Why is Feminism much worse than Cancer nowadays that is caused by women which keeps most men single?

[Lyfe]

Yeah I’d you told your daughter to obey your son I think that would be a bit weird. I think you are arguing about power and control and not love like Christ taught, simple as that. If you want to argue from a Christian basis, Christ said he had only one teaching which was love. What does love imply? Sacrifice, transcending the I self, benevolence, respect for another’s will, can you say you love someone if you don’t respect their will, or they love you if they don’t respect yours. The only problem you are describing is how relations without love are failures. If you say someone doesn’t love you because they don’t follow your commands, I think again you are misunderstanding that one underlying concept. You see God as a power, a controller, and you project that into relations but power only comes in when love is absent, to replace what it would fulfil at a lower level, power instead of cooperation etc.

Again tho why is it being presumed on your part that the biblical model of marriage is devoid of this? Why are you assuming that that I disagree with this sentiment?

 

[Lyfe]

In truth I could contend that secular marriages are really the marriages that aren't based off of love. The reality surely seems to reflect that. Divorce would suggest little attempt at sacrifice and half of marriages currently fail. Biblical marriages emphasize a structure. Secular marriages do not as they are mostly based off of feelings and obedience to self. People can say what they want about biblical marriages, but they cant pretend that secular marriages are any less disastrous or corrupt.

 

[lightseeker]

Again tho why is it being presumed on your part that the biblical model of marriage is devoid of this? Why are you assuming that that I disagree with this sentiment?

Just the way you talk about what everyone should do, who everyone should be, language like obey, authority, control etc

 

[Drifter]

I honestly just want a copy and paste of how the passage is translated with the words that should have been used. That's all I am asking for. Surely you can respect that knowing how many different interpretations exist concerning so many thousands of scriptures.

I said three times now that it's not a mistranslation issue. Becase of the syntax gap between English and Koine Greek, the meaning of that scripture is muddied. I dont know how else to explain that to you. The Greek speaks to mutual submission. This theme is picked up again in the Corinthians passage where Paul discusses the subject of origins (not authority) by bringing the creation and purpose of men and women full circle i.e. the first women was made from the body of the first man but every man born since has come from woman. The first woman was made for the sake of the first man but neither sex is independent of each other in Christ. They both need each other. You can see this again in Paul giving the instruction to not deprive either spouse sexually unless it was mutually decided. The wife is also said to have authority over her husband's body. This was an extremely countercultural proclamation. The full cannon of scripture shows a picture of mutuality and co operation between the sexes. Not a competition and not a "chain of command".

 

[Drifter]

In truth I could contend that secular marriages are really the marriages that aren't based off of love. The reality surely seems to reflect that. Divorce would suggest little attempt at sacrifice and half of marriages currently fail. Biblical marriages emphasize a structure. Secular marriages do not as they are mostly based off of feelings and obedience to self. People can say what they want about biblical marriages, but they cant pretend that secular marriages are any less disastrous or corrupt.

You do realize that the divorce rate within the church is on par with the secular rate right?

 

[Lyfe]

Just the way you talk about what everyone should do, who everyone should be, language like obey, authority, control etc

Those are all feminist words they apply to bliblical marriage my dude. If I used them it may be, because I am so used to having to respond to those very words they throw out there.

 

[Lyfe]

You do realize that the divorce rate within the church is on par with the secular rate right?

Yeah even people who go to church dont follow the Bible. Nothing new...

 

[justjess]

Every job you go to you submit. That’s everyone too not just you. If you don’t submit at one you submit at another. And that’s fine with you. You can’t gloss over the things I mentioned that you submit for when it comes to a job. Turn that billion dollar corporation into a man and that all of a sudden is slavery.

And I think Lyfe posted the stats on women leaving marriage most of the time. So walking away from being a housewife IS an option. And if she’s walking away from a man with money, she can poach his money to fund her new relationship with


Ahh the motherly/nurturing/caretaking role. I wonder where I heard that before? But either way, one hand we have men delivering value to EVERYONE, while on the other hand women provide value to the elderly or those with children? Is this where we leave it or anything else?

Really? Nurses, teachers, caregivers for the elderly, sick, disabled, young.. that’s what you boil that down to? You have a superiority complex tbh. Jesus said to offer service specifically to the groups women offer their service too and you still scoff at it in favor of skyscrapers and bankers money.

 

[justjess]

Again tho why is it being presumed on your part that the biblical model of marriage is devoid of this? Why are you assuming that that I disagree with this sentiment?

You can not LOVE that which you claim rulership over. It isn’t a pure love. If you can look at the person you claim to love and deny that which would make them happy or fulfilled you don’t love them.

 

[Lyfe]

You can not LOVE that which you claim rulership over. It isn’t a pure love. If you can look at the person you claim to love and deny that which would make them happy or fulfilled you don’t love them.

Why did you use the world rulership?

 

[Lyfe]

I said three times now that it's not a mistranslation issue. Becase of the syntax gap between English and Koine Greek, the meaning of that scripture is muddied. I dont know how else to explain that to you. The Greek speaks to mutual submission. This theme is picked up again in the Corinthians passage where Paul discusses the subject of origins (not authority) by bringing the creation and purpose of men and women full circle i.e. the first women was made from the body of the first man but every man born since has come from woman. The first woman was made for the sake of the first man but neither sex is independent of each the in Christ. They both need each other. You can see this again in Paul giving the instruction to not deprive either spouse sexually unless it was mutually decided. The wife is also said to have authority over her husband's body. This was an extremely countercultural proclamation. The full cannon of scripture shows a picture of mutuality and co operation between the sexes. Not a competition and not a "chain of command".

If we are consistent with your logic then I am on the same level with Christ?

 

[justjess]

Why did you use the world rulership?

Because that is what the system you PREFER boils down to and because you are hell bent on fighting in favor of it regardless of what all the female voices are telling you regarding their own feelings towards it and the experiences of women they’ve known under it.

 

[Lyfe]

You can not LOVE that which you claim rulership over. It isn’t a pure love. If you can look at the person you claim to love and deny that which would make them happy or fulfilled you don’t love them.

Even more why is it being presupposed that husbands under a biblical marriage dont give wives what make them happy?

 

[justjess]

Even more why is it being presupposed that husbands under a biblical marriage dont give wives what make them happy?

Because if they were happy they never would have fought and died for the rights they gained under feminism

 

[Lyfe]

Because that is what the system you PREFER boils down to and because you are hell bent on fighting in favor of it regardless of what all the female voices are telling you regarding their own feelings towards it and the experiences of women they’ve known under it.

I disagree.

 

[Drifter]

If we are consistent with your logic then I am on the same level with Christ?

No. But based on your logic, men are to women as Christ is to man. That's blasphemy. If you read hierarchy into the "headship" passages, you're implying Christ is subordinate to the Father. An Arian blasphemy that has been firmly rejected hence why complementarians largely dont use the Trinity as a model for marriage anymore. Look, I have to go somewhere. If you want to continue this convo I'll be back tomorrow but please dont bother unless you're actually willing to listen.

 

[Lyfe]

Because if they were happy they never would have fought and died for the rights they gained under feminism

So the reason why they were unhappy in life is solely attributed to work related rights and certain freedoms? Also what percentage of american women even consisted of feminists at that time? Your acting like it was all women who were feminists.... Your really contending all the women werent happy in a definitive sense at that time?

 

[justjess]

I disagree.

I think you have made that obvious by now.. just because you disagree doesn’t mean your opinion of your opinion is correct. It’s cognitive dissonance.

you want women to submit to being housewives whether they want to or not, blame feminism for brainwashing women rather than acknowledge even in the slightest that if the old way wasn’t flawed women wouldn’t have attempted anything new, and blame all the mentally weak women who fell for it for destroying the family and “gods plan” rather than consider that the type of family you idolize was already destroyed (defective by design) before feminism even came around. You think any woman who doesn’t agree with you is following satan. So say you disagree all you want.. they are just words. Your detailed thoughts show otherwise.

 

[Lyfe]

No. But based on your logic, men are to women as Christ is to man. That's blasphemy. If you read hierarchy into the "headship" passages, you're implying Christ is subordinate to the Father. An Arian blasphemy that has been firmly rejected hence why complementarians largely dont use the Trinity as a model for marriage anymore. Look, I have to go somewhere. If you wat to continue this convo I'll be back tomorrow but please dont bother unless you're actually willing to listen.

I have been listening, but your basically telling me to accept this obscure interpretation as the gospel truth.

 

[Drifter]

I have been listening, but your basically telling me to accept this obscure interpretation as the gospel truth.

Proper linguistic explanation = obscure interpretation.