ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2016 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Sunday, July 17, 2016

The black art of theology

Dalrock observes the evolution of Christian complementarianism:
From the beginning complementarianism has been an effort to split the difference with Christian feminists (egalitarians).  This comes naturally from their belief that feminism isn’t a manifestation of the same discontent that caused Eve to want to be like God in the garden of Eden.  Instead, complementarians see feminism as a misguided (but entirely understandable) rebellion caused by the provocation of cruel men.

Complementarians believe if they are nice enough to women, feminist rebellion will go away as the reason for the rebellion is thereby withdrawn (examples here and here).  This requires compromise when Scripture offends feminists, and this has lead complementarians to invent novel interpretations of Scripture.  But this compromise is by no means a one time deal.  The compromises of yesterday become the starting position for bargaining today, and today’s new compromise will become the starting point for bargaining tomorrow.

We can see this with the complementarian position on spiritual headship.  Complementarians had to find an interpretation for Ephesians 5:26-27** that formally set them apart from egalitarians but caused minimal offense to feminists.  But no amount of compromise with feminists will actually avoid offending feminists, and this has lead to multiple complementarian stances on the topic of spiritual headship.

In the latest CBMW quarterly journal David Croteau describes the two predominant complementarian compromises on spiritual headship, and then proposes rejecting the concept of spiritual headship altogether.
Theology: the art of convincing Christians that the Bible doesn't mean what it says and God doesn't want them to do what the Bible tells them to do.

And any woman who identifies herself as a "feminist" - or man, for that matter - should be expelled from the Church, no hesitation, no debate, no questions asked. Feminism is observably less compatible with Christianity than Satanism or Islam.

Labels:

115 Comments:

Blogger Johnny July 17, 2016 8:09 AM  

What has become obvious to me is that feminism is not about men. The thing is inward looking. It is about the inward dynamic of the women who are feminist acting out. Plus now the formal movement has been corrupted by the lefty political agenda.

Perhaps the more modest feminist views can be reconciled with the Bible, but surely not the current and more radical ones.

Anonymous Eduardo July 17, 2016 8:11 AM  

Don't be so rough with Theology Vox XD!

U___U you and your rhetorical savyness.



Blogger Orville July 17, 2016 8:25 AM  

As Christians we believe we are created in the image of God. Yet, we are not complementary to God. We don't complete him. He is complete in and of himself with no need for us at all. Marriage is patterned after the relationship between Christ (God) and the church (man). Therefore marriage is not complementary at all, and men should make no exceptions to women.

Blogger Kyle Searle July 17, 2016 8:39 AM  

@Johnny,

Nonsense, modern feminism is entirely about female lesbians trying to make women more masculine. Take a look at Gender Trouble by Butler for example, which is pretty much the founding basis for 3rd wave feminism (i.e. the notion that gender is separate from sex). Then google Bulter. Feminism takes the successful model of masculinity, and makes women follow it, and simultaneous tries to make men more feminine. There's no femininity-centric model anywhere in feminism. It's just that the best leaders women have are masculine lesbians who were exposed to too much androgens in the womb.



Anonymous Eric the Red July 17, 2016 8:58 AM  

Feminism of any kind has no built-in limits.
It is unconstrained, it will always want something more.
It is evil.

Anonymous The OASF July 17, 2016 9:01 AM  

The end product of Feminism is global genocide. When women are taken out of their very specific roles in culture and Society they collectively begin the drive to annihilate everything around them, including & specifically life itself. And because our institutions are filled with men who constitute The Brood of extreme left-wing hypocrites, cuckservatives, false Christian-churchians, Neoconservatives, "Libertarians" etc. Etc. Etc. they are succeeding.

It's no wonder feminism is so popular with the Satanic order.

Anonymous MK July 17, 2016 9:07 AM  

"The best feminine movement is the waddle."
Millôr Fernandes (Brazilian writer)





Blogger Human Animal July 17, 2016 9:08 AM  

If Feminism was about reconciling with Reality, it would be called Science.

Blogger Durandel Almiras July 17, 2016 9:38 AM  

Feminism and Marxism both need to be formerly recognized as heresies. By preaching an equality outside the bounds of sonship with God, they fundamentally reject God's creation and in turn reject God as Lord.

But good luck convincing the Church hierarchy, especially Francis.

Blogger Mr.MantraMan July 17, 2016 9:47 AM  

IMO it is best to discredit and disqualify the insane instead of trying to debate the insane.

But then again the fraud that is conservatism just loves the charade of fruitless debate with the insane, pass it off as "True conservative opposition to the authority of the Left" then hustle the masses for money.

Blogger Cail Corishev July 17, 2016 9:48 AM  

@4 You may be right about the source of "third wave feminism," but that's not what Dalrock is writing about. He's talking about the feminism that infests Christian churches today, often including very traditional, orthodox ones. This "Christian feminism" is more subtle than the Hollywood variety, but no less adamant about its dogmas. It often manifests in women who are quite feminine and embrace marriage and motherhood, even being submissive to their husbands most of the time; but it always, always finds a way to make the wife the ultimate head of the family.

In service of that point, they will torture logic to the point of saying a wife can best be a helpmate to her husband by providing him with honey-do lists (whether he asked or not), and that a husband can best sanctify his wife by following her spiritual lead. They will write thousands of words explaining why a single verse of scripture doesn't mean what it says, in order to reconcile the Christian model of the family with their insistence that no woman should ever have to obey her husband when she doesn't want to.

Blogger Skylark Thibedeau July 17, 2016 9:49 AM  

Feminism is the worship of Ishtar/Astarte. I'm surprised the Churchians aren't installing Asherah Poles in place of the Cross to placate them.

Blogger Leo Little Book July 17, 2016 9:59 AM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Leo Little Book July 17, 2016 9:59 AM  

I used the Nice massacre as my Churchian shibboleth today. But "Are you a feminist" sounds better.

Blogger LES July 17, 2016 10:20 AM  

Strange. Feminists reject the curse God put on Eve. They want the curse God put on Adam.

Blogger LES July 17, 2016 10:24 AM  

Genesis 3
16 To the woman He said:

“I will greatly multiply your sorrow and your conception;
In pain you shall bring forth children;
Your desire shall be for your husband,
And he shall rule over you.”
17 Then to Adam He said, “Because you have heeded the voice of your wife, and have eaten from the tree of which I commanded you, saying, ‘You shall not eat of it’:

“Cursed is the ground for your sake;
In toil you shall eat of it
All the days of your life.
18 Both thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you,
And you shall eat the herb of the field.
19 In the sweat of your face you shall eat bread
Till you return to the ground,
For out of it you were taken;
For dust you are,
And to dust you shall return.”

Blogger Escoffier July 17, 2016 10:24 AM  

Johnny wrote:What has become obvious to me is that feminism is not about men. The thing is inward looking. It is about the inward dynamic of the women who are feminist acting out. Plus now the formal movement has been corrupted by the lefty political agenda.

Perhaps the more modest feminist views can be reconciled with the Bible, but surely not the current and more radical ones.


Which part of rebellion is modest Johnny?

Blogger Phillip George July 17, 2016 10:24 AM  

Sarah, who obeyed Abraham and called him her lord.

...I'd turn this into a joke if I could but Barbara Eden calling her Master Master must have been one of the most endearing images from Childhood.
"Yes Master".

Maybe no one will remember it but Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton did a remarkable job of Shakespeare's Taming of the Shrew.\
Infact 400 years after it was written I'm still using it as a manual,

1,2 and 3 are all ancient images. Why is that? "Our /“Our ancestors have inherited only lies, vanity," refers to the suffragette disgrace among other things.

Blogger GracieLou July 17, 2016 10:28 AM  

I find the best theology comes from exorcists. They don't sugarcoat hard truths. The Fr. Chad Ripperger videos are particularly good. http://youtu.be/G8fZxrlqk2g

He says feminism is a cancer and a manifestation of female spiritual disorder. It causes extreme unhappiness in women and is a grave injustice to children.

Another point he makes is that the spiritual realm is ordered, it respects authority, and is hierarchical. A man's authority over his wife offers her spiritual protection. When a woman steps outside her husband's authority she sets herself up for diabolical attack. This is similar to how children who step outside parental authority tend to get run over by trucks.

I've seen this play out in my own life. I can't think of one time when my husband adamantly told me to do or not do something that I did or failed to do that didn't end in disaster. Even little things like, "Don't use the garbage disposal, we have septic." And I'm like, it's just a little eggshell...$300 later...

Blogger Escoffier July 17, 2016 10:29 AM  

Kierkegaard had the complementarians # way back in the mid 1800's. (I know I post this a lot but I truly love this quote and how it skewers the Churchian faith)

“The matter is quite simple. The Bible is very easy to understand. But we Christians are a bunch of scheming swindlers. We pretend to be unable to understand it because we know very well that the minute we understand we are obliged to act accordingly. Take any words in the New Testament and forget everything except pledging yourself to act accordingly. My God, you will say, if I do that my whole life will be ruined. How would I ever get on in this world? Herein lies the real place of Christian scholarship. Christian scholarship is the Church’s prodigious invention to defend itself against the Bible, to ensure that we can continue to be good Christians without the Bible coming too close. Oh, priceless scholarship, what would we do without you? Dreadful it is to fall into the hands of the living God. Yes, it is even dreadful to be alone with the New Testament.

Anonymous Wyrd July 17, 2016 10:45 AM  

But-but-but Jesus said thou shalt be nice is the whole of the Law, didn't He?

Anonymous E.R. July 17, 2016 10:48 AM  

I'm not sure whether I should judge a movement by one fool or cleave it from the herd and deal with it solo.

"Feminism is observably less compatible with Christianity than Satanism or Islam."

VD projects.

I thought VD was generally intemperate, not indulging in baseless attacks. I called him out on his inconsistencies with hedonists and fags. Now his recommendations on excommunicating feminists are toilet paper.

For a little disabusing history:

Atheism, feminism, and satanism as a formal philosophies all grew out of the west. Not Islamic lands, not Buddhist lands, and not Hindu lands.

Satanism as a formal theology came from Anton LaVey, Stanisław Przybyszewski, Carl William Hansen. All whites that descend from Christian white countries. LaVeyan Satanism is hedonism. Satanism is Hedonism. Since VD is cool with not calling satanists out, his recommendations on feminists could be taken with a grain of salt.

Funny thing is, VD your post "Weaponizing Girls" (5/4/2014) you recognize that the west can't weaponize Muslim women against Islam. You said "I understand that if you make something a weapon [women], your enemy will have to be cowardly, self-defeating, or a fool to refrain from destroying it."

Which religion has self-effaced and bent over against the onslaughts of Atheism Satanism and Feminism? Where were these ideas formally born and developed?

"Islam is not more important than race or Western civilization to anyone but Muslims; because it is more important to them, they cannot participate in Western civilization."
Why would they want to participate in a civilization that destroyed tradition? How could a noble religion be vulnerable to have its members defect and produce blatantly evil beliefs as atheism, satanism and feminism and not doing anything about it for so long? Communism came out of the west too. People criticize Muslims for the Danish cartoon massacres and its attacks against "western secular educated women" and yet it appears they are mobilized and vigilant. During the Danish Cartoon massacres, I think it was Al-jJzeerah or Sky News that was interviewing Egyptians in Tahrir Sqaure for their reactions. It was a Muslim girl in Hijab that told the reporter "We don't want any pictures drawn of ALL the prophets, Muhammad, Issa (Jesus), Musa (Moses), Ibrahim (Abraham)" I'm paraphrasing her and that's what she said. You know there are paintings of Jesus in western modern art galleries depicting Jesus with is carnal organs exposed. But that's okay right? No one was hurt or harmed? It was in the name of art Bravo VOX on picking your allies and enemies.

Let me guess... Churchian? Okay Mr.Alt-Right who gets hurt at being called a homophobe and a hedonist and fag journalist defender... there's a place in your "Christian" heart for feminists ..I bet.. somewhere . I said it before, pick your allies carefully because traditionalism is too valuable to dole out membership to just anybody. If you are traditionalist wielding a sword against another civilization, don't leave you Achilles heal exposed for them. However you lift the armor up from the Achilles VD.

I said it before, the alt right looked bankrupt. It's probably just you that's bankrupt VD, oh and a fag a and hedonist.

Oh, for the sake of good etiquette, I still think you're very intelligent and mostly well meaning. I would't disagree or argue against 99% of the things you say. But this intemperate crap, I won't have patience for that.

Stop projecting.

Blogger LonestarWhacko July 17, 2016 10:49 AM  

The Bible frankly warns of apostasy and a standing apart. Ever wonder why such pointed warnings were given? Eve was the first feminist.

Anonymous E.R. July 17, 2016 10:53 AM  

Edit "I said it before, the alt right looked bankrupt. It's probably just you that's bankrupt VD, oh and a fag a and hedonist.
"

>

I said it before, the alt right looked bankrupt. It's probably just you that's bankrupt VD, oh and not to forget the fag and the hedonist.

Blogger Rusty Fife July 17, 2016 10:55 AM  

E.R. wrote:Edit "I said it before, the alt right looked bankrupt. It's probably just you that's bankrupt VD, oh and a fag a and hedonist.

"

>

I said it before, the alt right looked bankrupt. It's probably just you that's bankrupt VD, oh and not to forget the fag and the hedonist.


Is Milo trying to infiltrate the church?

Anonymous Gen. Kong July 17, 2016 11:02 AM  

Skylark:
Feminism is the worship of Ishtar/Astarte. I'm surprised the Churchians aren't installing Asherah Poles in place of the Cross to placate them.

Only once they're done setting up the statues of Sts. Martin Looter Keeehng, Nelson Mandela, Trayvon of Skittles and Swisher the Sweet Gentle Giant of Fergudishu. After that they can install money-lending offices for Goldman-Sachs and their friends, then maybe the totem poles you mention. In worship of St. Trayvon, the Churchians are no-limit cucks. Moose-Limbs are more honorable than Churchians, of whom Anti-Pope Hi-Fellatin' Franny is the finest example.

Blogger VD July 17, 2016 11:09 AM  

I said it before, the alt right looked bankrupt. It's probably just you that's bankrupt VD, oh and a fag a and hedonist.

You're observably wrong. And you're not very intelligent either.

Anonymous E.R. July 17, 2016 11:13 AM  

* Correction. Charlie hebdo. Not Danish cartoon. I got it confused.

Blogger Artisanal Toad July 17, 2016 11:14 AM  

This comes naturally from their belief that feminism isn’t a manifestation of the same discontent that caused Eve to want to be like God in the garden of Eden.

That assumption is the key mistake. The Apostle Paul said Eve was deceived, it was not a discontented Eve trying to be like God, she was deceived and it was her solipsism that did it. But nobody reads this story anymore and learns the lesson of what is being taught, because this story is the stake through the heart of feminism.

Eve was the greatest of all women, the mother of all, created by God and not born with a sin nature (as was every woman who came after her). She lived in paradise before sin entered the world, was naked and unashamed, walked with God in the cool of the day, had no job, no children, no responsibilities...

And she proved she couldn't follow the ONE AND ONLY RULE they had.

She had job, to follow ONE RULE.

Afterward God was faced with a decision. What does one do with women, when the greatest of them all, at the top of her game with no outside influences or distractions, proves she can't follow even one rule and because of her innate solipsism got deceived by a slick line and created the original train wreck? What would any judge do with someone like that?

Declare them incompetent and appoint a guardian.

Look at it from that perspective and read Genesis 3:16.

"yet your desire shall be for your husband and he shall rule over you." And what does that mean? Read Numbers 30 and see for yourselves.

Feminism is all about equality and the claim that men and women are equal. No, by God's first judgment, women are not equal to men and never will be. Women were declared incompetent by God and a guardian was appointed over them.

If you read the narrative carefully, you'll notice that Adam was not deceived and observe the choice he made. God said "in the day you eat of it you shall surely die." Adam chose, knowing the consequences, to eat of the fruit and die with his wife after she ate the fruit. Thus, oneitis is a lack of faith in God. Satan used Eve as a tool to take down Adam, the head of all creation, which is how creation was cursed and sin entered the world.

But if you're looking for the curse on Adam, go back to Genesis 3:16. Adam was appointed to be Eve's guardian. That is the curse on Adam (and likewise all men) right there.

Feminism is the attempt to deny this, claiming that women and men are equal. Genesis 3:16 is the context of every single passage concerning the submission of wives in the NT. And women hate this, because God does not change. Women still bring forth their children in pain, snakes still crawl on their bellies, and men are still to rule over their wives.

Denying Genesis 3:16 is the foundation of feminism.

The curse on women was to bring forth children in pain.

The judgment of God was to establish a guardianship.

The curse on men was to be appointed as the guardian.

Blogger evolutionisbunk July 17, 2016 11:18 AM  

Two things:

1. I thought complementarianism merely meant that the two sexes were created to complement each other.

2. In addition, it is the Fred Flinstone approach. The iron hand in the velvet glove. Love your wife and be nice to ladies in general, but guys are the head of marriage and ladies don't have leadership roles over men.

Blogger Escoffier July 17, 2016 11:18 AM  

Gen. Kong wrote:Skylark:

Feminism is the worship of Ishtar/Astarte. I'm surprised the Churchians aren't installing Asherah Poles in place of the Cross to placate them.

Only once they're done setting up the statues of Sts. Martin Looter Keeehng, Nelson Mandela, Trayvon of Skittles and Swisher the Sweet Gentle Giant of Fergudishu. After that they can install money-lending offices for Goldman-Sachs and their friends, then maybe the totem poles you mention. In worship of St. Trayvon, the Churchians are no-limit cucks. Moose-Limbs are more honorable than Churchians, of whom Anti-Pope Hi-Fellatin' Franny is the finest example.


I have argued for a couple of decades now that the modern Churchian worships progressivism in its pure form and progressivism infiltrates the Church as a silent deadly gas that stealthily replaces Christ with itself and its cult of 'niceness' and 'respectability' until Christ is choked out of his own assembly by this noxious gas.

And to be clear Progressivism is itself demonic which simply means that Asherath Pole or undermining rightly ordered Biblical male authority and headship are all simply the doctrine of demons.

Anonymous E.R. July 17, 2016 11:19 AM  

@ 27.

I fixed the typo. 22,24,28.
Reread it.

Read carefully. No ad hominems from me. I just picked a part your thinking and criticized it.

Go take apart my argument. I'm waiting.

Blogger dienw July 17, 2016 11:24 AM  

@ 22. E.R.
Quickly, who and what is the synagogue of Satan? Do they have doctrine or theology. Was Anton LaVey, et al alive when that theology developed?

Blogger Escoffier July 17, 2016 11:26 AM  

Say E.R. I think we're pretty well stocked up on Cuck here, go peddle crazy elsewhere.

Blogger Rabbi B July 17, 2016 11:26 AM  

Theology: the art of convincing Christians that the Bible doesn't mean what it says and God doesn't want them to do what the Bible tells them to do.

Ever since the Garden of Eden, there isn't one sin that men commit which cannot be traced back to how we decided to answer one simple question: "Did G-d really say?" (cf. Genesis 3:1)

As long as we don't believe that G-d says what He means and means what He says, every man will do what's right in his own eyes.

How does a young man keep his way pure? By living according to Your Word. (cf. Psalm 119)

Anonymous Gen. Kong July 17, 2016 11:26 AM  

Johnny:
What has become obvious to me is that feminism is not about men. The thing is inward looking. It is about the inward dynamic of the women who are feminist acting out. Plus now the formal movement has been corrupted by the lefty political agenda.

It's not really about women either. It's about elevation of the self above God, as the Artisanal Toad noted above. The ultimate goal of feminism is the destruction of the Church and of the civilization (now largely in ruins) based upon it, via the destruction of marriage, families and children. Feminism boils down to Satanism at the end of the day. It's infiltrated every church in the Banana Empire of any size, and taken over more than a few.

Blogger evolutionisbunk July 17, 2016 11:28 AM  

Clarification of previous post:

I meant to say:

Ladies don't have leadership roles over men in the church such as women pastors and no teachers over men in the church.

If a lady wants to be a piano instructor etc. etc. and it does not interfere with other responsibilities, then she is free to do so.

Blogger Human Animal July 17, 2016 11:32 AM  

E.R. - midwit babble

Is this a reading comprehension thing or one of those psycho-sexual grudges?

Blogger pyrrhus July 17, 2016 11:35 AM  

O/T German police, including ex-Stasi, now arresting citizens for remarks and FB posts critical of immigrants....http://gatesofvienna.net/2016/07/the-stasi-never-died-it-just-went-to-work-for-angela-merkel/

Blogger Bard July 17, 2016 11:35 AM  

Artisanal toad: That is interesting. Is that your interpretation or did you first get that idea from someone else?

Anonymous Mark Call July 17, 2016 11:36 AM  

Theology: the art of convincing Christians that the Bible doesn't mean what it says and God doesn't want them to do what the Bible tells them to do.

It's worked for 17 centuries.

But the question remains. Will "xtians" who have been fed the Big Lie that "the Law is 'done away with'" and that "Romans 13 - as preached by the Approved 501c(3) church of 'another jesus' shall be the Whole of the Law" ever figure out where that leads?

Take a look around!

If YHVH Himself and His Word Made Flesh did not in FACT do what He said -- and change NOT the smallest part of His Instruction (Matthew 5:17-19) -- then any "law of man," from the Magna Carta to the Bill of Rights, literally doesn't have a prayer.

Blogger Bard July 17, 2016 11:38 AM  

Artisanal toad: That is interesting. Is that your interpretation or did you first get that idea from someone else?

Blogger VD July 17, 2016 11:39 AM  

I got it confused.

You don't say.

Go take apart my argument. I'm waiting.

There is no need. It speaks rather eloquently for itself.

Anonymous Migrant Welcoming Committee July 17, 2016 11:41 AM  

Complementarians believe if they are nice enough to women, feminist rebellion will go away

Very much the opposite, in fact. The more men have tried to accommodate and appease women, the more angry, resentful, and demanding women have become. The most belligerent women in the world are in the most feminized countries, the exact places women where have gotten the most of what they said they wanted.

In the last generation and especially the last few years, some Western countries have become near matriarchies, and what's come of it? Men of those countries demonized more than ever, and their women welcoming an invasion by foreign men from less feminized tribes.

It is also the most placating and 'reasonable' men who have the most trouble with their wives or girlfriends.

Almost as if the bronze-age scribes who recorded the earliest parts of the old testament understood female nature better than modern theologians with PhDs.

Anonymous Jack Amok July 17, 2016 11:49 AM  

But no amount of compromise with feminists will actually avoid offending feminists,

Of course not. It makes them even more offended, because they don't even want to go where they are pushing, they're just testing limits to see how far you will let them go.

Treat feminism like a giant, collective shit-test. It may not always actually be that, but if you respond as if it is, you'll be right far more often than you'll be wrong.

Blogger Artisanal Toad July 17, 2016 11:58 AM  

@40 Bard

That is my interpretation of events. I wrote about it here:

https://artisanaltoadshall.wordpress.com/2016/05/22/gen-3-16-exegesis/

It's not popular with anyone because it also points to the failure of the men to be fit to rule.

Genesis 3:16 is also where we got hypergamy. A careful study of the word desire results in the understand that it means both the desire to conquer and a sexual desire. Which perfectly explains shit tests, because that shit test is the attempt to overcome, to conquer, to discover whether the man is fit to rule. For the guy who passes the shit tests with flying colors, her desire changes to sexual desire.

This is the reason why Game works and why Christian men hate it so much- because it points to their utter failure to be fit to rule. They fail the shit tests and every time they fail the shit test they get more of them as the women get more frustrated with their failure.

The men blame the women and call the female reaction to their failure to be fit to rule a rebellion, but I will spare you the rant about the perverse doctrines of "mutual submission" and "servant leadership" as applied to marital relations in the church.

The implicit point of being appointed the ruler is that the ruler be fit to rule. When the man isn't fit to rule the woman isn't attracted.

Anonymous MK July 17, 2016 12:01 PM  

MK wrote:"The best feminine movement is the waddle."

Millôr Fernandes (Brazilian writer)


I wrongly quoted Millor Fernandes before.
The actual phrase should be "the best feminist movement is on the hips".

Anonymous E.R. July 17, 2016 12:09 PM  

@38.

You're right. I misread it. Crap. Thanks for pointing it out.

Sorry VD. I'll bare this mark of idiocy.

Blogger VD July 17, 2016 12:18 PM  

Sorry VD. I'll bare this mark of idiocy.

You already did.

Blogger Rusty Fife July 17, 2016 12:29 PM  

MK wrote:MK wrote:"The best feminine movement is the waddle."

Millôr Fernandes (Brazilian writer)



I wrongly quoted Millor Fernandes before.

The actual phrase should be "the best feminist movement is on the hips".


I was wondering about the translation. The only attractive waddle I've seen is from my pregnant wife.

Blogger darrenl July 17, 2016 12:46 PM  

"And any woman who identifies herself as a "feminist" - or man, for that matter - should be expelled from the Church, no hesitation, no debate, no questions asked."

It's always amusing to watch Protestants exercise their Biblical authority and excommunicate each other over matters of theology.

Blogger VD July 17, 2016 12:51 PM  

It's always amusing to watch Protestants exercise their Biblical authority and excommunicate each other over matters of theology.

Two words: Pope Francis.

Now drop it unless you really want all the anti-papists piling on.

Blogger Artisanal Toad July 17, 2016 12:58 PM  

@50

That's the view from within the wife goggles. Which is as it should be.

Blogger Sheila4g July 17, 2016 1:10 PM  

Vox: "Theology: the art of convincing Christians that the Bible doesn't mean what it says and God doesn't want them to do what the Bible tells them to do."

Beautifully succinct. Well said, Vox.

Anonymous Wyrd July 17, 2016 1:26 PM  

Two words: Pope Francis.

Waiting for John Wright to lecture us all about the diabolical media distorting the word of Il Papa.

Il Papa dindu nuffins.

Blogger RobertT July 17, 2016 1:30 PM  

Just a guess, you have as much trouble with mediocre authority figures as i do. You made a career out of the controversy, I went dark. You're the only blogger I follow. I think you're the only one who really gets it.

Blogger Were-Puppy July 17, 2016 1:31 PM  

@10 Mr.MantraMan
IMO it is best to discredit and disqualify the insane instead of trying to debate the insane.
--

Yes, it saves you from wasting hours in a fruitless debate.

Blogger residentMoron July 17, 2016 1:41 PM  

@41

Nobody ever convened a synod to decide to revoke the law of gravity.

The making void of God's law is not a matter of changing or re-interpreting it, although those things inevitably spring from the actual issue.

The critical point is the accusation (because every theological error IS an attack on the character of God) that God's law is imposed on otherwise morally neutral existence, from outside, and by force. Thus the error of the Roman Catholics has been fairly well completely swallowed whole, and without any real reflection, by the vast majority of Christians, protestant or catholic. The common understanding is that God is a roman Emperor; he makes arbitrary laws based on his whim, and enforces them arbitrarily with overwhelming force, killing his enemies and favouring his sycophants.

But God is the Creator and we his Creatures, and *he* says you can tell even about the character of a child by the things he makes. God built the principles by which he operates into the very fabric of existence, and you can no more change his laws than you can change the force of gravity.

Once you think you can, it matters not what you think the law says, really. You're still singing the song of his enemy and you're still following the path of his enemies on the long bloody road to hell.

Anonymous Erp July 17, 2016 1:44 PM  

Speaking of which, have you actually read what he says or did you just buy the media overinterpreting what he says?
He may be a bit clueless about the west's priorities and needs, notably regarding the rapefugee crisis, i agree with that, but come on.

Bring it on, sedevacantists and assorted protestants.

Anonymous Wyrd July 17, 2016 1:48 PM  

@Durp,

Pope Marx I suxxorz.

Anonymous ded July 17, 2016 1:58 PM  

>muh sola scriptura
Such a concept only makes sense in Islam, where the Quran was supposedly written in Heaven from eternity.
It would hold water, if only Tradition didn't predate Scripture.

Anonymous Wyrd July 17, 2016 2:04 PM  

>muh sola scriptura

It sez right there in the New Testament televangelists should have big hair.

Blogger darrenl July 17, 2016 2:07 PM  

"Two words: Pope Francis.

Now drop it unless you really want all the anti-papists piling on."

Irrelevant. Anti-papists are certainly not going to stop piling on whether I drop it or not. It's what they do regardless who holds the office.

My point is this, Vox. If you're going to support the principle that a practitioner of sin X (...in this case, X=feminism..God help them...) can be "...expelled from the Church, no hesitation, no debate, no questions asked", then it logically follows that any sin can be subject to such judgement, for what makes feminism more of a sin of excommunication than any other disorder of this age. My guess is that both yours and my favorite sins would not hold up very well to this yard stick.

Blogger Mint July 17, 2016 2:21 PM  

I am leading a bible study group, and upon a popular request, the topic for the next few weeks will be marriage. As a single woman, I need helps and pointers. If any of the ilk have any sites or reading materials for us, it will be greatly appreaciated. Thank you.

Blogger VD July 17, 2016 2:28 PM  

My point is this, Vox. If you're going to support the principle that a practitioner of sin X (...in this case, X=feminism..God help them...) can be "...expelled from the Church, no hesitation, no debate, no questions asked", then it logically follows that any sin can be subject to such judgement, for what makes feminism more of a sin of excommunication than any other disorder of this age. My guess is that both yours and my favorite sins would not hold up very well to this yard stick.

Your point is wrong. My statement has nothing to do with feminism being "a sin". I made no such claim.

It is based on the fact that if an individual calls himself a feminist, he or she will, when sufficiently pressed, almost invariably deny the Resurrection and Lordship of Jesus Christ. It is not a theological argument, it is an observation.

Blogger residentMoron July 17, 2016 2:33 PM  

@64

Mint, you're not qualified. No amount of *reading* will qualify you for that task.

So my advice is to invite a married Christian couple, who've been married and faithful (not only to each other but to God) for about 50 years.

They will be qualified.

Blogger collisioncat67 July 17, 2016 2:44 PM  

If you want to see women's narcissism and vanity given free reign just check out a few of the periodicals devoted to women.
They are all about living the ultimate feminine self-centered life.
Topics typically include;

MY awesome beauty.
MY perfect health
MY gorgeous, sensual lover. (male and/or female)
MY reproductive health (abortion)
MY empowerment.
MY sassy, flaunting-of-tradition attitude.
MY SELF LOVE.

The diabolical writings of LaVey and Crowley have nothing on "O" and "Ms" magazines.

Anonymous Quartermaster July 17, 2016 2:50 PM  

I wouldn't agree with your definition of Theology, if you are being serious, but it certainly holds as a sarcastic view of how apostates see it, all the while claiming to be faithful to scripture.

Blogger Josh July 17, 2016 2:58 PM  

Irrelevant. Anti-papists are certainly not going to stop piling on whether I drop it or not. It's what they do regardless who holds the office.

On this blog the anti papists aren't the ones trying to refight the reformation. Almost always it's a butt hurt catholic complaining about evil protestant heretics.

Blogger Artisanal Toad July 17, 2016 2:59 PM  

@64

Mint, I have just the thing for you. Go to the link below and you'll see the center portion of a chart I created with all the Bible passages on marriage mapped out, linked and cross-referenced. The entire chart is linked at the bottom of the post so you can download and view it (microsoft's photo viewer works well and you can zoom in and out easily with a scrolling mouse).

https://artisanaltoadshall.wordpress.com/2016/04/13/how-marriage-begins-according-to-god/

What most Bible study leaders do is find and present the commentary they agree with. I challenge you to dig into the Word to see what God has to say and then see if you can agree with Him. I put this chart together to make it easy to do that.

If you want the printable version, drop me a comment at the post requesting the .tiff file and I'll email it to you. The file is about 30 meg and printed out it's almost 5' x 5'

Blogger Mint July 17, 2016 3:03 PM  

@67. Thank you. I have the same suggestion for the group and will schedule one for the week after this one.

On that note, do you think a pastor, who is celibate, is not qualified to teach about marriage?

Blogger Mint July 17, 2016 3:05 PM  

Oops that question is for @66 residentMoron

Blogger Escoffier July 17, 2016 3:09 PM  

darrenl wrote:"Two words: Pope Francis.

Now drop it unless you really want all the anti-papists piling on."

Irrelevant. Anti-papists are certainly not going to stop piling on whether I drop it or not. It's what they do regardless who holds the office.

My point is this, Vox. If you're going to support the principle that a practitioner of sin X (...in this case, X=feminism..God help them...) can be "...expelled from the Church, no hesitation, no debate, no questions asked", then it logically follows that any sin can be subject to such judgement, for what makes feminism more of a sin of excommunication than any other disorder of this age. My guess is that both yours and my favorite sins would not hold up very well to this yard stick.


The issue isn't sin, it's heresy. And yes, heretics are to be given the opportunity to recant, and upon their refusal, they are to be put out of the body. Because there really is such a thing as absolute truth.

Anonymous Wyrd July 17, 2016 3:19 PM  

Catholic versus Protestant is only Democrat versus Republican in Heaven. Fudge that scat. I'm Protestant in birth but love Augustine and Aquinas.

Blogger Mint July 17, 2016 3:19 PM  

@69 Artisanal Toad, thank you. I have a look on the link and a brief reading. Interesting. The chart font is a bit small in my tablet. I would love to study it more in a readable version. Please email the printable file to mintwilson at gmail dot com. Thank you.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash July 17, 2016 3:20 PM  

Wyrd wrote:Il Papa dindu nuffins.

Father, forgve me, for I have sinned. I laughed out loud at "Il Papa dindu nuffin.

And please, for each other's sake, if not for God's, let's not turn this into Papist vs Prot.

If you want a fight, Mr. Rational is stinking up another thread with his idiot rationalizations of Atheism.

Blogger haus frau July 17, 2016 3:38 PM  

Off topic but would like to put in a prayer request for an older couple who babysit in the church daycare. I've known them for several years. They are in their late 70's, have been married for 55 years, and the husband was just diagnosed with inoperable, untreatable, liver and lung cancer. He also likely has bone cancer according to the doctor. He is on hospice and in a lot of pain with a very poor appetite. They have two children, a son and a daughter. The son lives with them because he is schizophrenic. He has quite a few behavioral quirks and his father is the primary authority figure who can control his son's quirks, for lack of better words. The wife is worried about how he'll handle his dad's passing with his mental issues. Their daughter does live nearby and is close to them. Not sure what I would pray for exactly but time to settle affairs and peace in their family would be a good start. Thank you.

Anonymous Gen. Kong July 17, 2016 3:52 PM  

Almost as if the bronze-age scribes who recorded the earliest parts of the old testament understood female nature better than modern theologians with PhDs.

"As it will be in the future, it was so at the birth of man; there are only 4 things certain, since social progress began: that the dog returns to his vomit, and the sow returns to her mire, and the burnt fool's bandaged finger goes wobbling back to the fire, and after this is accomplished, and the Brave New World begins, when all men are paid for existing, and no man must pay for his sins, as surely as water will wet us, as surely as fire will burn, the Gods of the Copybook Headings, with terror, and slaughter, return."


Anonymous SciVo July 17, 2016 3:59 PM  

Johnny wrote:Perhaps the more modest feminist views can be reconciled with the Bible, but surely not the current and more radical ones.

No, none can. Any movement or sentiment that takes on the mantle of feminism (vice humanism) is inherently prejudiced and flawed in exactly the same way as Black Lives Matter (vice All Lives Matter) -- and since the Bible is Truth, it cannot be reconciled with lies.

There has never been a justified feminism. In the same way that we laugh to see slapstick comedians get hurt (in seeming) and make fools of themselves (in reality); in the same way that most every man with status is willing to believe the worst of most every other man; to our everlasting shame, it is all too easy for us to believe the worst of the men that came before and left us the best world they could.

But here is the disproof: from the beginning of feminism, it has always been our n*great-grandfathers who were supposedly monstrous toward women; so we can expect the men of 2120 to declare that we were monstrous, though we know that we are not; so in the absence of hard evidence, we should extend the same credit to our forefathers as to ourselves.

For a blistering critique that has withstood the test of time, see The Fraud of Feminism (1913) by Ernest Belfort Bax. He wasn't right about everything -- for one thing, he was a socialist -- but I expect that you will find it illuminating to see how little has changed in over a century, except for the successful obscuration of hatefacts.

Blogger weka July 17, 2016 4:02 PM  

From the Borgy I don't link to, but it makes an important point. The Feminists would make their errors mandatory.

Let us not beat around the bush. Here is the problem with the hard-left, feminist, BLM, "Islam is a religion of peace," egalitarian, multicultural, gay "marriage," "homeschoolers are subversive," social justice, wealth distribution, safe space, gun control, etc worldview.

There is no way to articulate or describe an end state to their ideas (a moment when all their dreams come true) that does not include self-delusion, violence and coercion on a massive scale. Run the variables through any algorithm or solution you want, it comes out the same.

Everyone who has ever studied (or had a relative escape from) totalitarianism knows this.


We need to fight this, now, as it is the fifth column in our churches. Our external enemy is the Turk and their progressive minions. Our internal enemies are those heresairchs who want convergence into error so we are all. equal.

As in equally damned.

Anonymous Jonathan July 17, 2016 4:46 PM  

"...what may be known about God is plain to [us] because God has made it plain to [us]" - Rom 1:19

The context of that verse is that God is talking about the nature He created being the full testament of His Being that can be comprehended by the human intellect. Theology, of any kind, is heresy at the point it purports to provide a comprehensive picture of God's full nature. Human's lack the capacity for such a thing and any attempt to theologize God is rooted in sinful pride.

Even the concept of the Trinity developed from a defensive metaphor against the Arian heresy and morphed into its own heresy upon the demise of Arianism. Rom 2 is very clear that even the most illiterate savage is capable of grasping the nature of God equal to the most brilliant philosopher. As all our righteousness is as filthy rags in comparison to the holiness of God so is our intellect as a muddy puddle in comparison to His wisdom and majesty.

Anonymous namae nanka July 17, 2016 4:58 PM  

Saw the first few comments and I've to point it out that feminism has always been like this, it hasn't been corrupted or subverted. What is certainly correct is that they're now more carefree about uncovering their fangs.

See Feminist Intetions by WL George written in 1913.

Or these snippets about the holy and sacred first wavers,

"Feminism, the extremist " and of late years the predominant cult of the Woman's Movement, is Masculinism.

It makes for such training and development in woman, of male characteristics, as shall equip her to compete with the male in every department of life; academic, athletic, professional, political, industrial."

- Arabella Keneally, Feminism and Sex Extinction, 1920

1860s Eliza Linton addressed feminists as "you of the emancipated who imitate while you profess to hate". She criticised feminists of this era as "the bad copies of men who have thrown off all womanly charm".

Feminism, feminism never changes.

Anonymous M.W. Peak July 17, 2016 5:15 PM  

Feminism is an ideology of woman versus God with an invitation for men to follow.

Anonymous SciVo July 17, 2016 5:51 PM  

evolutionisbunk wrote:1. I thought complementarianism merely meant that the two sexes were created to complement each other.

Sure, in the same way that feminism is about equality, which is to say not at all. SJWs always lie.

Basically, what complementarianism comes down to is servant leadership (in which the adjective negates the noun) and pastoral headship, in which the pastor inserts himself into the marriage as AMOG. I would describe this arrangement as a "luxury bad" (as opposed to a luxury good).

You can read Dalrock's whole series on complementarianism. It's really good.

Blogger Cail Corishev July 17, 2016 6:45 PM  

I thought complementarianism merely meant that the two sexes were created to complement each other.

It starts with something like that, saying that husband and wife have different roles in a marriage which complement each other. At first, I think some well-meaning pastors and writers thought that would be a way to ease women into being subject to their husbands: "Look, it's not about him being a tyrant and you being a second-class citizen like the feminists say! It's just that you have different roles, and your role of helpmate is just as important as his role of leader. They're actually equal, just different. Complementary, see?"

Thing is, women aren't stupid, and they can see that this ends up giving the husband the pants back. So those pushing complementarianism as a model for the family structure had to keep massaging it, trying to find a way to make it acceptable to women -- which means it must give them a veto over their husbands' decisions, at least -- while also making it seem compatible with the scriptural model of the family.

So you get lines like this one I've heard among traditional Catholics: the husband is the head of the family and the wife is the heart. That's sweet and all, but in practice it ends up meaning the husband gets to make the day-to-day decisions, but his wife is his spiritual superior, and if he ever makes a decision she hates, she will find a spiritual reason to oppose it, and generally the pastor will weigh in on her side.

And so it goes, with people trying to fit the square peg of the Christian family into the round hole of egalitarianism.

Anonymous Anonymous July 17, 2016 6:51 PM  

I like how you managed to get Protestant/Catholic differences backwards.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash July 17, 2016 6:55 PM  

One of the problems I have pretty frequently in this regard is when my wife asks for my opinion on a subject that simply doesn't matter to me. Like what to have for dinner, or which grocery store to go to. I will often push the decision back to her, which make her unhappy, and she will get quite peevish.
Looking back later, I will realize she was ASKING me to lead, and I was refusing. No wonder she got peevish. And then later, when I do have a firm idea of what to do, I get emotion and drama.

Blogger Artisanal Toad July 17, 2016 7:23 PM  

@84

I suppose it depends on your perspective, because the complementarianism model is just as much an excuse for a husband to disregard his obligations. He doesn't have to be fit to rule if he's really not a ruler and they're actually just different and complementary to each other.

Look at the idea that's floated that a husband's spiritual leadership is measured by his wife's tingles and the mockery that receives. Dalrock had a post about that.

The problem is, God said "your desire shall be for your husband." If you read that as "your desire shall be for your ruler" then all of a sudden it makes a lot of sense that her desire (attraction) is definitely impacted by his fitness to rule. This gets all transmogrified and spiritualized, yada, yada, yada...

But the fact is, the women are attracted to masculine and dominant men who demonstrate all those attractive behaviors that Game teaches. Because Game teaches the attitude of a ruler and those behaviors indicate he is fit to rule. Which is how I have to refer to it with churchians who can't handle the terms "alpha" and "beta" when describing behavior.

What we have today with feminism is a rebellion by women against God's ordained authority structure and that's exacerbated by both the failure and refusal of men to hold the position that men and women are not equal at all. Because God said "he shall rule over you." Women don't want to be ruled by a man they don't see as being fit to rule them and men don't want to do the work of being fit to rule. A pox on both their houses.

Anonymous Mark Call July 17, 2016 8:00 PM  

Mint wrote:I am leading a bible study group, and upon a popular request, the topic for the next few weeks will be marriage. As a single woman, I need helps and pointers. If any of the ilk have any sites or reading materials for us, it will be greatly appreaciated. Thank you.

Mint - check out the articles here under topic "marriage":

http://markniwot.com/?cat=4 (Marriage)

Lots of them are articles, but many are full in-depth audio files of teachings from Scripture on the subject.

No - they're not even remotely PC, but they are straight from Scripture "as Written".

Blessings...

Blogger Aeoli Pera July 17, 2016 8:52 PM  

There are unclear things in the Bible, but this is not one of them. Anyone claiming to be both Christian and a feminist is admitting they are disingenuous.

Anonymous TheVillageIdiot Ret. July 17, 2016 9:56 PM  

Women;
can't live with 'em
can't do all the positions without 'em
DannyR

Blogger IreneAthena July 17, 2016 10:27 PM  

@85 The correct answer to "What do you want for dinner?" is:
"You look tired. Let's eat something simple, order pizza, or go out to eat."
I Peter 3:7

Blogger Rusty Fife July 17, 2016 10:47 PM  

IreneAthena wrote:@85 The correct answer to "What do you want for dinner?" is:

"You look tired. Let's eat something simple, order pizza, or go out to eat."

I Peter 3:7



Naw, it's usually a manhood test. She's looking for me to do my leadership thing so she can rub against it.

If she's tired she'll suggest fending for myself or whatever she wants for eating out.

Blogger residentMoron July 18, 2016 12:19 AM  

@Mint

Yes. For reaching about marriage and for the post of pastor.

"husband of one wife"

Blogger OneWingedShark July 18, 2016 12:48 AM  

Mint wrote:I am leading a bible study group, and upon a popular request, the topic for the next few weeks will be marriage. As a single woman, I need helps and pointers. If any of the ilk have any sites or reading materials for us, it will be greatly appreaciated. Thank you.

Proverbs 31.

residentMoron wrote:@64

Mint, you're not qualified. No amount of *reading* will qualify you for that task.


Come now, are you really saying that the Holy Spirit cannot use this for teaching. Besides, Titus 2 clearly lays on older women upright and righteous living so that they can teach the younger women.

Artisanal Toad wrote:
The men blame the women and call the female reaction to their failure to be fit to rule a rebellion, but I will spare you the rant about the perverse doctrines of "mutual submission" and "servant leadership" as applied to marital relations in the church.


But servant leadership is exactly what men are supposed to do. Men are instructed to love their wives, as Eph 5:25-28 says:

Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, in order to make her holy by cleansing her with the washing of water by the word, so as to present the church to himself in splendor, without a spot or wrinkle or anything of the kind—yes, so that she may be holy and without blemish. In the same way, husbands should love their wives as they do their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself.

And to prove that acting like Jesus in this matter is servant leadership I need only cite John 13:1-17 -- wherein Jesus does the servant's work of washing feet; the action that made Peter be so taken aback he said “You will never wash my feet.”

And Mathew (20:28) bears witness to it as well, perfectly stating what Paul was citing in his letter to the Ephesians:
just as the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life a ransom for many.”

Blogger residentMoron July 18, 2016 2:21 AM  

You quote it and you still don't understand it. Giving in to your wife's rebellion is not loving or perfecting her.

Blogger Scott July 18, 2016 2:54 AM  

Feminism is a cancer Christianity (churchianity) can't beat. Every church (Lutherin) I've been a member of has been or is in the process of being eaten from the inside out by feminism and its twin brother, social justice. And these are the more conservative churches in the neighborhoods I've lived in.

So I'm thinking zombies are real. Social justice and feminism and the like are the collective virus. Most people are infected and not only walk dead, but talk dead, and vote dead. Not sure if head shots are terminal, yet.

Blogger Leo Little Book July 18, 2016 3:38 AM  

Any readers in Hong Kong / Shenzhen interested in meeting up can click my profile and email me.

Blogger Mint July 18, 2016 3:41 AM  

residentMoron wrote:@Mint

Yes. For reaching about marriage and for the post of pastor.

"husband of one wife"


Thank you for answering. I need more information to clarify things for me.
So a celibate pastor (for example Roman Catholic clergy) is not qualified to teach about marriage. Is this because they have no experience on the subject? Are you saying that to teach -no, even to just lead a bible study group- any saints/faithful has to have first hand experience to do so?

I mean, what about Paul who was not married but most definitely sending letters to teach about marriage to saints. His first letter to Corinth chapter 7 talks about this subject.

For me, pondering about which Words of God I have learnt that I may share and may not share based on which one I have experienced first hand, and not based on what the Holy Spirit has put in my heart to share, I find this notion as strange.

One example. I live in a very conservative, traditional, Muslim environment. Some people still get married through arranged marriage here. I mean, when there is a chance to reach out and preach Christ through Campus (a great opportunity by the way, campus is a place where freedom has some room to wiggle here), this Christian youngsters will not be able to teach/reach his peers about what Bible teach about sex, dating, and marriage since most of them (male and female) are virgin.

Forgive me, maybe you have more guidance on this matter that I need to reconsider my position.

Blogger residentMoron July 18, 2016 4:56 AM  

Paul claimed to have been personally tutored by Christ. All we have is the Word he and others wrote and what sense we can make of it given the native intelligence God gave us at birth and any wisdom he's given us since.

It is the Word that says a church leader must be the husband of one wife. It is the Word that disqualifies the Catholic priest and the single woman, both. Don't quibble with me about it.

All scripture is profitable for instruction, but not all (people) are given either the gifts of leadership and interpretation, or the responsibility to lead.

Nonetheless some will take it anyway, and some will encourage them, twisting the scriptures to their own damnation.

Mint asked what advice I would give to lead a study on marriage and I answered; find someone qualified according to the scriptural standard for such leadership.

Do you really need to know more? Or do you really want to theologise the question, persuading Christians that God doesn't really mean what he says, as per Vox's definition above?

"Did God really say ... ?"

It's not more information you need, it's more obedience.

FYI, your heart is deceitfully wicked beyond your ability to measure, just like mine.

That's why I gave Mint God's advice and not mine. But give her yours if you want to make her into your servant instead of his.

Tell her that your carefully crafted loophole scenario means she doesn't have to use the means commanded of and provided to her.

In the end, she must choose whom she will serve.

Blogger Mint July 18, 2016 5:34 AM  

residentMoron, again thank you for your willingness to engage me in this conversation.

1. I am not quibbling about who is qualified to be Church leaders. Bible has stated the qualification. My bible study group consists of young layman Christians. It is not a church or para church.
2. Thank you for your advice. I have made plan for it to commence.
3. I am withdrawing from this discussion.

Be blessed,
M

Blogger Leo Little Book in Shenzhen July 18, 2016 5:58 AM  

residentMoron's discourse on the "one wife" issue is less intelligent and broadminded than this one, and his anti-papacy less accurate than this one.

The unseemly problems occasioned by girl-greedy Mormon polygamist elders illustrate why church leadership should not be polygamous.

Blogger residentMoron July 18, 2016 7:05 AM  

Mint

You're most welcome. Note please that I did not say you were quibbling. I took your question honestly and answered the same.

I pray your study is a blessing to all.

Blogger residentMoron July 18, 2016 7:09 AM  

Oh yes, be broadminded about the infinite possibilities of meaning in the simple phrase "husband of one wife".

Perhaps afterwards you can define "is" for us ...

Blogger residentMoron July 18, 2016 7:12 AM  

Just FYI, I'm not particularly anti-papacy - just anti error.

It's not me who has declared papists as being beyond salvage, but the reverse.

Blogger guest July 18, 2016 7:30 AM  

Denominations tossed out Genesis long before they incorporated feminism and homosexuality. Nice try but attempting to weed out one heresy, while leaving the others (evolution, homosexuality, the question of where the church gets authority, Calvinism, etc, etc, etc)isn't going to cut it. On the other hand "The churches of Christ salute you." Romans 16:16

Blogger guest July 18, 2016 7:33 AM  

Denominations tossed out Genesis long before they incorporated feminism and homosexuality. Nice try but attempting to weed out one heresy, while leaving the others (evolution, homosexuality, the question of where the church gets authority, Calvinism, etc, etc, etc)isn't going to cut it. On the other hand "The churches of Christ salute you." Romans 16:16

Anonymous r July 18, 2016 11:53 AM  

With respect, Protestants, if you excise the Theotokos from your philosophy, you have excised the example of virtuous womanhood.

Pope Francis is a cuck. This is divine punishment on the Church, and we deserve it.

Blogger Escoffier July 18, 2016 12:52 PM  

Scott wrote:Feminism is a cancer Christianity (churchianity) can't beat. Every church (Lutherin) I've been a member of has been or is in the process of being eaten from the inside out by feminism and its twin brother, social justice. And these are the more conservative churches in the neighborhoods I've lived in.

So I'm thinking zombies are real. Social justice and feminism and the like are the collective virus. Most people are infected and not only walk dead, but talk dead, and vote dead. Not sure if head shots are terminal, yet.


Actually Feminism is an opportunistic infection. A healthy, vital Church connected to Jesus Christ would laugh off this infection but a damaged body, one in poor health will fall prey. I will leave it as an exercise for your imagination what might be causing this infection. My only suggestion is read the book of Acts and try to really see what's happening.

Blogger Leo Little Book in Shenzhen July 18, 2016 2:53 PM  

Perhaps afterwards you can define "is" for us ...

Calling you monolingual would be an exaggeration.

Blogger residentMoron July 18, 2016 3:05 PM  

I always appreciate the resort to insult.

After one's opponents have run out of arguments, it puts a signal end to the controversy.

Blogger Leo Little Book in Shenzhen July 19, 2016 7:35 AM  

With respect, Protestants, if you excise the Theotokos from your philosophy, you have excised the example of virtuous womanhood.

Perhaps you should respect the Bible enough to peruse the table of contents before opining.

it puts a signal end to

Consult your handle.

Blogger Bibliotheca Servare July 19, 2016 11:23 AM  

It's a beautiful story, and -in my opinion- one of Shakespeare's greatest works. The movie you mention was actually my first exposure to the play. Afterwards, I absolutely had to read it. It has been among my favorite works of literature ever since.

Blogger residentMoron July 20, 2016 1:06 AM  

Yes, indeed. Flummoxed by a moron. I'll put it on your gravestone.

Blogger Father Marker July 23, 2016 8:20 AM  

@46 Artisanal Toad

While I have no argument with what you are saying I'll put it to you that you have missed something that can change the whole nature of the argument that you propound.

There is a principle in the bible that goes like this. "The name giver has dominion over the name receiver"

Man was given dominion over the animals in Genesis 1. In Genesis 2 the animals are brought before man and he names them. After he names the animals God through a special creative act brings another being before him which man names "woman". This naming by man is his stamp of dominion over the woman. In other words the woman came under the authority of man from the moment she first met him.

How do we know that dominion means authority over? Easy, it was God who gave the seas and the wind their names. It was Jesus as God who commands the wind and waves to be still on the sea of Galilee and they obeyed.

Even children recognise the authority of their parents to command them.

This authority was recognised by the woman and proof of this is found in the offer that Satan made her. By eating the fruit she would achieve a higher status like God. Hypergamy kicked in and she ate.

Also Adam got hit for two things. 1. He listened to his wife and 2. He ate the fruit. One would almost be tempted to think that listening to his wife was a misdeed of the same magnitude as eating the fruit.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts