Matt 7:15
Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
I'm not a member of any Christian church's denomination.
I don't attend a church service.
But I have read the Bible (KJV) multiple times. While I'm certainly not a biblical scholar, I do believe I understand the overarching morality and guidelines the Bible seeks to impart on believers.
Dalrock has been on a tear lately in going after Christians who teach subversive, false doctrines that appear on the surface to be "Christianity."
As someone who doesn't have a dog in the denomination-competition hunt (who's got the true doctrine, who's worshipping traditions are true to God's command, etc.), my interpretation of the Bible is based solely on my own quest to understand truth.
I haven't stepped into a church and listened to a sermon in over 16 years - save for the occasional wedding, baptism or funeral of a family member or friend I've had to attend.
Yet Biblical principles are the foundation of my moral belief. The Golden Rule, the 10 commandments and all that. I guess part of my brainwashing I endured for the first 14 years of my life did have some positive influence on me.
Many writers and commenters in the anti-establishment/politically incorrect sphere of teh interwebz oft note how feminized many Christian church's have become. That was the case of the church I grew up in, where men are demonized and women lionized on their pedestals of spiritual purity and moral superiority. Where the men commonly talked about their wives and referred to them as "their better halves."
This state of affairs is precisely why men have been driven from the church. It's why I left as soon as I was a teenager tired of being shamed and branded with the scarlet M in my particular sect I was born into.
But something happened to me today that gave me another epiphany. While driving and listening to my ipod (more specifically, the new Chickenfoot album...kickass!), when the album finished, and I didn't choose a new album to listen to, my ipod automatically shut off. The radio transmitter I use to listen to music on the car radio shut off, and I discovered that the frequency I was using now picked up the local Christian talk radio channel.
And apparently I tuned in right in the middle of some evangelical mangina blowhard raising holy hell from his broadcast pulpit, exhorting husbands for their failures in leadership and not taking care of their wives is the root of so many marital problems. It contained all of the stereotypes regularly pointed out in the manosphere regarding the feminization of the modern church.
I tuned in right as he began to discuss Ephesians 5:22 and how it doesn't mean what men "thinks it means." He then went on to explain what the verse means: that men and women in marriage are to be in mutual submission to each other.
In my opinion, there is a key point of discernment in understanding which preachers and pastors are teaching the false doctrine of Feminism disguised as Christianity - any preacher or pastor that seeks to soften, change or redefine the verse of Ephesians 5:22 to mean something other than what was plainly written: Wives sumbit to your husbands as unto the Lord so as to shame men and appeal to women, is a false teacher.
My understanding of the core message of the Bible, is that Traditional Christianity is a cultural program, designed to build strong families to form a strong society. A code of morality to build a community bound by faith and adherence to the same principles. It is Patriarchal to it's core.
In my view, Ephesians plainly lays out the hierarchy of leadership in marriage and in the home. Wives are commanded to submit to their husbands, and husbands are commanded to love their wives as Christ loved the church.
This authoritative sounding preacher, than made the case that this meant a husband and wife were to have mutual submission to each other, and not that the husband is the leader. He basically equated the command to love their wives, as just another way of saying husbands and wives are to submit to each other.
But than, this is what I get for reading the Bible and thinking for myself, rather than rely on someone else to interpret it for me.
He than went on a tirade reiterating repeatedly about how men are responsible for the sad state of marriage in the modern day, as they don't pay enough attention to their wives, and that by exerting any sort of authority makes him an unjust, domineering tyrant and that he's not loving his wife, like Christ loved the church.
This kind of sermon is female rationalization hamster superfood. No wonder the kind of Churches that preach this crap are full of women without nary a man in sight.
In practice, mutual submission doesn't work. You end up with a submission deadlock. Couple this with the modern Christian's warped view of the intrinsic virtue of the female simply for being born with a vagina, way up on her pedestal, and what do you have when husband and wife are practicing "mutual submission?"
You end up with a female-headed household.
This is not traditional, Patriarchal-based Christianity. It is the abomination and corruption that has driven men away from the many denominations that ascribe to this anti-Patriarchal shibboleths in droves.
This man, preaching from his pulpit and having a national broadcast by a syndicated radio network, was subtly and subversively distorting the Bible to shame men into becoming beholden to their wives authority, as well as the sole reason marriages are foundering in today's church. According to this broadcaster, anything less than mutual submission would mean he was being a domineering tyrant and not loving his wife like Christ loved the church.
Immediately following the sermon, a commercial came on, urging listeners to buy DVD's of the sermon just broadcast. It also included "kits" including visuals and supplemental materials for Pastors, Reverends and other Christian leaders to help SPREAD THE WORD.
Immediately after the sales pitch, another sermon began by some other sanctimonious holy roller, who began preaching on how anyone should feel guilty for not paying tithing to the church.
It brought to mind one of my favorite old school Metallica songs, Leper Messiah:
Send me money, send me green, heaven you will meet...make your contributions and get the better seat!
I turned off the radio in disgust.
When I got to work, I googled the name of the evangelist's radio program and found his website.
The website is shallow, littered with feel good phrases of psuedo-spirituality. It was just a showcase for all of it's content - TV, Radio and Magazine articles, that were all "subscriptions" that required fees (accepting all major credit cards) to access. In addition to mulitiple links to become a subscriber, it also had "donate to the ministry" buttons all over the place.
SPREAD THE WORD.
Here's the problem as I see it. Mass media broadcasting evangelists seem far more concerned with raising donations, selling books and DVDs and pimping for speaking fees and guest appearances at Churches than they are in actually preaching Biblical TRUTH.
This is the worship of Mammon. Worst of all, they've commercially packaged the materials that subvert Biblical truths and promulgate false doctrines to sell it to Pastors, Evangelists, Reverends and any other leader that listens to Corporate Christian radio and lets these lying liars lead them astray so they in turn can lead their own congregations astray.
I think this is one way in which feminism was able to weasel it's way into the doctrine of many corrupted Christian denominations. Feminism sells well, because it tells many women the lies they want to hear. Women who otherwise believe they are good Christians, and that submitting to their husbands has nothing to do with being a good Christian. And these women rule their homes and seethe in contempt for their beta-ized husbands and their "mutual submission."
In my humble opinion, if you ever hear any Preacher, Pastor or any other proclaimed Biblical authority make the case that Ephesians 5:22 does not mean Men are not the authority in the home, you are listening to the false doctrine of a church dedicated to the worship of Feminism and of Mammon, and not God THE FATHER.
23 comments:
You need to get back into the Church, not for your own sake, but for the sake of others. I've spent the last 10 years or so calling pastors, elders, deacons, and teachers on their feminization of the Gospel. I've frustrated most pastors, woken up a few manginas in the deacon body, and gotten some strange looks from their wives. It's a thankless, frustrating calling, but it sure is fun sometimes stirring the pudding. I've been labeled a "troublemaker" by manginas and thanked by women. I've also noticed lately when I make a pro-male comment in a Bible study class, I usually get a friend request from one of the wives, on top of having a good "nap" after church with my submissive wife ;^) . Iron sharpen's iron, and you shouldn't give up on the Church. I'm sure you could have a lot of fun being a "troublemaker."
Christians are responsible for whom they support, whom they gve money to, and for attending false teaching/doctrine. We are to come out of the false/Babylonian church and walk with Christ, not try to tame ravening wolves.
"I tuned in right as he began to discuss Ephesians 5:22 and how it doesn't mean what men "thinks it means." He then went on to explain what the verse means: that men and women in marriage are to be in mutual submission to each other."
Wow. This makes me glad that the preacher at the congregation I attend has no issue with telling women to submit to their husbands and stop trying to run the church. It's been a long, hard battle about this over the last eighteen months, but he's been able to kill off a good portion of the feminism that was present in the congregation. I'm proud to have helped him.
"Here's the problem as I see it. Mass media broadcasting evangelists seem far more concerned with raising donations, selling books and DVDs and pimping for speaking fees and guest appearances at Churches than they are in actually preaching Biblical TRUTH."
This is unfortunately true. And nothing is more profitable than false doctrine. People love being told that they can do what want and still get to heaven. They like being told that they don't have to repent of their sin in order to be right with God. And they will pay good money to hear this.
"In my humble opinion, if you ever hear any Preacher, Pastor or any other proclaimed Biblical authority make the case that Ephesians 5:22 does not mean Men are not the authority in the home, you are listening to the false doctrine of a church dedicated to the worship of Feminism and of Mammon, and not God THE FATHER."
Amen.
The preacher had a point but he may have overstated it. The previous pope said something similar, which the present pope clarified at the time. The husband IS the head of his wife but his rule is mitigated by love. The wife is required to obey her husband, "in everything". God will judge the husband on how he led his wife in love and the wife on how she followed her husband and his legitimate commands.
David Collard
DC: Seems the only reasonable idea.
Another thins is when people say "Only God can judge" they think more of the "You cannot judge me" part than the "God will judge me" part.
Lavazza
I'm glad you posted this.
Women are to submit to their husbands. Men are to love as Christ loved the Church and gave himself up for her.
Then there is the curse of Eve: That her desire will be for her husband, and to rule over him.
Leaving aside the theology, we see how this works in practice. If the man does not lead and act dominantly, there is a leadership vacuum. The wife often steps in and tries to lead, with disastrous results. This is why the man is called to lead, with his dominance tempered by love.
I've called out pastors on this before. Eph. 5:22 does NOT mean mutual submission. It means the wife submits, the husband leads.
This is more evidence that the modern Christian church is thoroughly feminized.
deti
Good post Keoni, even though it is a bit disheartening that this message og "mutual submission" was being spread over the airwaves.
I do however, understand how this view has gained traction. There is a verse earlier in the chapter 5 of Ephesians (I think it's verse 21) that exhorts Christians in general to submit to one another. Of course, this is not absolute and does not extend into the family else Paul wouldn't have felt the need to reiterate godly family order.
However, a vocal group of feminist Christians have used the verse to promote egalitarian marriage as a Biblical principle. But as I said in my recent post, "Feminism By Any Other Name..", when a man invites his wife to co-lead, she becomes the leader by default.
One look around can clearly illustrate where that has gotten us.
I think it is legitimate to argue that mutual submission does apply in the family, but the forms of submission are very different. Paul's language places a burden on men to have sacrificial love and a wife to show respectful obedience. The problem is not the concept of mutual submission, but the failure to properly distinguish roles. The husband submits by love and the wife by obedience.
David Collard
Replace all your "than"s with "then".
I pretty much agree, except for the fact that tithing is Biblical, whether you like it or not. You can't speak out (correctly) about one scripture being misinterpreted, and do it yourself. However, I would never send tithe money to one of these TV preachers. My late father did, and he was bombarded with requests from TV 'ministries' from then on.
I agree totally about the feminization of most churches. When the church attacks the biblical pattern for the family, then who is left to defend it?
Good stuff, KG-I came to the same conclusion as you did when reading Eph. 5...
@knepper said; where does it say in the NT for Christians to tithe? If you point to the old woman giving her last coins, she was a Jew living by the Law, not a Christian.
It sickens me as a Christian man to hear EVERY single Christian "man" I've met in person and discussed this with tell me they think men must mutually submit to their wives.
Without fail!
I make a point of telling uppity broads that pretend to be Christians to pull out their Bibles and read the passage or STFU. I tell them they're ignorant and/or willfully rebelling against what they themselves say is God's word.
I have pissed women off to no end but I do not care. I will not be cowed, manipulated or lied to.
And I enjoy showing these cowed men the truth, even if I know they will never act upon it.
Everything about women screams for their desire to submit to their men. Their physiology, their psychology, you name it.
And they almost never have it in them to directly rebel in the face of masculine virtue. They back down every time. What does that tell you?
"But than, this is what I get for reading the Bible and thinking for myself, rather than rely on someone else to interpret it for me."
This. If you walk as Christ actually walked, no church would have you anyway. Paid professionals are Nicolaitans by definition, no matter how nice they are.
"You need to get back into the Church, not for your own sake, but for the sake of others."
I'd take Truth over Unity any day, and twice on Sabbath.
Word Up.
"Mutual submission": a fancy way of saying "egalitarian", which ends up, as you point out, with an unBiblical, female headed household. False prophets indeed!
The mutual submission thing is so tiring. I do not want to control a woman, I just want to lead her. She can voluntarily submit to my leadership and follow me or she can choose not to, if I lead her wrongly or am unworthy of her trust.
I also do not need to prove myself to her. But if she goes she should go without expecting or feeling entitled for anything from me.
"Paid professionals are Nicolaitans by definition, no matter how nice they are."
What's the definition of a Nicolaitan? Other than that they're wrong, the Bible says very little about them.
A problem with a lot of radio, TV and do-it-yourself evangelists is folks forming and then spewing opinions based on what they read in their personal favorite translation of scripture.
Many passages translated to English only communicate a partial meaning. They don't go deeper into the concepts and context of the original words. Sometimes even knowing the Greek word meanings isn't enough because the earliest Christian writers were mostly Jews who were communicating from a background of Hebrew thought and culture. In fact, a lot of the New Testament is somewhat awkward Greek that when translated into Hebrew becomes very poetic and richer in meaning.
The footnotes for Eph 5 on the USCCB site are pretty good: http://www.usccb.org/bible/ephesians/5
This passage is not about mutual obedience. It is about love and HOW a husband is to love his wife and HOW a wife is to love her husband. In Catholic theology, faith and love are understood to be active ("Faith without works is dead."). They are not warm fuzzy emotion words. Faith and love are supposed to drive believers to act.
THe word "submit" is a poor translation of the Greek which is also about having things in right order to each other. Verse 21 on "submitting to each other" fits just fine with the following verses as long as this is understood. Paul goes on from there to describe what the "right order" is between husband and wife.
Preach it, HL!
Eventually I'll get around to writing about marriage in the prophets and in the NT--including Eph 5--but in the meantime you can download my comments on marriage in the Torah for free. (I'm always willing to accept donations, of course! LOL)
From my comments on Exodus 13:15... "Because the firstborn is always male, so the Messiah and King, the firstborn of the resurrection, the only begotten Son of God, and the kinsman
redeemer of all mankind must be male. Patriarchy is intertwined with God’s economy on every level, and if one rejects patriarchy—and thereby the kinsman redeemer—one also rejects its special protections for women, children, travelers, the sick, and the poor."
The last pope got a lot of this going with some of his writings. But careful reading shows that even he did not negate the headship of the husband or the wife's duty to obey. As he wrote, the roles are Christianised. Christ redeemed the natural order. He did not abolish it.
David Collard
While we're at it, let's talk about the marriage debt. Are there any couples who understand that concept?
With regard to your post, it is one subject I noted a few years ago. Not in what I understood about feminism, but my LACK of understanding and knowledge of the Bible. Rather than listen to sermons, such as the one you described in your post, I did something radical. I've sat down to actually read the written word.
I believe what is most frustrating about the whole state of affairs is this; those without conviction to sit a read have little to no other resource for obtaining biblical knowledge. Listening to a radio sermon as described in the post, or naively attending the multitude of feminized churches, boys and men gain little in the way of knowledge, understanding, and biblical authority.
I think you're dead-on correct in your assessment of how the Church has horribly misinterpreted passages like Ephesians 5:22 and disrupted the very clear order of relations in marriage as both the OT and NT point out.
However...
"My understanding of the core message of the Bible, is that Traditional Christianity is a cultural program, designed to build strong families to form a strong society. A code of morality to build a community bound by faith and adherence to the same principles."
This is a grievous error. Christianity is not a "cultural program" developed to make better people or families; it is resurrection, rebirth, and re-creation, starting with Christ and culminating with the new heavens and new earth. To reduce Christianity into into a social program of self-improvement is to discard the gospel and its striking message that we aren't getting better, and we can't do it ourselves.
In fact, Jesus seems to have very little concern for earthly family, as Luke 8:19-21 point out. God's grace completely re-defines the family, and his goal isn't to give us perfect, stable marriages, but to follow him even when it's tough. While I agree with much of what the Christian manosphere says, I think they largely mangle the gospel message into their own agenda, much like the false teachers who reduce it to health and wealth.
In this view, Paul's writing on marriage in Ephesians and elsewhere is not designed to be a blueprint for a happy family, but one that honors God through obedience. This is, I believe, a small but important distinction.
The Christian manosphere seems to cultivate a certain type of person who believes the Bible is little more than a useful social manual, based around personal, individualist piety. Being part of a church and the larger body of Christ is an essential part of being a Christian, like it or not. Yes, many churches are screwed-up, but you can always keep searching for another one, or work for positive change. Rejecting church altogether because it doesn't suit you is little different from the wife who divorces her husband because she's unhaaaaaapy with him. In both cases, obedience in reflection of Christ is the goal, not individualistic satisfaction.
Post a Comment