Dangers of Feminism

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
A

AgeofKnowledge

Guest
God wants all people to be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth. That includes feminists.

It's true that I can only explain it but I can't make them understand it; however, God can and some eventually will leaving behind the heresy and false teachers and coming to a genuine knowledge of truth.

I shall do my part, God will do His part, they just need to do their part. :)

1 Timonthy 2:3-4 "...and pleases God our Savior who wants all people to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth."


You are wasting your time! Let Jesus deal with them at the Great White Throne of Judgment.
 

Misty77

Senior Member
Aug 30, 2013
1,746
45
0
genesis 3
16Then he said to the woman,“I will sharpen the pain of your pregnancy,and in pain you will give birth.And you will desire to control your husband,
but he will rule over you.


That is an incorrect translation. The verse states, "Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you. "

TO RULE (as in your desire will be TO RULE OVER your husband) has been added erroneously for generations. The same wording is used in Song of Solomon regarding romantic longings between the two of them. Literally, the curse is the prevalence of domestic violence because women will love their husbands, but the husbands will use that to lord over them.
 
Last edited:
B

biscuit

Guest
God wants all people to be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth. That includes feminists.

It's true that I can only explain it but I can't make them understand it; however, God can and some eventually will leaving behind the heresy and false teachers and coming to a genuine knowledge of truth.

I shall do my part, God will do His part, they just need to do their part. :)

1 Timonthy 2:3-4 "...and pleases God our Savior who wants all people to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth."
Good Luck !!

"And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet." (Matthew 10:14)
 
A

AgeofKnowledge

Guest
It wasn't until the fall that God states in Genesis 3:16 to Eve that "...your desire will be for your husband, And he will 'rule' (Hebrew יִמְשָׁל־) over you."

"Rule over" a different Hebrew and context with a different meaning than that used in say Genesis 1:28 in which humanity is told to "subdue" (Hebrew wוְכִבְשֻׁ֑הָ) and have "dominion" (Hebrew hוּרְד֞וּ) over the earth.

It is more meaningfully translated in Hebrew as, "You are turning away [from God!] to your husband, and [as a result] he will rule over you [take advantage of you]."

The verb contains a simple statement of futurity; there is not one hint of obligation or normativity in this verb. It's best viewed as a statement that is part of a cursed existence because of sin until Christ’s redemptive work frees human beings from the curse of Eden.

Now I realize many state that this is reaffirming the chain of authority (God—man—woman) established at creation but reversed at the fall; however, I don't see that at all in the Hebrew and would remind those who assert this that a key element in Jesus’ approach was his argument that God’s original intention for humankind was a monogamous relationship of equals, as depicted in the Old Testament creation stories (Gen. 1:27, where women and men are both ‘made in God’s image’) clearly implying that God regarded exploitation of one by the other as part of the fallen world, and not integral to the order of creation.

That said, later in the Bible God does affirm a job subordination within the marriage relationship complete with the so-called household codes (Col. 3:18–4:1; Eph. 5:22–6:9; 1 Pet. 2:18–3:7; 1 Tim. 2:8–15; 6:1–2; Titus 2:1–10) in which the husband is answerable to God for the well-being of his wife and family. These align roughly to the conventional, hierarchical family structures of the ancient world.

Of course, as one would expect, there has been considerable debate about the significance of these codes and I'm sure we'll argue them here at some point... lol.

But Misty77 is correct that "rule over" in Genesis 3:16 does NOT have a patriarchal meaning which so many in their ignorance wrongly say that it does.
 
B

biscuit

Guest
But Misty77 is correct that "rule over" in Genesis 3:16 does NOT have a patriarchal meaning which so many in their ignorance wrongly say that it does.

I won't debate with you a bible verse that is self explanatory and implied into God's institution of marriage for nearly 6000 years and it is universal. Even primitive tribes that never knew God followed the biblical verse out of innate & instinctive beliefs. I guess Misty has gotten to you and wearing you down. Nevertheless, have a blessed day.
 
A

AgeofKnowledge

Guest
I sense a "bad experience" somewhere in your past with regards to feminists biscuit due to your heightened emotional state with regards to the topic.

Of course, many men today have that in their past what with the "no fault" divorces, twice a month visits with their kids (if they're lucky), reduced to near poverty and isolation as walking human wallets after the divorce, etc..

I had this one friend who was an engineer at an aerospace company and his wife filed a "no fault" divorce in which she claimed a lot of things that were true against him in order to get as much out of him as humanly possible so she could spent it with a younger "boy toy" she had fallen into adultery with.

The poor guy never even saw it coming until the paperwork was filed.

He ended up renting a room and living in poverty seeing his kids every other weekend (if that was convenient for the adulteress, of course). His money paid for the bed and house the "boy toy" slept in with the ex-wife, the ex-wife's car the "boy toy" tooled her around in at night to different bars to party, alimony for the bar tab and other expenses, etc...

I was like "wow!" I'm a Christian so only defend violence in cases of self-defense, just war, death penalty for murder, etc... not as a tool of personal revenge but I can kind of understand on a purely sinful human level how some guys just *snap* under all that stress.

They end up in the news, on liveleak, etc...


Good Luck !!

"And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet." (Matthew 10:14)
 
B

biscuit

Guest
I sense a "bad experience" somewhere in your past with regards to feminists biscuit due to your heightened emotional state with regards to the topic.

Of course, many men today have that in their past what with the "no fault" divorces, twice a month visits with their kids (if they're lucky), reduced to near poverty and isolation as walking human wallets after the divorce, etc..

I had this one friend who was an engineer at an aerospace company and his wife filed a "no fault" divorce in which she claimed a lot of things that were true against him in order to get as much out of him as humanly possible so she could spent it with a younger "boy toy" she had fallen into adultery with.

The poor guy never even saw it coming until the paperwork was filed.

He ended up renting a room and living in poverty seeing his kids every other weekend (if that was convenient for the adulteress, of course). His money paid for the bed and house the "boy toy" slept in with the ex-wife, the ex-wife's car the "boy toy" tooled her around in at night to different bars to party, alimony for the bar tab and other expenses, etc...

I was like "wow!" I'm a Christian so only defend violence in cases of self-defense, just war, death penalty for murder, etc... not as a tool of personal revenge but I can kind of understand on a purely sinful human level how some guys just *snap* under all that stress.

They end up in the news, on liveleak, etc...
Just based on the bible and not bending it, stretching it or modifying it. Never been married, no children, paying no alimony, no child support, never went to jail over a woman. When it comes to women, my slate is squeaky clean and many are very fond of me.. I just don't care for posters mocking God and feminists are among the worst of the bunch.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
A

AgeofKnowledge

Guest
Sorry, but I aced all the Hebrew courses at seminary finishing my M.Div. with honors and have access to all of the reputable scholarly materials and commentary. The patriarchal assertion in Genesis 3:16 is not there and all of the top seminary trained reputable bible scholars are in agreement that it's not there.


I won't debate with you a bible verse that is self explanatory and implied into God's institution of marriage for nearly 6000 years and it is universal. Even primitive tribes that never knew God followed the biblical verse out of innate & instinctive beliefs. I guess Misty has gotten to you and wearing you down. Nevertheless, have a blessed day.
 
A

AgeofKnowledge

Guest
In post #386, change "that were true against him" to "that were NOT true against him." Typo.
 
B

biscuit

Guest
Sorry, but I aced all the Hebrew courses at seminary finishing my M.Div. with honors and have access to all of the reputable scholarly materials and commentary. The patriarchal assertion in Genesis 3:16 is not there and all of the top seminary trained reputable bible scholars are in agreement that it's not there.
There are just as many who will disagree with you with the same credentials. When it comes to man and his interpretations of the bible, nothing is set in stone, as we see with the "rapture." Heard plenty of women on many secular boards who stated that a man is the ruler of the household and want him to lead and they would follow him. I wouldn't marry a woman who thought otherwise. many men are living in poverty because they didn't do their homework when it came to feminism and got burned. I knew what they were about at the age of 16 and avoided such types, but many of my friends just get swallowed up by it. Feminism is alive & well because a "sucker is born every minute," and these feminists know they have an adequate supply of men to continue their evil practice. The good news is this evil practice will be short-lived because Jesus is returning home and will separate his sheeps from the goats. The goats will be tossed in the "lake of fire."
 
Last edited by a moderator:
A

AgeofKnowledge

Guest
Name some so I can qualify their credentials in ancient Hebrew with their quotations of Genesis 3:16 in which they state "rule over" has a patriarchal meaning.

I'm not going to misrepresent scripture for you, Misty, or anyone else. I know what Genesis 3:16 says in ancient Hebrew.

Now you've made an assertion with respect to reputable seminary trained theologians in ancient Hebrew asserting that the ancient Hebrew in Genesis 3:16 makes a patriarchal assertion so prove it.

There are just as many who will disagree with you with the same credentials.
 
B

biscuit

Guest
Name some so I can qualify their credentials in ancient Hebrew with their quotations of Genesis 3:16 in which they state "rule over" has a patriarchal meaning.

I'm not going to misrepresent scripture for you, Misty, or anyone else. I know what Genesis 3:16 says in ancient Hebrew.

Now you've made an assertion with respect to reputable seminary trained theologians in ancient Hebrew asserting that the ancient Hebrew in Genesis 3:16 makes a patriarchal assertion so prove it.
Prove what !! that trained theologian in Hebrew interpretation have a finally say when it come to Bible verses. SMH!! You should have told that to the Jewish Sanhedrin with their Hebrew scholars that Jesus was God in the flesh, which they miserably failed to interpret with their Hebrew bible. The problem isn't with the bible, it is man himself. Try again!
 
A

AgeofKnowledge

Guest
I can't find any properly cited scholarly sources in your last post to qualify asserting Genesis 3:16 implements patriarchy. Here are examples of what properly cited sources look like:

“'Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you'” (Genesis 3:16) does not announce God’s created design for a male hierarchy. Rather these words announce a cursed existence because of a broken relationship between the human creation and the Creator. A restricted place for woman, and male-over-female dominance, is thus not divine purpose but an expression of human sin.

Kaiser, W. C., Jr., Davids, P. H., Bruce, F. F., & Brauch, M. T. (1996). Hard sayings of the Bible (666). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity.

"Solidarity is to be replaced by struggle, tyranny and the desire for domination by one partner over the other (Genesis 3:16). The battle of the sexes is begun, the woman’s desire to control the husband, the man’s to master her. Mutuality turns to superiority and inferiority.

This sexual power struggle had developed into theological heresy by New Testament times. Forms of Gnosticism spoke of systems of intermediate beings who bridged the gap between God and man. Some spoke of women as these intermediaries and of Eve as the bringer of both light and life, the mediatrix who brought divine enlightenment to mankind. Some even embellished the Genesis accounts and sometimes gave Eve a prior existence in which she consorted with the celestial beings.

Paul’s prohibition against women teachers in 1 Timothy 2:11–15 had such groups in mind. The heretics had led astray ‘weak-willed women’ (2 Timothy 3:6), even forbidding marriage (1 Timothy 4:3). In opposing them, Paul reminds the whole church, not just women, of the sole mediatorship of Christ (1 Timothy 2:5–9).

Adam, he continues, was created first rather than Eve; and Eve, far from being an instrument of light, was deluded (1 Timothy 2:13–14). No-one, he argues, has a privileged position with God on the basis of gender."

Ferguson, S. B., & Packer, J. (2000). New dictionary of theology (258). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.

See how this works? You find reputable Bible scholars trained in ancient Hebrew at the best seminaries and then you cite what they have to say with respect to Genesis 3:16 asserting patriarchy or the lack of it in this case because Genesis 3:16 does not assert patriarchy.

I hope you find this instructional.
 

sc81

Senior Member
Dec 17, 2013
152
0
0
That is an incorrect translation. The verse states, "Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you. "

TO RULE (as in your desire will be TO RULE OVER your husband) has been added erroneously for generations. The same wording is used in Song of Solomon regarding romantic longings between the two of them. Literally, the curse is the prevalence of domestic violence because women will love their husbands, but the husbands will use that to lord over them.
well it's convenient you pick and choose your translations to fit your beliefs, but you're implying only women desire men which isn't true. Men have much more desire for women since they are almost always the initiators in pursuing. It's nothing to do with domestic violence.
 
Jan 18, 2014
193
2
0
I love how people of the same faith argue over intricate translations to satisfy their personal needs. If you ever want proof that morality does not need the bible it's situations like this. Simple fact. People should be equal. Partners. Not one ruling over the other. Get into the 21st Century People!!!
 
A

AgeofKnowledge

Guest
Do you often find yourself driving by and yelling stuff out the window at people as you go by? How does this qualify as deep thought? Lol.

I love how people of the same faith argue over intricate translations to satisfy their personal needs. If you ever want proof that morality does not need the bible it's situations like this. Simple fact. People should be equal. Partners. Not one ruling over the other. Get into the 21st Century People!!!
 
A

AmberGardner

Guest
The violence is not between Adam and Eve, the violence is between satan and the woman, and his seed and her seed.

Genesis 3:15 And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel."
 
Jan 18, 2014
193
2
0
Please excuse my passion but I know far too many intelligent woman who are persecuted into a position of servitude due to the chains of religion. This is not a diveby preaching, rather a gasp of utter frustration that in this day and age, such matters are still up for question. These are not questions for a civilised culture. The answer should be plain for all.
 
A

AmberGardner

Guest
Genesis 3:16 To the woman he said, "I will make your pains in childbearing very severe; with painful labor you will give birth to children. Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you."
I'm saying that this verse doesn't mention violence. It's stating that as a result of her sin, labor pains will be worse than God originally intended, and that Adam will have authority over his wife as a result of her sin. And he gets this authority for her protection. It's lovely. Instead of throwing Eve in hell for her sin, he gave her children and a husband to protect her. He had mercy on her, but not on satan.

Genesis 3:14 So the LORD God said to the serpent, "Because you have done this, "Cursed are you above all livestock and all wild animals! You will crawl on your belly and you will eat dust all the days of your life.
He did not have mercy on satan, and satan hates the woman and her offspring.

Genesis 3:15 And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel."
 
L

lioncub

Guest
Dangers of Feminism

There are several ways in which Feminism has hurt Christian marriages and families and society. Feminism is deeply rooted in western thought, certainly American thought. Men and women both are influenced by it. It is an implicit assumption in TV shows and movies and children are exposed to it through the school system.

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. Peter illustrates how a wife should obey her husband, pointing to Sarah who 'obeyed Abraham calling him lord.' Women effected by Feminism may bristle at these teaches. Some men do as well. Some Feminists have tried to reinterpret the meanings of Greek words to make the text more palatable. For example, they may try to find references to 'kephale', translated 'head' seem to mean 'source, and just ignore that more authoritarian references to the use of the word in Ancient Greek. 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.

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.

I've heard Ephesians 5 taught from the pulpit before. It seems like this is a typical treatment of the passage in some types of churches.

"This verse tells wives to submit to their own husbands. Well, I know we've all heard a lot of preaching about that over the years. You'll notice that the Bible has a much longer section for husbands, and they have the great responsibility to love their wives as Christ loves the church."

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.

That's the type of thing I've heard in church on the subject. The churches aren't really pointing out the widespread rebellion in the home as many wives rule the roost. Feminism has conditioned men to be passive and not take up their leadership role. Many women crave their husbands to lead--something innate that Feminism hasn't erased-- but Feminism has conditioned them not to submit, either. 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.

Radical feminism has put forth some really poisonous ideas. Some Feminists have described marriage as if it were prostitution. No fault divorce is seen as a somewhat positive thing. Radical Feminists working in various social services can cause damage with their anti-male, anti-family thinking. Many of the homes for abused women have feminist literature. Back in the 1980's, as a teen, I had a relative who spent some time in one of these homes, not because her husband was violent, but because he went through a brief period of mental instability that scared her. I read some of the literature from there. One pamphlet argued that once a man is an abuser, he is always an abuser. Of course, women are encouraged to stay away from their abusers. 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.

Also, there is a study that indicated that a certain percentage of cases where a man hits his partner happen after she has hit him repeatedly over a long period of time, and he hits her on a one-off occasion. Abuse is a serious problem, and there are networks set up to help abused women. But abused men have no network to rely on and law enforcement may not take it seriously.

There is also the problem that 'abuse' is an ever-widening term. If you look at some of the domestic violence center websites, the long list of behaviors that are counted as 'abuse' include a man using 'logic' on his wife. Quoting scripture about wives submitting to their husbands is also listed among 'abusive' behaviors. This is particularly bad. No doubt this was added to the list by someone who dislikes those part of the Bible. There may be abusers who do quote scripture when it suits their ends, but so do the righteous, who seek to have marriages in accordance with God's word.

Then there are pastors who have added abuse as grounds for divorce, and even remarriage. This isn't mentioned in scripture as justification to find a new spouse. If a pastor says to leave a spouse if their is 'abuse' and the definition of 'abuse' has been expanded to include reminding a wife of what the Bible teaches wives to do, that's a sad thing. Most of us think of physical abuse when we hear 'abuse', but the definition has been widened. Pastors need to be careful how they address the issue.

One philosophy coming from radical Feminists several years ago was that all men are abusers or potential abusers. That's not a very beneficial way of thinking.

Also, some radical feminists will throw the word 'rape' around quite freely. Instead of referring to forced sex, the definition of 'rape' is expanded to include cases where a woman felt some sort of pressure to have sex, even if she agreed to it. So in a marriage, reminding a wife of her duty to give 'due benevolence' could be labeled 'rape' as happened on a recent thread.

As believers, we need to love the word of God. We also need to be wary of the so-called wisdom of this present age. We should evaluate philosophies based on the word of God and reject what opposed God's word. 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. The law is holy, just, and good. We also see that God wants wives to submit to their husbands and for husbands to love their wives as Christ loved the church. We need to be careful not to reject the Lord's teaching because of some philosophy we picked up growing up. If we want to have marriages that please God, we need to follow His word.
Agreed. Also, feminism makes marriage a dubious prospect to begin with. The thought of marrying a rebellious Christian woman is a real turn-off for men. Christian women need to wake up and be prepared to submit according to God's word, otherwise they make themselves an unattractive prospect for marriage.
 
Last edited by a moderator: