring or compensating someone. You may find a lexicon that uses the word 'reverence' if that would make sense in specific contexts. Translation is an art after all, and words between languages do not usually exactly correspond with each other. 'Time' is a different concept than the one carried by the word translated as 'reverence' when wives are told to reverence their husbands.

The word for 'reverence' of husbands is a word that could be translated 'fear.' You fear or reverence God, the king, and wives are to 'fear' or reverence their husbands. 'Fear' sounds negative in English, making us think of trembling afraid that someone will harm us. That's not the way we use the word in the phrase 'fear of God.' It's a type of reverence, and husbands are to reverence their husbands.

It is very important that husbands honor their wives as the weaker vessel. That is an important point, but of course this post was about problems caused by feminism. Feminism may have played a role in men not properly honoring their wives as the weaker vessel.

Honestly, though, in discussions like this on the Internet and in sermon I've heard, I've never seen a Christian man say he should not reverence his wife or love her. But the influence of feminism in our culture has made it hard for women to accept the idea of reverencing their husbands or submit to them. Men carrying out their role is an issue, but it seems like Christian men are generally willing to at least accept the concept. Yet many Christians, even of both genders, have difficulty accepting what scripture requires of wives if they've accepted the Feminist indoctrination they've received, sometimes without realizing they've been indoctrinated.

What if I translated 'submit' as 'care deeply for someone.' We could say, yes, wives should care deeply for their husbands, so that must be a good translation.

But it's not a good translation. While it may be Biblical that wives should care for their husbands, that isnt' what submit means. Submit doesn't mean adapt either. A wife who submits to her husband will have to adapt to him, but she could adapt to him without submitting to him, too.

Someone teaching the passage to husbands and wives should tell husbands to love their wives. But in my experience, much time and effort is spent on this. I may have gone to some churches that were not has heavily 'Fundamentalist' as some of the posters here. But it does seem like some pastors tip-toe around the wives submitting passage. Some, not all, and your church may be different.

Something to notice though is that on a theoretical level, neither Christian men nor women seem to have a problem with the concept of a man loving his wife as Christ loved the church. Living it out is another matter. Loving your neighbor as yourself is anothercommand that we can accept theoretically.

But just as far as accepting what scripture says, many women have difficulty with accepting the truth of the teaching of scripture when it comes to the issue of submission. I can understand the difficulty. When someone teaches on slaves submitting to masters and talks about the importance of submission in 'hired servant' situations at work, that is a difficult topic. Maybe it's a harder issue to actually work out than accept theoretically, but it is still a tough topic. What the Bible actually says about submitting to rulers is difficult, and that may be an area where some preachers and authors will gloss over or make excuses.

When the audience has difficulty accepting what the Bible says, the one teaching the scripture needs to emphasize and explain the teaching. This is the case with wives submitting to husbands. Some preachers do that. Others read the verse and go on to the next topic.

I may have overstated my case in that quote. Reading feedback from other posters, in some churches the issue of widespread rebellion in the home is not addressed. Some churches do address the issue head-on.

Keep in mind also that the woman conditioned by feminism may see loving leadership as selfish domineering. Jesus made Himself the Servant of all, but He still gave orders to His disciples that they obeyed. He told them to go out to preach. He told one of them to go catch a fish. He sent two of them to prepare a room for Passover. He said, "Ye call me Master and Lord, and ye do well, for so I am." His relationship with His disciples was not egalitarian and non-hierarchical. Yet He also washed their feet and died for them.

I do not blame the influence of feminism on women either. From what I've read and interviews I've seen, certain male power-brokers may have actually funded it to get women into the workforce to increase the tax base. So women were 'empowered' to go work, and now it is expected in our culture. Now many women would like to stay home with the kids rather than send them to daycare. Instead, they work all day and then go home and take care of the housework and the kids. So the economic changes have happened, but marriage has become a weaker institution in society, and the philosophy has messed up the order of the home. Children have sufferred from widespread divorce.

Feminism did not create male passivity. But it certain enforces it in our society. Many men feel it is wrong or inappropriate to take a leadership role in the home, or just feel uncomfortable doing it. They haven't seen it themselves, and the idea that they need to take this role hasn't been drilled into them from a young age like feminist thought has.

Men and women are both rebellious in this fallen world. But we are also made in the image of God. You can go to nonChristian societies where people are less familiar with Bible stories than the average American atheist, and find that wives submitting to their husbands is a cultural value, and see wives acting that out. I've lived overseas.

Complaining is a problem. My focus was on the control issue of wives who won't accept leadership because it isn't the way they want it.

Angela53510 · Dec 6, 2013

Nice straw man, presidente. You set it all up, then knocked it down. You have very narrow mindedly created your own definition of feminism and then shown that it is responsible for so many evils and ills in society.

I agree with Proverbs35. The issue we need to look at is not some movement or other, which has done both good and evil, but the effect of sin on both men and women, and on marriages.

I strongly submit that misogyny down through the ages is much more responsible for failed marriages and a society falling into ruin than feminism, which has tried again and again to bring a semblance of reason and justice for both men and women. While modern feminism may be extreme, it is merely an outgrow of centuries of women being used and abused by men who were selfish and self centered, and more physically powerful.

Perhaps some men resent the law no longer allows them to dominate and abuse women in their marriages any more. I think they need to read the Bible and find out that God's justice is very important - it is part of his holiness. When any man breaks the marriage bond, through immorality or abuse, he has violated God's laws, including the promise to care for his wife.

Sadly, feminism is a result of the tyranny of men over women. Even in the Bible, God gave more rights to women than any of the surrounding cultures had. God used women for his glory in both the Old and New Testaments. And women continue to serve God with or without husbands. Men need to stop looking for something to blame for the breakdown in marriage outside themselves and their own sin.

Sin is what breaks marriages, and God's love and grace is what helps restore relationships.

maxwel · Dec 6, 2013

Ya know, we didn't have ANY of these problems
until we started giving women crazy rights...
like going to school.

: )

Conotocarious · Dec 6, 2013

"Feminism" has changed many times over the years. I am not so sure what it means.

Then again, I am not so sure what "Christian" means anymore. It's a dangerous world.

presidente · Dec 6, 2013

Angela53510 said:

If you self-identify as a 'Christian feminist' I suppose you would see what I wrote as a strawman.

One of my concerns about feminism is that it sees patriarchy as evil, and patriarchy is responsible for the woes of women. The Bible presents patriarchy positively. God is the Father. In laws given by God to Israel, fathers give their daughters in marriage. Land is inherited by men (except in the case where a man dies without sons, but women have to marry in their fathers clan to pass lands down to sons again), who use the wealth to care for the women in the households. The Bible tells wives to submit to their husbands. Lamentations also presents women ruling over the people in a negative light, lamenting over it. (Though there was one female judge, Deborah.)

Doesn't feminism see such things as injustice? If the same types of principles are carried out in societies in the modern world, don't feminists have a problem with these types of things? If only men inherited property in a society, wouldn't feminists call that unjust? Or if fathers give daughters away in marriage, don't feminists bristle at the idea?

Sin causes problems for men and women, but there is nothing wrong with pointing out that a certain belief system is incompatible with Christianity and pointing out the problems with it. This thread is about the dangers of Feminism.

I will agree that sinful men hating women is a problem. Sinful women hating men is a problem. Hate within genders is a problem. But the topic here is the dangers of feminism.

One of the problems with feminism is that feminists often label things that are not misogyny as misogyny. God did not have fathers give daughters away in marriage because he hated them. Christ does not want the church to submit to Him because of hatred. He loves the church. Wives are not instructed to submit to their husbands because of hatred. God loves Christian wives. God did not have Israelite inheritance of lands pass down through men because of hatred for women. Calling these types of things 'hatred' or 'misogyny' or 'injustice' is wrong thinking, unbiblical thinking.

I don't think I've ever met a man who has lamented not being able to abuse his wife. Maybe some abusers think that but just don't say it. But I think you really exemplified what it means to build a strawman in that last quote.

I think we are in agreement that a husband is to love his wife, treat her with honor, and be self sacrificial toward her.

If that's the origin of feminism, why by a feminist? It sounds awfully reactionary. Could feminism's origins be a Satanic plot to create more strife between men and women, part of many movements meant to destablize the family in society and hinder Christians from manifesting the glory of Christ in their marriages? Feminism didn't act alone in harming the family. There was also the sexual revolution and numerous other ideas that have contributed.

Are these these same set of rights that feminists consider to be 'justice'? Or does feminism lead one to consider the holy, just, and good laws God gave to be unjust?

One of the problems with feminism is that it created or intensified a man versus woman mentality. The issue here isn't women's sin per se. It's feminism. Some men are feminists, and many men in the west are affected by feminist thought without identifying as feminists. The topic is not specifically women's sin or men's sin, though that can be related, but rather the dangers of feminism.

Love rejoices with the truth. Wrong thinking, wrong doctrine, and wrong doctrine can lead to sin and destroy relationships. Wives not submitting to their husbands is sin. Men can sin by not offering the proper care and leadership. Men can sin by not providing for their wives and in some ways, the influence of feminism has led some men not to take this as seriously.

Angela53510 · Dec 6, 2013

You really have not yet defined feminism yet. I have never considered myself a Christian feminist. I have a husband who I love and respect, and we have had a good, long marriage. But when I read rants like these, I have to reconsider my position.

Men who tilt at windmills often contribute to the demise of chivalry.

I pray we can just stick to the Bible, instead of condemning and judging one another. You have a doctrine here that wreaks of the hierarchical beliefs propagated in some of the more ignorant churches in the south of the US. I studied the takeover of the Southern Baptist Churches in the US, and how this anti-feminist movement was merely a small part of the false doctrine that these leaders preached, and how it infiltrated all the seminaries, demanding the profs sign a confession statement. Some of these excellent theologians and scholars did leave, but others of this movement went on to form societies to teach the oppression of women.

Feminism is not dangerous. It is not a Biblical doctrine. It is merely an attempt to readdress the terrible inequities in society, where men are free to leave their families and continue in ministry, to commit adultery, to put down women as "equal but less".

What remains dangerous is those who do not follow the Bible. When men wake up and realize that feminism is neither a danger or a threat to God, but rather those who make up false doctrines that are contrary to Scripture, are the true danger. Those who use a weak hermeneutic and pull verses out of context (wait, didn't see too many Bible verses in this diatribe!) to make up a doctrine which would be more at home in Roman context, than in the early church.

This is what you need to remember next time you try and make up a tale of the evils of feminism. God will use "whosoever" he will to do his work, to be in ministry, including wives and single women who love God with all their hearts. That means women who are willing to stand against misogyny and the lies of complementarianism.

Try and remember the following verse and apply it to your false doctrine. Because this verse is part of the truth that Christ set us all free!

"There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus." Gal. 3:28

presidente · Dec 7, 2013

Angela53510 said:

I may have gotten you confused with someone else. I apologize if I've mischaracterized your position.

Is pointing out some of the problems with feminist thought condemning people?

Specifically, which doctrine do you take issue with that I have mentioned? Biblically, what problem do you have with it? I listed various statements regarding patriachal aspects of the both Old and New Testament scriptures. Do you find fault with that?

Hierarchy in marriage go back to the creation, with another layer added to at the Fall. It's found in the teachings of the Old and New Testaments. Historically, those who commented on New Testament teachings on marriage held to a hierarchical view before fairly modern times. John Chrysostom knew Greek, and his sermon makes a lot of points that have been made in sermons in modern times, even by preachers who haven't read his sermon, who were reading the same scriptures. He wasn't an 'ignorant' southerner from the United States, either.

I am not familiar with the paper you read. Was it written by a feminist? Specifically, what did they teach that was oppressive to women? Biblically, what was the problem with their doctrine? Is teaching that wives submit to their husbands 'oppressive to women.' Historically, the Southern Baptists have been a conservative denomination. There are forces pushing it toward a more liberal viewpoint, and then there is a backlash pushing it toward a more conservative direction. That was happening several decades ago.

Paul wasn't a feminist, but he taught against adultery and leaving one's spouse. Malachi wasn't a feminist, and he prophesied against men leaving their wives. I've never heard of feminism being specifically focused on men leaving their families and continuing in ministry or committing adultery. That's news to me. I'm sure feminists have opinions on this and ever other topic. One of the main themes of feminism seems to be that there is an evil male dominated system called 'patriarchy' and that patriarchy is evil.

That's the danger of feminism, the areas where it runs contrary to the word of God and diverts people to the word of God. I've mentioned several of these areas in my first post and in later posts. Wives are supposed to submit to their husbands, and feminism has a big problem with that.

I've paraphrased and referred to numerous verses. You can look them up yourself on the Internet can't you? The arguments I've made about the verses make sense in context, too. If you want to discuss something specific or if you see a specific problem with something I've written, feel free to share it.

Every member of the body of Christ, male and female has a role to play. You seem to be creating a false dichotomy, as if someone who believes that what the Torah teaches about gender roles is holy just and good and takes the passage about husband's and wive's duties in Ephesians in I and II Peter doesn't believe that God uses women. Why would that be the case?

Do you think it is a lie to say that men and women have complementary roles? Have you tried having your husband give birth to a baby? it just doesn't work.

You haven't defined misogyny? Was it misogynistic for God to have inheritance pass to males only and not females (unless there were no son in the family? Is it misogynistic to point at that this is in the Bible? Is it misogynistic to tell wives to submit to their husbands?

Like you pointed out earlier, we need to be careful about pulling verses out of context. The context is about being heirs according to the promise. In Acts 22, Paul goes into the temple to perform some ceremonies demonstrate in accordance with James' and the elders' request that he do so to demonstrate that he wasn't teaching Jewish people not to circumcise their children or to forsake the law, though Gentiles were told to abstain from things strangled, and from blood, from fornication, and from meat offered to idols. Paul told slaves to submit to their masters. He told wives to submit to their husbands. Men don't give birth now (fortunately technology hasn't enabled it yet.) Men should not try to marry men or women women.

PoxEclipse · Dec 7, 2013

Ask? Seek? Knock?

This isn't really a feminism post, even though there are related themes...

I really hate voicing my opinions as it opens me up to abuse/ridicule by my 'brothers/sisters' which I am quite content not to experience, but this topic has been on my mind for a few weeks now so I guess I'll chance it. I am not attacking anyone else's posts or ideas as I haven't read them yet, so please show me the same courtesy. You are all free to believe and think what you like.

These ideas are not an accepted Biblical, Scriptural, or Doctrinal take on men and women, however, I do believe these ideas to be sound and HOLY.

A few thoughts on men versus women...

Men tend to be dominant, women submissive. Men violent, women nurturing/caring. Men prideful and arrogant, women humble?

Obviously these are not 'set in stone' traits for we all know there are exceptions to most every rule.

Let's look at examples and traits set by the Father and Son.

Truth, love, patience, humility, caring, kindness, compassion, wisdom...

So often I hear that men are the leaders, lords of the household, women should turn to the husband for guidance, women should remain silent in church...dare I say, women should walk ten paces behind the man and in his shadow as well?

Since when did man become God? Since when was man ever able to replace God's wisdom, understanding, and teaching ability?

Why on earth would any woman choose to look to a man for leadership or guidance instead of the Father?

I have a simple answer...men, being deceived by the enemy, felt the need to enslave their own brothers, as well as their wives throughout history. It's a matter of deception, vanity, pride and arrogance. Men bought into the lie and actually believe that they are 'ALL THAT', and that they can do a better job than the Father in their arrogance.

Why haven't the men pointed the women toward the Father for guidance?

Why haven't the women figured this out on their own?

Societal conditioning, or brainwashing if you prefer. It really is a lesson that takes a lot of time to learn, how to turn to the Father instead of man. Even men looked to other men for guidance (Kings/Presidents...Pastors), and they still do in their folly. Why should women be any different, especially considering the fact that if women should actually start to think for themselves, they would quickly be 'put back in their place' by the ever so wise men who 'Lord' authority over them?

Consider the woman, sorrowful in the extreme, prostrating herself at Christ's feet, humble, loving...consider also the other men present. (Luke 7:36-50)

Men, it's time to stop with the power trips, it's time to give up on trying to play God, we're not good at it and we never have been. It's time to help women seek the Father on their own if you truly care about them. Just because the genitalia are different doesn't make women any less or weaker spiritually than a man. Help reverse the deception/brainwashing that we've helped to psychologically traumatize them with. In fact, if one were to match up the men's/women's traits next to God's, you might just find that they really are more Godly than us.

Women, it's time to start taking responsibility for your own walk and stop looking to a bunch of prideful, know-it-all idiots (men) for your spiritual guidance. You can read for yourself, you can pray for yourself, you can seek and knock just fine on your own, you don't need a man to interpret God's will for you...because let's face facts, as a general rule, men are completely clueless and just as brainwashed as you are by their own man-masters.

It's time to break the cycle of stupidity. It's time to tell the enemy that you aren't going to play his game anymore. It's time to start thinking for yourselves. Forget what you know or thought you knew. The chances are...it's all been lies that people have taught to you, believing it to be a truth.

Everyone, seek the Father for yourself. No one is going to take your place at the judgment, everyone here is PERSONALLY RESPONSIBLE to OUR HEAVENLY FATHER for their thoughts and actions. If you want to impress and obey someone, impress HIM!
Remember ladies, if your husband is wrong, and you follow his advice/guidance, it's not going to cut it with the Father. You'd better start doing your own homework (spiritually speaking).

Also, don't take my word for anything, these are just the nonsensical ramblings of a fool on the other side of your screen.

Luke 7

[SUP]36 [/SUP]Now one of the Pharisees was requesting Him to [SUP][aa][/SUP]dine with him, and He entered the Pharisee’s house and reclined at the table. [SUP]37 [/SUP]And there was a woman in the city who was a [SUP][ab][/SUP]sinner; and when she learned that He was reclining at the table in the Pharisee’s house, she brought an alabaster vial of perfume, [SUP]38 [/SUP]and standing behind Him at His feet, weeping, she began to wet His feet with her tears, and kept wiping them with the hair of her head, and kissing His feet and anointing them with the perfume. [SUP]39 [/SUP]Now when the Pharisee who had invited Him saw this, he said to himself, “If this man were a prophet He would know who and what sort of person this woman is who is touching Him, that she is a [SUP][ac][/SUP]sinner.”

Parable of Two Debtors

[SUP]40 [/SUP]And Jesus answered him, “Simon, I have something to say to you.” And he [SUP][ad][/SUP]replied, “Say it, Teacher.” [SUP]41 [/SUP]“A moneylender had two debtors: one owed five hundred [SUP][ae][/SUP]denarii, and the other fifty. [SUP]42 [/SUP]When they were unable to repay, he graciously forgave them both. So which of them will love him more?” [SUP]43 [/SUP]Simon answered and said, “I suppose the one whom he forgave more.” And He said to him, “You have judged correctly.” [SUP]44 [/SUP]Turning toward the woman, He said to Simon, “Do you see this woman? I entered your house; you gave Me no water for My feet, but she has wet My feet with her tears and wiped them with her hair. [SUP]45 [/SUP]You gave Me no kiss; but she, since the time I came in, has not ceased to kiss My feet. [SUP]46 [/SUP]You did not anoint My head with oil, but she anointed My feet with perfume. [SUP]47 [/SUP]For this reason I say to you, her sins, which are many, have been forgiven, for she loved much; but he who is forgiven little, loves little.” [SUP]48 [/SUP]Then He said to her, “Your sins have been forgiven.” [SUP]49 [/SUP]Those who were reclining at the table with Him began to say [SUP][af][/SUP]to themselves, “Who is this man who even forgives sins?” [SUP]50 [/SUP]And He said to the woman, “Your faith has saved you; go in peace.”

Rachel20 · Dec 7, 2013

presidente said:

Interesting.

I have a question..

As it is mentioned in the Bible, are you alright with slavery? If slavery was legal, would you still espouse it?

The Bible does have verses about the conduct of slaves and masters.

I know this is about women and submission to their husbands, but I just want to see whether the same logic would apply here.

Rachel20 · Dec 7, 2013

Also about dangers of feminism -

Do we talk about dangers such as women being educated, receiving the right to vote, equal pay for equal work, criminalization of prostitution, sexual harrassment laws, rape laws, violence against women?

Oh btw, do you guys know about acid attacks on women? Acid throwing is almost done solely on women.

Acid throwing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Here's a link about the story of a woman, who wanted to pursue further education but was opposed to, by her fiance.

I guess she didn't submit to his will.

Women survivors of acid attacks: She is Beautiful... | Women's WorldWide Web

There are more pictures of victims of acid attacks.

How dare she think about education and trying to earn money?

How dare she even think about gaining respect or trying to earn a living by herself?

How dare she even think she could be equal in any way to a man?

Isn't she a sub human being?

Is she equal in the eyes of God?

She's equal in only some ways. She dies....

Rachel20 · Dec 7, 2013

I apologize if these pictures disturb you.

They made me cry. I think they are very beautiful and courageous women to agree to be photographed.

And I think their stories are worth listening to.

God bless you and much love.

I hope if I have hurt anyone by this, they will forgive me, their sister in Christ.

presidente · Dec 7, 2013

Rachel20 said:

I am sorry to see what happened to the women in the pictures. That's a horrific thing for someone to do to someone else. You do know, don't you, that Christians who are not feminists are against prostitution, rape, sexual harassment, and violence against women? Christians with a traditional, historical interpretation of the scripture on marriage oppose these things, too.

presidente · Dec 7, 2013

Rachel20 said:

I wouldn't want to see the return of slavery, but the book of Revelation makes me suspect that it is on it's way back. Be that as it may, when slavery was legal, it was possible to the a righteous, loving person and still be a slave-owner, as we see from the book of Philemon. Philemon was a man who loved the brethren, and owned a slave. Americans and Europeans have a specific history with slavery remembering a type of slavery that was race based, unlike in the Grecco-Roman world. Slaves were brought over from Africa in horrific conditions in which many died, and there is a very dark history regarding slavery in the west. The freeing of slaves in the west a century and a half ago may have come largely in response to the prayers of slaves for freedom.

I also acknowledge that the law of God is holy, just, and good. I do not find God or the Bible at fault for what the Bible says about slavery.

Rachel20 · Dec 7, 2013

Are you speaking for all Christians?

I've been viewing this thread, and I've seen quite a few posts which say women should submit to their husbands no matter what the violence is committed against her, and that if she resists this, she's succumbing to satanic influences of feminism.

Feminism is thought as satanic.

I am going to again rely on a definition by wikipedia.

Feminism is a collection of movements and ideologies aimed at defining, establishing, and defending equal, political, economic, and social rights for women.

Is this definition a problem to Christians?

I understand there might be issues that arise, because non Christian feminists seem to propage radical sexualization and reversal of gender roles in the family.

I think Christian women should stand up for Christ, the truth and what God expects from us and BOTH Christian men and women should stand up for people who are marginalized and despised.

However we're talking about dangers of feminism and equality.

Do you consider women to be less equal than men?

Rachel20 · Dec 7, 2013

presidente said:

So since slavery was considered legal in the Bible, as Christians, if a situation does arise that slavery returns,should we be quiet and not support the uprising and seeking of slaves for freedom?

I also believe God is just , holy and good.

He delivered Israel, that was in slavery from Egypt.

He delivers and expects us to address oppression

Isaiah 1:17

Learn to do good; seek justice, correct oppression; bring justice to the fatherless, plead the widow's cause.

He is awesome.

Psalm 9:9

The Lord is a stronghold for the oppressed, a stronghold in times of trouble.

secularhermit · Dec 7, 2013

I've liked you have balnaced the O.T. and the N.T.

secularhermit · Dec 7, 2013

alexis said:

Wow, Lexi! I wish my daughter be so smart as you are.

God gives men and women instructions and, in the male case, man has to secure home security, job and housing. Of course, on the other side, he has to be smart enough, because some men concentrate too much on job, and have lost the emotional bond (and that side) of marriage.

Dangers of Feminism

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Conotocarious

Guest

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Banned

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Banned

Banned