Sunday Funny 6-28-09
by John Cole of thetimes.tribune.com…
A double heart breaker for me was reading that a large contingent in the Iran uprising was women. Of course. They are unbearably oppressed.
And they were abandoned back to their hell on earth by so-called feminist Barack Obama, as they were by so-called feminist groups like the National Organization for Women, from which we have heard nary a peep re: the Iran situation….
NOW was too busy standing behind Obama, both focused almost solely on abortion, over half of whom’s victims are female. Had Iranian women been protesting for the right to abort rather than the right to their own humanity, well, that would have been something else.
The other heart breaker was the stark reminder that this country and these women need Jesus.
Jesus liberated women. Jesus lived in a culture that treated women the same as they are treated today in Iran. There’s much more to this topic, but bearing that in mind, read this by Mary Evans, from her book, Woman in the Bible:
To turn from a consideration of the place of women in Judaism and the Roman Empire… to look at the attitude and behavior of Jesus as presented in the gospels, is to be immediately aware of a startling contrast. Jesus’ approach to women is without precedent in contemporary Judaism….
Jesus healed women, He allowed them to touch Him and to follow Him; He spoke without restraint of women, to women and with women. He related to women primarily as human beings rather than as sexual beings, that is, He was interested in them as persons, seeing their sex as an integral part but by no means the totality of their personality….
So, from the gospel accounts a portrait of Jesus emerges which is clear and consistent…. His attitude to women was startlingly new, He was able to mix freely and naturally with women of all sorts, and women followed and ministered to Him. His approach can accurately be described as revolutionary, and we must take care in assessing the impact of Jesus’ approach from our post-
revolution standpoint, not to forget just how revolutionary it was.
It is no wonder women helped fund Jesus’ ministry, and they were the first to view His resurrection and the first to carry the Gospel message. Matthew, Mark, and Luke indicate women were the first to view the resurrected Jesus. Unlike most of His male followers, women stayed with Jesus to the end and aided in His burial. As Evans wrote, “there is no record of any woman ever opposing Jesus.”
There was an awful, chilling phone call placed by a woman from Iran this week, begging for help:
In actuality, the women (and men) of Iran need Jesus, not Obama, to rescue them. Obama’s a wimp anyway, simply a reminder once again not to put our faith in people.
What is going on in Iran and the entire Middle East isn’t a political issue, in reality. It is a God issue. It is our issue as Christians.
[Photo attribution of man pointing cane at woman during protest in Tehran: Newsweek]
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
This is so sad; but these protestors (hooray, women!!!) are so brave. I don’t know that I could have the courage to do what they are doing, and I hope with all of my heart that this will all be resolved and people will be put back in charge of their government, de facto their lives- especially the women. They deserve to experience some power, now.
But, it’s very possible that I’m misreading the cartoon, but Islam isn’t what requires women to wear burqas. The burqa is a choice. I think that it is the culture of Iran or at the very least the Middle East- the laws of the land- that pressure women into it or require it. Islam doesn’t force women into the role that the law has.
You’re so right Jill. Iran needs the Gospel desperately. They are 99% Muslim and while the state technically considers the .4% Christian population a “protected minority”, in reality there is no protection. Pastors and church-goers are harrassed and therefore many have gone underground.
Years ago, I used to attend a weekly prayer meeting that focused on needs of the persecuted church. I don’t remember anything in my Christian walk that stirred up as much opposition as attending that prayer meeting. It was amazing how every week, something would come up to try to distract me and keep me from getting there.
I imagine it’s similar to what a lot of sidewalk counselors face when going out to rescue children at abortion mills – the front lines of battle, no doubt.
“Heavenly Father, may the Church of Jesus Christ wake up and take its proper place in the Earth. May our intercession shake the gates of Hell and drive back the powers of darkness that have terrorized and victimized the women of Iran. May we boldly confront our leaders to bring effective diplomatic and political pressure to support the cause of the oppressed there. Give our leaders backbone, oh God, and a burden to help those under this tyranny. Lord we pray for an open door for the Gospel to be preached in Iran. Help us to know what we can do to help alleviate their suffering. Strengthen our resolve Lord as we fight for justice for the women of Iran and for the unborn in America and throughout the world.
In your Mighty Name we pray Lord Jesus, amen.
Vannah,
I suggest following atlasshrugs.com and JihadWatch.com for a few weeks and you will come to the painful realization, as I did, that the last sentence of your comment is wishful thinking.
Those sites really rip off the mask of Islam. Much like Jill just ripping off the hypocritical mask of NOW in her post.
Hold on a second, I’m still in the throes of riotous laughter as the absurdity of Jill’s post today.
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH, HAHAHA, ha ha, hardy har har.
Ok, now that that is out of the way:
Part of the reason I shed my faith is the abhorent things the Bible says about the roles and positions of women.
This pretty much told me all I needed to know as far as whether or not I would continue to be a believer:
I Tim 2:
11.Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
12.But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
13.For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
14.And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
15.Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.
The idea that the Bible is a liberated women’s book is just ridiculous.
I’m glad the women of Iran have had enough. I’m glad they’re taking a stand against those who would oppress them. They need freedom more than anyone else in Iran right now. The can do it. We can do it.
And my feelings regarding the Koran are even stronger, as from what I have read, that book’s teachings are even more oppressive.
What some people in Islam do doesn’t represent all of Islam. It can’t. Just as people say, “Take a look at what the reality of being pro-life is,” when glancing at the George Tiller murder, the reality of Islam is complex. I really do think that it is the Middle East, and not Islam, that is responsible for the problems. Though, of course, the Middle East isn’t evil- it just has a lot of issues that are bogging it down (I’m mean, really down).
I’ll try to get around to your website though, Carder, to see you side of things about this.
xalisae,
Sorry to hear you’ve abandoned your faith. The Christian walk is one of liberty, not bondage. I’m going to do a little research on the passage you quoted but you have to be careful not to take one passage and make gross generalizations.
Jesus came to set the captives free, not put them into religious bondage. There is a lady by the name of Joyce Meyer who is a very popular Christian teacher / speaker doing a tremendous work for God.
God doesn’t hate women, consider how beautiful women are. They’re the crown of His Creation, His masterpiece.
And regardless of your position with respect to faith, I am proud to fight with you, shoulder to shoulder, on behalf of the unborn.
and for women’s rights.
Ed,
If you happen to have “The Big Book of Bible Difficulties” by Norm Geisler, he gives an excellent exegesis of the passages on page 497.
There is a very interesting show today on the eternal world catholic show the World Over Live Show at 5p.m. with Raymond Arroyo. Some non-Catholics will recognize his name from the Laura Ingraham radio show. He interviews the producer Steve McAveety (not sure of the spelling)of the movie, The Stoning of Sarriah M , again not sure of the spelling. Very enlightening and inspiring. Also you can probably get info from Raymond Arroyo’s website, just do a search The World Over Live.
Too bad the feminists groups are not educating themselves of the true nature of authentic feminism. This movie depicts the battles happening for women in countries that are really suffering as far as women’s rights. Unfortunately their agenda does not allow them to join this cause because it does not address their(radical feminism) precious right to abort their young. Only then, would they be on board.
I wonder where Jay Leno’s wife stands on this movie…. just pondering.
God doesn’t hate women, consider how beautiful women are. They’re the crown of His Creation, His masterpiece.
What a lovely statement Ed! Thank-you.
I agree that Christianity is the one religion that has worked unceasingly to uphold the dignity of women!
I read somewhere that the most beautiful creation to a man is a woman! (And vice versa!)
Bobby, can you give us a quick summary if you have the time! Good to see you are back! :)
“Had Iranian women been protesting for the right to abort…” How true! If that had been the case our leftist media pundits would have been going ballistic. As it is, the opportunity to contrast the freedom and respect women have in western culture versus that of much of the Muslim world was by and large ignored. But, then again, even with those rights women enjoy do enjoy, there are those who abuse them by using the threat of emotional disengagement in any number of ways, abortion included. There would be far fewer abortions if the men in the life of those women would be more supportive.
While on the subject of Iran, our young president’s impotent words and gestures are seen for what they are by the mullahs–meaningless. Meanwhile, our leftist MSM pundits are cooing about how nuanced and measured those words are. It is a surreal scene, especially when we are forced to note the the president of France, of all places, actually exhibited more testosterone than his counterpart, a.k.a. the “leader of the free world.”
The Stoning of Soraya M.
http://www.thestoning.com/
I’ll just type in the text from Gesler’s book. The following is from Norm Gesler’s book mentioned above in response to the passages from 1 Tim:
“When properly understood, these and many other passages of the bible exalt the role of women and give them a tremendous ministry in the body of Christ. Several things should be kept in mind on the topic of the role of women in the church.
First, the bible declares that women, like men, are made in the image of God (Gen 1:27). That is, they are equal with men by nature. There is no essential difference- both male and female are equally human by creation.
Secind, both men and women are equal by redemption. They both have the same Lord and both share equally in exactly the same salvation. For in Christ “there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” (Gal 3:28).
Third, there are no sex symbols on the ministry gifts listed in the bible. It does not say “gift of teaching- male; gift of help- female.” In other words, women have the same gifts for ministry to the body as women do.
Fourth, throughout the bible, God gifted, blessed, and greatly used women in ministry. This includes Miriam, the first minister of music (Ex 15:20), Deborah (Jud 4:4), Huldah the prohetess (2 Chron. 34:22), Anna the prophetess (Luke 2:36), Prasilla the bible teacher (Acts 18:26), and Phoebe the deconess (Rom 16:1).
Fifth, Jesus had many women who assisted him in the ministry (Luke 23:49, John 11). Indeed, it is very significant that in a patriarchal culture that Jesus chose women for his first two resurrection apperences (Matt 28:1-10, John 20:10-18). St. Peter did not make it until the third round (1 Cor 15:5)!
Sixth, whatever Paul may have meant by the “women be silent” passage, he certainly did not mean that they should have no ministry in the church. This is clear for several reasons. For one thing, in the same book of 1 Corinthians, Paul instructed women on how they should pray and prophesy in the church, namely, in a decent and orderly way (1 Cor 11:5). Further, there were also times when all the men were to be “silent” as well, namely, when someone else was giving utterance from God (14:28). Finally, Paul did not hesitate to use women to assist him in the ministry, as is indicated by the crucial role he gave Phoebe in delivering to its destination the great epistle to the Romans (Rom. 16:1).
Seventh, when understood in context, the “silence” passages are not negating the ministry of women, but are limiting the authority of women. Paul asserts that women are not permitted “to have authority over a man.” (1 Tim 2:12) Likewise, he follows his extortion to “keep silent” by reminding them to be “submissive” (1 Cor 14:34). Of course, men too were under authority and needed to submit to the headship of Christ over them (1 Cor 11:3). Indeed, the ultimate proof that there is nothing degrading about being submissive is that Christ, who was God in human flesh, is always submissive to the Father, both on earth (Phil 2:5-8) and even in heaven (1 Cort 15:28) That male headship and leadership is not simply a cultural matter is evident by the fact taht it is based on the very order of creation (1 Cor 11:9, 1 Tim 2:13). Thus, elders are to be men, “the husband of one wife” (1 Tim 3:2). This however in no way demeans or diminishes the role of women, either in the family or in the church. The fact that men can not have babies is not demeaning to their humanity or their role in the family. It is simply that God has not granted them this function, but a different one.
Eight, God has given women an exalted role both by order of creation and redemption. First of all, Eve was not created from Adam’s feet to be walked on by him, nor his head to rule over him, but from his side to be equal and companion to him. (Gen 2:19-25) Furthermore, ever man ever born was carried by a woman’s womb and then, the vast majority were nurtured by her through infancy, childhood, and youth until they grew up. In addition, when God chose the vessel by which he himself would become manifest in human flesh, it was not by direct creation of a bod (as Adam), or in assuming a visible form (as the angel of the Lord) nor was it by cloning a male human being. Rather, it was by being miraculously concieved and carried to full term in a woman’s womb, the blessed virgin Mary. What is more, God has, thorough the birth and nurturing process, endowed women with the most marvelous role in forming all human beings, including every man, at the most tender and impressionable times of their lives, both parental and postnatal. Finally, in the Church, God ha made woman “one in Christ Jesus” (Gal 3:28) and bestowed upon them the gifts of the spirit (1 Cor 12:14, Rom 12) whereby they can edify the body of Christ including prophecy (Acts 2:17-18, 21:9) and teaching (Acts 18:26, Titus 2:4).”
yes I saw the trailer Carla. It looks like a very interesting movie.
I totally agree with Jill’s argument that Jesus was essentially a feminist. The problem is that Paul didn’t get the memo.
I think that Bobby’s analysis is correct, but it is essentially a rationalization of one class of people (women) being subordinated to another class of people (men). Somehow this subordination is not made more palatable by the fact that men are also to submit, given that men’s submission is to an invisible god whose wishes only male respresentatives in the clergy are (in general) allowed to interpret.
The bottom line is that all of the Abrahamic religions are patriarchal, and there is not much of a way around that. That is not to say that I wink at all at the atrocities perpetrated on women in the name of Islam. And in fact, western feminists like Ms. Leno were sounding the alarm about the Taliban long before any conservatives took notice.
As someone who has traveled extensively in the Middle East, I think that Obama is playing this perfectly. Making a big stink would just play into Ahmadenijad’s hands given that Iranians of all political stripes are generally opposed to U.S. meddling in their country’s affairs.
“Seventh, when understood in context, the “silence” passages are not negating the ministry of women, but are limiting the authority of women. Paul asserts that women are not permitted “to have authority over a man.” (1 Tim 2:12) Likewise, he follows his extortion to “keep silent” by reminding them to be “submissive” (1 Cor 14:34). Of course, men too were under authority and needed to submit to the headship of Christ over them (1 Cor 11:3). Indeed, the ultimate proof that there is nothing degrading about being submissive is that Christ, who was God in human flesh, is always submissive to the Father, both on earth (Phil 2:5-8) and even in heaven (1 Cort 15:28) That male headship and leadership is not simply a cultural matter is evident by the fact taht it is based on the very order of creation (1 Cor 11:9, 1 Tim 2:13). Thus, elders are to be men, “the husband of one wife” (1 Tim 3:2). This however in no way demeans or diminishes the role of women, either in the family or in the church…”
I find that entire thing no less than infuriating. I am submissive to no man, never will be, and if ANYONE wants to try to get me to submit, I can assure them they’ll have at the very least a fistfight on their hands.
Particularly this piece: “but are limiting the authority of women. Paul asserts that women are not permitted “to have authority over a man.”‘
It’s the kind of thinking like that which makes me want to get a different degree and become head of some random company department, staff it entirely with men, and treat them all like crap. I am SO GLAD we have women in the military now and are working towards throwing off this utterly backwards thinking. ^_^
Posted by: xalisae at June 28, 2009 12:46 PM
——
xalisae – 3 questions for you:
1) If at one time you received Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, (thus a true believer) but later rejected Him because of what it says in his Word, then did you really receive Him as Lord?
2) Do you understand what is described in context?
3) Would you be willing to reject all that Christianity has brought to Western Civilization?
See, the problem I have is you treat the Scripture you quote very seriously, to the point of believing it may be followed by those within the Church. However, by rejecting Christ’s authority, you are your own god. So was your faith real or is what was written real?
Re: context, 1 Tim 2 is where Paul is speaking specifically about practices he follows. These are Paul’s practices, not God’s commands. As Jill pointed out, within Paul’s day, men would have felt uncomfortable with the equality of women, so Paul was accommodating/teaching them. Such practices aren’t necessary in a Church where authority is properly respected, and love and respect is properly shown. I’ll grant you that others within the professed Church can take the passage out of context, but that’s why it’s important to understand the principles and context of the whole Holy Bible.
My last point is while it’s easy for you to reject the Bible, you do so because of the liberties afforded you by those who follow the commandments of the Bible, seek the principles found within it, and serve a gracious and merciful God. Without Christianity, Western Civilization, and particularly, the United States would not be nearly as free.
I find that entire thing no less than infuriating. I am submissive to no man, never will be, and if ANYONE wants to try to get me to submit, I can assure them they’ll have at the very least a fistfight on their hands.
Posted by: xalisae at June 28, 2009 3:00 PM
I especially appreciate and second the comments made by Bobby Bambino on June 28, 2:23 p.m. and those made by Chris Arsenault on June 28, 3:02 p.m.
“Ever have a male boss? :-)”
Wow…I had never thought of it before…but really, I haven’t. That’s kinda cool.
“If a male police officer told you to stop – would you submit? Why respect his authority if you did stop, but reject the authority of the church? Simply because their can be female police officers, but not female pastors according to Paul?”
He’s a representative of the law. Law has no gender, and as a citizen of the United States, I am bound to follow it, male or female.
Chris,
There is a difference between submitting to someone who happens to be a man and submitting to someone because he is a man.
I used to have a male boss and yes, I followed his direction. But now he has moved on and I am in his place — whereas under the “women can never have authority over men” scenario, I would be a permanent second class citizen.
I see you have a more liberal interpretation of the Bible, but as you admit in your second to last paragraph of your comment at 3:02, many other groups do not. The Bible has been used to justify such as things as women’s permanent submission to their husbands and women’s exclusion from the clergy.
Law has no gender, and as a citizen of the United States, I am bound to follow it, male or female.
——
Ah – so why would it be any different for those who are both professing Christ and being obedient to Him?
“I have to wonder – the context in which you understand what submission means is more akin to rape than the way I understand it.”
Well, in the context of the verse it sounds like someone telling me to sit down, shut up, do whatever a man might tell me, and believe whatever he might say is right.
I will not shut up. I will not do whatever I am told just because a man has told me to do it. I will use MY brain to think logically about my position on every issue and why, and I refuse to just accept anything I am presented with from anyone, let alone men in general just because it’s a man that has told it to me.
I can fight laws. I can’t fight God. That’s the great thing about the disembodied voice. I can’t go to his house and picket. I don’t have civil disobedience (breaking the law, which I would do if I felt it was unjustly discriminating against me) to shift public opinion and get him to change his ways. But another great thing about it is, all I have to say is, “I don’t believe you.” and it has no control over me in any way whatsoever. It has only the control over me I let it. If I break the law, I get thrown in prison. Big difference.
“My last point is while it’s easy for you to reject the Bible, you do so because of the liberties afforded you by those who follow the commandments of the Bible, seek the principles found within it, and serve a gracious and merciful God.”
I do so because I am able to because of laws and a government contructed by courageous men and women SOME of whom have believed themselves in some principles of the Bible, followed the writings and teachings of others who believed in liberty and freedom and not God, and arrived at the conclusion we have today. I love this country, I love this form of government with freedom and (for the most part) just laws representing (almost) every citizen. In all my experiences with relgion, it’s only felt like an oppression in every way, shape, and form, and I shrugged it off partly to be able to embrace fully the liberty afforded me by my wonderful country.
Hey there, PC’er, how did the lawn care go yesterday?
I especially appreciate and second the comments made by Bobby Bambino on June 28, 2:23 p.m. and those made by Chris Arsenault on June 28, 3:02 p.m.
Posted by: Raymond V at June 28, 2009 3:18 PM
me too!
Thanks Bobby.
Xalisae — Sigh. Lawncare is one of those never ending chores. I haven’t gotten through quite evreything I wanted to this weekend — partially due the allure of Ms. Stanek’s blog and her fabulous commenters!
Posted by: Prochoicer at June 28, 2009 3:23 PM
If I break the law, I get thrown in prison. Big difference.
Posted by: xalisae at June 28, 2009 3:29 PM
——
Don’t confuse justice delayed with justice denied. :-)
I am praying for my sisters and brothers in Christ that are dying for the faith and continue to be persecuted for Christ. Also praying for those that do NOT know Him. The world needs Jesus.
I am so grateful that I know this Jesus that loves women!!
PS
Our pastor today showed his granddaughter in 4D ultrasound on the big screen! It was so amazing. He talked about life beginning at conception and the DNA of every child will NEVER be replicated again. Every fingerprint unique to each baby, by God’s design.
I guess this is the problem then, Chris. In my family, if it is something he feels more strongly about or if I lack knowledge on the subject or have previously made an obviously poor choice, he will correct me and take the authority on that particular decision. The same applies in reverse, although he seems to care much less about a much broader scope of things than I do, so it’s a simple, “Hey, hun, can you do/not do x thing?” (most of the time. depending on what it is, sometimes it’s more severe, or sometimes he’ll propose an alternate route that makes more sense to us both, or I might)
Your frame of thinking is admittedly somewhat foreign to me.
It’s the kind of thinking like that which makes me want to get a different degree and become head of some random company department, staff it entirely with men, and treat them all like crap. I am SO GLAD we have women in the military now and are working towards throwing off this utterly backwards thinking. ^_^
Posted by: xalisae at June 28, 2009 3:00 PM
and just how would this be helpful? The mature approach would be to do EXACTLY the first part and then teach the men by example how human beings should be treated by recognizing their dignity as persons and acting accordingly. Women can do much to change the workplace, to humanize it and infuse it with dignity.
As Jill pointed out, within Paul’s day, men would have felt uncomfortable with the equality of women, so Paul was accommodating/teaching them. Such practices aren’t necessary in a Church where authority is properly respected, and love and respect is properly shown.
Another passage where feminists get their knickers in knots is the Ephesians 5:22 “Wives, be subject to your husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. As the church is subject to Christ, so let wives also be subject in everything to their husbands…..”
On the face of it, it appears that God is telling men that they can boss and subjugate their wives around. Not so. For the second part of the passage exhorts men to “love your wives, as Christ loved the church, and gave himself up for her….”.
Even when questioned on adultery and divorce, Christ mentioned how the hearts of men were so hardened that in Moses day he allowed for divorce. But that God had not intended it so.
Chris — Oops my error. I thought you were saying that Pauline teachings about women not being allowed to rule over men were something we could ignore in this day and age. Guess not!
Angel, I am familiar with the command in Ephesians that men are to their love their wives. But that doesn’t change the first part that commands women to submit to their husbands. So it is still patriarchal. I don’t see how a command to the husbands to be loving makes it okay for them to be in charge.
Think of it this way. Suppose we lived in a country with a hereditary caste of noblemen who were in charge. They got to make all the decisions for the country. The people could be heard but wouldn’t have a vote, nor an opportunity to join the caste of noblemen. Let’s say the noblemen were under a command to be extremely loving towards the people and work in their best interest. Would that be okay? Do you think the men reading this blog would be okay with that?
well it does PC, because how did Christ love the church? Christ completely submitted himself to the point of death. So a man in a Christian marriage should be prepared to die to himself for the love of his wife and children. In fact, Christ’s directive to men is much harder than it is to women.
“and just how would this be helpful? The mature approach would be to do EXACTLY the first part and then teach the men by example how human beings should be treated by recognizing their dignity as persons and acting accordingly. Women can do much to change the workplace, to humanize it and infuse it with dignity.”
I never said I was mature, and I won’t deny that I can be very spiteful. If I feel the rules are nonsensical or arbitrary, I freely admit I can be highly rebellious. ;)
When Jesus came out of the tomb, he was first seen by women. It was the men who saw later. It wasn’t His disciples even.
Wives are commanded to submit to their husbands only. (And I suggest that a man totally devoted and surrendered to Christ, no wife on earth would have a problem with submitting to).
Husbands are commanded to give their lives up for their wives AND to submit to them as well (mutually).
Which is an easier command to obey? In light of this command who has more culpability to God?
Prochoicer: Someday, and I hope soon, you realize that there is a God in Heaven, that the Bible is His Word, and He is to be obeyed. In essence what I am saying PCer is that your opinion, compared to what God commands, doesn’t amount to a hill of beans. He is the Creator and we are the creation and there is, as demonstrated by everything in the Universe, a divine order set in place.
Jesus Christ was and is the ultimate women’s liberator. This is why He would never, ever condone abortion, because He loves women, totally and unconditionally.
On the other hand, the women’s movement and the abortion movement have enslaved more women than any other movement in the history of mankind and set their teeth on edge against a Holy God.
He simply asks that we trust Him during our short and fleeting stay on this planet in preparation for eternity. Remember that Satan was able to deceive a third of the angels into warring against God and as a result earn an eternity in hell for their rebellion.
Abortion is an affront to the creative nature of God, it negates God as Creator,
Abortion denies the power of God to right a wrong, it negates God as Redeemer,
Abortion makes that which is good, the birth of human life, into that which is evil, the death of human life, and then calls it good, the very definition of blasphemy,
Abortion negates the resurrection power of God as it takes flesh that is alive in it’s earthly abode (the womb) and kills it, while God takes that flesh which is dead in it’s earthly abode (the grave) and desires to make it alive,
Abortion’s desire is to take that which was composed from the chaotic array of elemental molecules into a symphony of life infused with an eternal soul, and turn it back to the entropy of randomness, chaos, nothingness, uselessness.
Abortion is against all that is hopeful, all that requires faith for success; for it’s solution; annihilation, it’s goal; death, it’s dream; breaking God’s heart, it’s vision, Satan’s ultimate power.
Abortion is a counterfeit, for the clawprints of Satan are everywhere to be found in its performance;
Abortion disguises hate as love, bondage as freedom, choice as maturity, sin as righteousness, political correctness as wisdom,
Abortion pits men against women, mothers against their children, fathers against God, Yes, abortion is Satan’s feeble attempt at killing God Himself, for abortion is a metaphor for Satan; it is his coat of arms, his family crest, his logo, his brand, it belongs to him……for he laughs at its willing proponents as they craft their own self-destruction, mantled in self-deception.
I never said I was mature, and I won’t deny that I can be very spiteful. If I feel the rules are nonsensical or arbitrary, I freely admit I can be highly rebellious. ;)
Posted by: xalisae at June 28, 2009 4:56 PM
agreed.
However, the best way to change behaviors is to model them! ;)
Wives are commanded to submit to their husbands only. (And I suggest that a man totally devoted and surrendered to Christ, no wife on earth would have a problem with submitting to).
I agree.
Husbands are commanded to give their lives up for their wives AND to submit to them as well (mutually).
Which is an easier command to obey? In light of this command who has more culpability to God?
Many men (but not all) have forsaken their duties before God. But they’ve also been portrayed as bumbling nitwits in TV, movies and commericals. Something that truly bothers me.
Ah yes, the man’s obligation is somehow harder — noblesse oblige! In a way it is a lot easier to be a peasant because you just have to worry about yourself and your family, whereas the poor nobleman has to protect everyone and go into combat and make the hard decisions on behalf of his vassals and his serfs. Yet, I have a feeling most of us would choose to be noblemen rather than peasants.
Of course, as you point out, this is only my opinion, and who am I to argue with God? But I have always believed that God is man’s creation and that “God” has been used to keep women in line for thousands of years. (When holes appear in theology’s elaborate justifications for women’s subordination, religious apologists can always fall back on saying, “Well, God said so.”) Jesus was a breath of fresh air who didn’t use God as an excuse to subjugate women, but the same cannot be said of his predecessors or his successors.
His Man, I do believe that your faith is sincere, so I am not trying to say that you personally are making God up. But I do think that ultimately God was made in image of Man, and serves partially as Man’s mouthpiece.
All that said, I do appreciate your good wishes and many of the positive values your religion espouses.