"Feminism is cancer."
At least according to one Milo Yiannopoulos at a recent talk with Steven Crowder, and Christina Hoff Summers, now referred to as "the triggering". And sadly, Milo (an unrepentant flamboyant homosexual) appears to be correct. From its roots, in an effort to gain equality for the sexes, it has now morphed into what is colloquially referred to as "third wave feminism". It's advocates are stereotyped as the angry misandrist woman with dyed hair, a bull horn and a foul mouth, like Chanty Binx. (
**LANGUAGE WARNING** https://www.youtube.com/shared?ci=NChC4q27f_E https://www.youtube.com/shared?ci=qcViFpDC3k0 )
Sadly, this infamous ideology has spread throughout our society, creating the horrors of abortion on demand, broken homes in the defense of "sexual liberation", leading to single parenthood (which creates its own host of problems including higher rates of criminal activity and suicide among children), a degradation of the acceptance of responsibility for actions, a degradation in the masculine role (which leaves young boys now confused as to their place in society and removes the biblical standard of manhood), high divorce rates, etc. Don't think you're getting off easy on this one guys, you're nearly as much to blame for this as feminists*! A lack of backbone, the inability to stand for what is right, has allowed this to spiral out of control. Too many men are taking advantage of these "liberated women", who don't want to be viewed as sex objects, yet demand the freedom to be treated like one. Premarital sex has become a norm in our society due to this, in which STDs and abortions are now the rule as opposed to the exception. No longer is it seen as virtuous to save oneself until marriage, now the virtue is in claiming as many sexual exploits as possible and avoiding the responsibilities that come with marriage. Sadly, this has found its way into Christianity as well under the guise of "egalitarianism".
"Christian" feminism*, also known as "egalitarianism" is the idea that there are no set roles for authority or teaching laid out in the Bible. This is a bit of a simplification, but not by much. It's the idea that when the Scriptures lay out the authority in the church, it's structure, and the structure of the family, that these don't actually mean things like "the man is the head of the woman" (1 Corinthians 11:3, Ephesians 5:23) or that women are not allowed to hold authority in the church (1 Timothy 2:12). They also can be ignored when they lay out the requirements to be an elder or pastor (1 Timothy 3:1-7, Titus 1:5-9, 1 Peter 5:1-4) which lays out specifications like "the husband of one wife", "his children are believers", etc. These things are glossed over, usually with folks having the temerity to claim that it's context means it doesn't apply today.
However, we see in the moving away from the biblical standard, splits in churches and the rise of false teachers. I myself just recently left a church that had stood on Biblical principles for over 150 years, until feminism* in the leadership brought a woman into the pastorate. A woman who could not exegete her way out a wet paper bag, and who wasn't even ordained until nearly a full year after taking the position. This same woman who said and I quote, "God is Love God is Love God is Love, you can make the bible say anything, God is Love God is Love God is Love." I'll never forget that, as it was in response to my explaining to a fellow church member, that the Bible says one must repent of their sins. I'm not saying there aren't also bad male pastors as well, because unfortunately in this day and age, they're far too common. That being said, since it is obvious that churches and Christians today are deteriorating, why would we walk further from God's word? That's like saying one could get themselves out of a hole, by digging deeper!
A case in point is Jory Micah. Some of you may recognize that name, as she recently attacked both Dr. James White and his daughter Summer. She is the epitome of what I was discussing above. Driven apparently more by emotion than logic or facts, she railed against Dr. White and Summer, claiming they were "cult leaders" and warning people to stay away from them.
Note how she was so incensed that she failed to realize the tweet she grabbed when she went on her emotional tirade, was nothing more than one detailing a Muslin podcast that Dr. White had listened to (with the intention of responding to it on The Dividing Line) and some church history. That's hatred? That's scary? Now, let me get into a bit more specifics about what I've been talking about, using Mrs. Peterson (that's her husband's last name, the one she refuses to take. So much for joining to one another Genesis 2:24 style huh?) and a couple of her followers. Let's begin:
Ok let's actually look at the text of Ephesians 5:21 shall we? "Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ." By itself, that makes one wonder if she doesn't have a point right? And while I agree, men and women are equal on their value and worth, they are not set side by side in authority. How do I know this? Because of the next three verses: "Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything." Now, Jory has attempted to get around this by saying that the word "head" here could be translated as "source". So the husband is the "source" of the wife, as if this passage were harkening back to Adam and Eve. However nowhere in the text is this even alluded to, let alone meant as part of the context. In fact, to claim "head" actually means "source" would change the meaning of the second part of verse 23 where it says that Christ is the "head " of the Church. Let's read that in the Jory Micah translation: "For the husband is the (source) of the wife as Christ is the (source) of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior." This means that Jesus is no longer in charge of His church, He no longer holds authority over it, but is simply the source from which it came. I'm sure Jory would be fine with that, as other aspects of her "theology" seem to point to someone who believes in libertarian free will. However, let's take her "source" argument to another verse, to see if the hermeneutic holds up shall we? "But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ". (1 Corinthians 11:3) Now let's try the Jory Micah translation: "But I want you to understand that Christ is the (source) of every man, and the man is the (source) of a woman, and God is the (source) of Christ" Congratulations Jory, you just made every man the source for his wife, and advocated for the Jehovah's witnesses view of Christ in one fell swoop! Heresy (and idiocy) abound! But now, going back to those verses in Ephesians, verse 22 tells women to submit to their husbands as they do the Lord. If one is not submitting at all to their husbands, it seems to show they are likewise not submitting to the Lord. Changing "head" to "source" doesn't get you around this fact. Verse 24 reinforces this fact, and even goes so far as to tell women to "submit in everything"! Now, lest people feel I'm being one sided, guys remember what it says next? Verse 25: "Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her". In other words guys, stick with them, be faithful, and be willing to lay down your life for them! In fact verse 28 commends us to love our wives as our own bodies! I hope you fellas reading this didn't think you were getting a free pass! This isn't a "yeah you women better submit to us!" article, it's an "All of us need to get our act together!" article! If men actually acted like the Bible exhorts us to act, we wouldn't be in this situation! So guess what guys, this our fault too!
Even though it "seems patriarchal"? So the fact that the entire old testament was patriarchal doesn't register? The fact that God inspired it that way doesn't register? Of course Jory's definition of "patriarchy" is the new third wave feminist version, as opposed to the biblical version. It seems she saying "Well God, you didn't really inspire this the way I wanted, but I'll love it anyway!" Oh, and remember Jory, Jesus reinforced and lived that "patriarchy", and inspired the words of the authors of that Bible!
*CITATION NEEDED! There isn't a shred of evidence for this emotionalism, but as we can see, Jory liked it anyway. Please produce a single verse, spoken by Jesus, that said He wanted "free, strong, confident women". It's this emotionalism, this shallow thinking with no evidence to back it up that I'm railing against here.
Makes you wonder about Paul's thinking? What, that Paul was just a misogynist, who only wanted to put women in subjugation? I'm sorry, but did we forget that Paul was INSPIRED BY GOD! That the words he wrote were GOD BREATHED! So you're in effect, insulting both God and the apostle Paul, in an effort to push a secular agenda of "feminism*". Obviously feminists like these are happy to throw God out, and replace Him with the almighty uterus!
*-third wave feminism
https://twitter.com/jorymicah/status/789512485925629952
https://twitter.com/jorymicah/status/789521547362906113
https://carm.org/1-cor-113-word-head-does-
