(I have split Satanic Feminism Part 3 into
3 parts; a, b, and c, for those who would prefer it to be a more manageable
read)
I do not permit a woman to teach or
to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet. For Adam was
formed first, then Eve; and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived
and became a transgressor.
The Apostle Paul in 1 Timothy 2:12-14
(Note,
this series overlaps with my series on Equality, which I refer to at times in
this series)
So far in
our Satanic Feminism series we have looked at how the wicked wanted the West to
change, and at part of the history of how they initiated this change. In doing
so we took a brief look at the philosophical roots of the feminist movement,
and where it found its inspiration about came equality from. I think from what
we have established so far, you have to conclude that feminism was not inspired
by Christianity, or by a faithful reading of the Scriptures. There is simply no
scriptural grounds for such an ideology suggested by any of the history we have
examined so far.
However,
this needs to be argued more explicitly because one mistake a lot of modern
conservatives or Christians make is seeing equality, and even early feminism,
as an intrinsically Christian or biblical idea. This is exemplified in many
arguments I have heard about feminism from conservative commentators all the
way down to random conservatives on social media. It is one of those arguments
that is parroted often without being examined. You may have even heard this kind
of argument before: first wave feminism is good, second feminism is less reasonable,
and third wave feminism, or intersectional feminism, has just gone beyond the
pale. Here[1] is one version of this argument, and
here[2] is another.
The justification
for this line of reasoning is the argument that the first wave of feminism was
just seeking to right a societal wrong, and successive forms of feminism took
the ideas further, to the point of absurdity in its most recent forms. The underlying
basis for this argument is that most people assume that equality is a good
idea, and because first wave feminism has famously been associated with
egalitarian impulses, like suffrage, many people are keen to affirm it, even if
they realize it has gone too far in the end. Indeed, someone made this point to
me on the day I originally began to write this, and I have heard it many times
before and since.
To support
this position a lot of conservatives like to note not just that first wave
feminism was connected to suffrage, but also that it had a large evangelical
presence in its ranks. It is important to recognize that we have grown up in
the culture that was created by that movement. Most people, even most Christians,
just assume that feminism was a noble cause at the start focused on a so-called
benign force like equality, and it has just been hijacked by a world that has
gone crazy. But there are some really big problems with this position.
First, this
position assumes the Bible is concerned with advocating for equality. But it is
not, as has been established in previous articles. Second, it assumes the move
for equality has been good for the West, when it has not, it has slowly eroded
every single one of the most important aspects of our society, the nation
(people), the Church and the family. Third, it ignores all of the evidence that
there were Satanic influences, indeed a Satanic foundation, behind the feminist
movement from the beginning. This is not just my conclusion as a Baptist
preacher, this has been historically documented by Per Faxneld in his work Satanic
Feminism: Lucifer as the Liberator of Women in Nineteenth-Century Culture.[3] We discussed this in depth in part one and two of this series.
My
contention in this series is very simple: feminism is not Christian, it is intrinsically
anti-Christian and has been Satanic from the beginning. This is certain both in
a theological and a historical sense, and we are seeing the fruits of its aims
bearing themselves out in our society today, especially in the effect feminism
has had on the family. In this article I want to address the first assumption
in some detail, leaving number two and three for later pieces which will expand
on the details and evidence of the first two articles in this Satanic
Feminism series.
While I have
written about what the Bible says about equality in more detail elsewhere, let me give a simple example here from
Jesus’ teaching, from the gospel of Matthew;
“1 For the kingdom of heaven is like a master of a house who
went out early in the morning to hire laborers for his vineyard. 2 After
agreeing with the laborers for a denarius a day, he sent them into his
vineyard. 3 And going out about the third hour he saw others standing idle in
the marketplace, 4 and to them he said, ‘You go into the vineyard too, and
whatever is right I will give you.’ 5 So they went. Going out again about the
sixth hour and the ninth hour, he did the same. 6 And about the eleventh hour
he went out and found others standing. And he said to them, ‘Why do you stand
here idle all day?’ 7 They said to him, ‘Because no one has hired us.’ He said
to them, ‘You go into the vineyard too.’ 8 And when evening came, the owner of
the vineyard said to his foreman, ‘Call the laborers and pay them their wages,
beginning with the last, up to the first.’ 9 And when those hired about the
eleventh hour came, each of them received a denarius. 10 Now when those hired
first came, they thought they would receive more, but each of them also
received a denarius. 11 And on receiving it they grumbled at the master of the
house, 12 saying, ‘These last worked only one hour, and you have made them
equal to us who have borne the burden of the day and the scorching heat.’ 13
But he replied to one of them, ‘Friend, I am doing you no wrong. Did you not
agree with me for a denarius? 14 Take what belongs to you and go. I choose to
give to this last worker as I give to you. 15 Am I not allowed to do what I
choose with what belongs to me? Or do you begrudge my generosity?’ 16 So the
last will be first, and the first last” (Matthew 20:1-16).
Now some
might see this and right away think: well bad choice of passage to make your
point, look what the workers say in verse 12, “These last worked only one hour,
and you have made them equal to us who have borne the burden of
the day and the scorching heat.” Ha! See, Jesus has made them equal, and yes they
are complaining about that, but the passage definitely teaches equality sir!!
But does it really? What is the point of the passage?
Jesus is
talking about who gets access to the kingdom. The Jewish leaders that Jesus is
dealing with think they and the Jews they lead are God’s only people, because
they have followed him from time immemorial, but here comes these new disciples
and all these other people, and Jesus appears to be favouring them. Indeed,
Jesus gives the workers who came in the last hour the same pay as those who had
been there all day. This is not equality, because they are being paid the same
sum for different amounts of work. These workers are annoyed because
they have been treated unequally and felt that their work is being undervalued.
Being made equal in pay to someone who had done less work is not equality. It
is the master doing as he sees fit.
In other
words, the early workers are complaining that Jesus does not treat
people equally. Jesus, in return, challenges them about his grace: “15 Am I not
allowed to do what I choose with what belongs to me? Or do you begrudge my
generosity?” Jesus is saying what many Bible passages say; that God gives as he
sees fit, and the conclusion of the parable seals the point: “So the last will
be first, and the first last.” Jesus is not saying that all will be equal, but
the exact opposite, some will be treated better than others, and many of those
who are last will be shocked that they are.
The main
point of this parable is quite simple: Jesus, who is God, does as he sees fit. It
is not our place to question the Master.
The Bible is
filled with many examples of how spiritual equality does not exist. There are
sheep and goats, wolves and shepherds, snakes, foxes and doves, and even among
the unsaved some will be beaten with few blows and some with many when they
face judgement (Luke 12:41-49). David may consider his friend his equal, but by
stating this he is admitting that he does not consider others to be (Ps.
55:12-15). Material equality does not exist, because we will always have the
poor. Equality amongst people is simply not a biblical idea. As with this
parable, there are many other passages which rebuke the idea. You must twist these words, “the
last will be first, and the first last” violently to make them about equality. They
are referring to a reversal, not an equalization. And if equality does not even
apply to the final perfect state, how can it apply now, when we see all around
us it does not exist?
When you
recognize that equality is not a biblical position you recognize that the scriptures
cannot have been the driving force for feminism. Feminism is, in reality,
inherently about power and domination not equality, but it frames itself as a
quest for equality, and is understood by many, whether progressive or
conservative, to be as such. But even if it were truly about equality the
Scriptures cannot be the impetus for this movement, because the scriptures are
not concerned with equality. This becomes especially clear when you look at the
explicit teaching on this issue from the Bible.
Feminism
says women should
lead society, the Bible says a society led by women is cursed, Isaiah
3:12 - “12 My people—infants are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O
my people, your guides mislead you and they have swallowed up the course of
your paths.”
Feminism
says the home should
not have a head, and if it does, it need not be the man. The Bible says,
“22 And the rib that the Lord God had taken from the man he made into a woman
and brought her to the man. 23 Then the man said, “This at last is bone of my
bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called Woman, because she was taken
out of Man” (Genesis 2:22-23). In the ancient world, where this was written, naming
is a sign of authority and pre-eminence. The one who leads, the one who has
authority, is the one who can name. But if that is not clear enough, then the
Bible also says is, “5 For this is how the holy women who hoped in God used
to adorn themselves, by submitting to their own husbands, 6 as Sarah obeyed
Abraham, calling him lord” (1 Peter 3:5-6).
Feminism
says women should
teach and assume authority over men, the Bible says, “11 Let a woman
learn quietly with all submissiveness. 12 I do not permit a woman to teach or
to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet” (1 Timothy
2:11-12). Or Paul’s last work, “2 You then, my child, be strengthened by the
grace that is in Christ Jesus, 2 and what you have heard from me in the
presence of many witnesses entrust to faithful men, who will be able to teach
others also” (2 Timothy 2:1-2).
Feminism
says that gender is
a construct and that men and women are interchangeable, and some say that
marriage is an oppressive institution. Jesus tells us, “4 He answered,
“Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male
and female, 5 and said, ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother
and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’?” (Matthew
19:4-5). The Bible not only affirms the goodness of marriage, and the reality of
the male and female genders, it also highlights gender differences. For
example, 1 Corinthians 16:13 – “13 Be watchful, stand firm in the faith, act
like men, be strong.” Or Jeremiah 48:41 – “…The cities shall be taken and the
strongholds seized. The heart of the warriors of Moab shall be in that day like
the heart of a woman in her birth pains…”
So, not only
is the Bible not concerned with equality it also rejects the pillars of
feminism at every point. Someone might respond and say, but feminism is about justice,
is the Bible against justice? No, the Bible taught the West to defend the weak,
and to do what is right, the Bible defined what justice meant in the West for
centuries, and still effects our understanding of fairness, openness and equity
today. Feminism undermines those Scriptures, and therefore is a force for
wickedness because it redefines justice…indeed, that is what all social justice
is, a redefinition of justice. Justice needs no qualifier, only application.
That someone
can read these passages we have looked and say that the Bible is consistent
with feminism is completely against reason. In fact, even some of the first
wave, or so-called evangelical, feminists saw how these passages conflicted
with their ideology. Which is embarrassing, because modern “evangelical”
feminists say the Bible is consistent with their ideology, whereas the original
“evangelical” feminists confidently said that it was not. Rather than face
this, and conform their version of Christianity to the Bible’s teachings, they
simply decided to brush this teaching aside,
While woman's subordination is taught as a Scriptural
doctrine, the most devout and learned biblical scholars of the present day
admit that the Bible has suffered many interpolations in the course of the
centuries. Some of these have doubtless occurred through efforts to render
certain passages clearer, while others have been forged with direct intention
to deceive. Disraeli says that the early English editions contain 6,000 errors,
which were constantly introduced, and passages interpolated for sectarian
purposes, or to sustain new creeds. Sometimes, indeed, they were added for the
purpose of destroying all Scriptural authority by the suppression of texts. The
Church Union says of the present translation, that there are more than 7,000
variations from the received Hebrew text, and more than 150,000 from the
received Greek text…
…Amid this vast discrepancy in regard to the truth of the
Scriptures themselves; with no Hebrew manuscript older than the twelfth
century; with no Greek one older than the fourth; with the acknowledgment by
scholars of 7,000 errors in the Old Testament, and 150,000 in the New; with
assurance that these interpolations and changes have been made by men in the
interest of creeds, we may well believe that the portions of the Bible quoted
against woman's equality are but interpolations of an unscrupulous priesthood,
for the purpose of holding her in subjection to man.[4]
The source
of this quote is The Complete History of the
Suffragette Movement written by Elizabeth Cady Stanton and other famous
feminists. There are several false assumptions and leaps of logic in these two
paragraphs, which we may deal with in another article. But for today’s purpose,
I just want you to observe that this early feminist is outright rejecting the Bible’s
teaching on male and female distinctiveness. They are not seeking to uphold it
in anyway, and therefore one should ask: Was this really a movement that was
precipitated by Christianity?
Remember
this comes from the period of feminism sometimes referred to as evangelical
feminism, but the spirit of this argument is very much this: “Did God really
say?” Sound familiar? This is not an argument seeking to uphold the Christian
faith, but rather undermine and subvert it. So is another tactic that is often
used to navigate around these passages.
Some, who
would say they are for the maintenance of Christian truth, have offered a
different argument to passages such as those above. This argument is that these
passages simply reflect the culture of their day, and we have grown beyond
them. After all this is true of other cultural aspects of scripture is it not? We
don’t all greet each other with a kiss when we enter into church do we, so why could
this not be the case on this issue regarding gender roles? But to say Paul did
not allow women to teach because it reflected the culture of his day is demonstrably
incorrect, as feminists themselves declare. Again, we read in The Complete History of the Suffragette Movement:
“In Rome she had not only secured remarkable personal and
property rights, but she officiated as priestess in the most holy offices of
religion. Not only as Vestal Virgin did she guard the Sacred Fire, upon whose
preservation the welfare of Rome was held to depend, but at the end of every consular
period women officiated in private worship and sacrifice to the Bono Dea, with
mystic ceremonies which no man's presence was suffered to profane…All
Pagandom recognized a female priesthood, some making their national safety
to depend upon them, like Rome; sybils wrote the Books of Fate, and oracles
where women presided were consulted by many nations”[5]
(emphasis mine).
This quote
makes an embarrassment of the idea that female religious leaders were not
allowed to teach in the New Testament era, or even the ancient era. This is
patently absurd, ahistorical, and even the Bible itself flatly contradicts this
idea…
…To see how the Bible and history contradict
this idea continue on to Part B…
[1] McEnany,
Kayleigh 2013, “21st Century Feminism: An Embarrassment to My Gender”, Blaze
Media, accessed 8/07/2021, https://www.theblaze.com/contributions/21st-century-feminism-an-embarrassment-to-my-gender.
[2]Blaze
TV Staff 2017, “Allie: I'm not a feminist, and here's why”, Blaze Media,
accessed 8/07/2021, https://www.theblaze.com/video/allie-im-not-a-feminist-and-heres-why.
[3] Faxneld,
Per 2017, Satanic Feminism:
Lucifer as the Liberator of Woman in Nineteenth-Century Culture, Oxford University Press, New York.
[4] Stanton,
Elizabeth Cady (et. al.) 2017, The Complete History of the Suffragette
Movement - All 6 Books in One Edition) The Battle for the Equal Rights:
1848-1922, Musaicum Books. Kindle Edition. Chapter 15.
[5] Ibid,
chapter 15.
No comments:
Post a Comment