The western world hates PATRIARCHY and the church ignores it. By this are we sinning?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Eloy Craft

Myth only points, Truth happened!
Supporter
Jan 9, 2018
3,132
871
Chandler
✟386,808.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Not a normal desire, but a dysfunctional one. It is ridiculous to think that Eve, who was previously given the mandate to be fruitful and multiply, had no desire for Adam until her fallen nature kicked in.
Then you agree that motherhood was changed by becoming painful but her desire doesn't change anything pre-existant but institutes a heirarchy of authority?
 
Upvote 0

Gregorikos

Ordinary Mystic
Dec 31, 2019
1,095
887
Louisville, Kentucky
Visit site
✟113,638.00
Country
United States
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
Well, I didn't post an understanding of the text. You quote a tradition that doesn't include a fall then use it to substantiate a chronology that doesn't exist. :scratch:

I stated that motherhood was established prior to the fall.

You then stated that "Genesis 1 was an oral tradition that reveals the beginning. Genesis 2 is an oral tradition that reveals the beginning. Scholars aren't sure which tradition is oldest.
Like the synoptic Gospels arent chronological."


If your statement was intended to refute my statement, then you did indeed post an understanding of the text. You seem to be saying that Genesis 1 is not chronological. That's an understanding. And it flies in the face of generally accepted scholarship and tradition, which holds that everything occurring in chapters 1-2 were prior to the fall.

Can you cite any generally accepted commentary or church father that understands that any part of Genesis 1 or 2 occurred after the fall?
 
Upvote 0

Paidiske

Clara bonam audax
Supporter
Apr 25, 2016
34,110
19,005
43
Albury, Australia
Visit site
✟1,473,140.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Certainly western governments are going that way and many of the institutions like universities and larger corporations are as well. If you believe in social justice then yes the aim is for equal levels of men and women participation. Social justice is just another word for equity and equity (equal outcomes) is the new buzz word being pushed.

You're painting with a very broad brush, here. I believe in social justice - I even see it as an indispensable part of the Missio Dei and thus the mission of the Church - but that doesn't mean I agree that the aim is for men and women to participate equally in every type of work.

Part of the problem here is unpacking the questions of justice and injustice, and how best to transform injustice. There is a huge variety of schools of thought on those issues, even among people who broadly agree that "social justice" is good and/or necessary.

So there for the left cannot complain about inequality for women when its not because of the patriarchy that there is not enough women in STEM.

Maybe it's not for that reason in, say, Norway (although I wouldn't really be confident that patriarchy isn't a factor even there). But we know that patriarchy is an issue in other western countries. We know that women and girls are discouraged from participating in those fields even from a young age. This is worth a read: The STEM Gap: Women and Girls in Science, Technology, Engineering and Math – AAUW : Empowering Women Since 1881

But the leftist groups are always making out that the only reason is the patriarchy and males are at fault for oppressing women. That is only a small part of it.

Patriarchy is only one factor, true. There are other issues, such as the way poverty perpetuates itself in our economic system. But that these problems disproportionately affect women show us that, even when men are not directly oppressing women, we have a patriarchal system which does not take into account the particular needs of women.

As we are seeing in modern society that some are targeting me as being bad and the cause of all womens problems.

This is a common misunderstanding when we talk about the problems of patriarchy. But as I said, patriarchy has to do with the systems we construct, and the way those systems affect men and women. It's not just directly about men "being bad" (although that happens, far more than it should), it's about systems which geared to and perpetuate a male-dominated world. The book Invisible Women: Data Bias in a World Designed for Men is a really useful insight into this aspect of patriarchy.

This model promotes individualism, economic success where not only women and parents are denied and left behind but most minorities like the disable, uneducated and indigenous as well.

Congratulations; you just discovered intersectionality.

businesses cannot be expected to accommodate all sorts of flexible hours if they are to be successful.

Actually, often businesses do better when they offer their employees more flexibility, in part because they are able to recruit and retain the best at what they do, even across changing life circumstances.

If we want to make families and shared care the priority then we need to fundamentally change the system into a collectivist one where families are the most important and not just blame males under a patriarchy.

Again, patriarchy isn't about "blaming males." It's about recognising that the current systems benefit men over women. That said, social changes which prioritise family bonds may well end up being of benefit when viewed through a feminist lens.

Patriarchy is about authority within families.

In our context, it's about a whole lot more than that, as we have been discussing. Such as access to education, employment, and social participation, all of which are currently impaired for girls and women relative to boys and men.

As you know, abortion is about authority within families.

It's about a lot more than that. It's about poverty and lack of personal security. It's about access to proper sex education and good healthcare. It's about the cultural norms around sex, consent, and sexual safety. It's about the community fabric we have in place to support parents and families (or not). To reduce it to a simple question of "authority" is to massively oversimplify a very complex and deeply difficult issue.

@Philip_B I think we must live in the same alternate universe.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Philip_B
Upvote 0

tampasteve

Pray for peace in Israel
Christian Forums Staff
Administrator
Angels Team
CF Senior Ambassador
Supporter
May 15, 2017
25,200
7,288
Tampa
✟767,751.00
Country
United States
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
ADMIN HAT ON

PLEASE NOTE: This thread has been moved and is now in the Conservative Christianity forum. The SOP is different from the previous location.

Also, stop goading one another. The move to Conservative Christianity needs to be noted, many of the side conversations, and main conversations in this thread would be in violation of the SOP of the Conservative Christianity forum.

ADMIN HAT OFF
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

stevevw

inquisitive
Nov 4, 2013
12,572
949
Brisbane Qld Australia
✟243,771.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
You're painting with a very broad brush, here. I believe in social justice - I even see it as an indispensable part of the Missio Dei and thus the mission of the Church - but that doesn't mean I agree that the aim is for men and women to participate equally in every type of work.

Part of the problem here is unpacking the questions of justice and injustice, and how best to transform injustice. There is a huge variety of schools of thought on those issues, even among people who broadly agree that "social justice" is good and/or necessary.
Don't get me wrong social justice is both good and necessary. Its how we go about addressing this. As I have pointed out todays thinking sees it as correcting an imbalance where policies need to increase the participation of minorities regardless of whether its deserved on the basis of ability. It doesnt matter what you or I think social justice is, its what is being applied by those in positions of power which primarily is the government and this usually influences big coroporations. I have already mentioned Canada and the US and now we are seeing the same from the Australian government even as we speak. They are talking about bringing in quotas

The Liberal Party needs more women in Parliament – and that means quotas
https://www.smh.com.au/politics/fed...nt-and-that-means-quotas-20210315-p57azr.html

Maybe it's not for that reason in, say, Norway (although I wouldn't really be confident that patriarchy isn't a factor even there). [/quote] Actually patrarchy is still happening in countries like Norway and Scaninavia who are the most egalitarian nations in the world. So this shows two things. First that the Patriarchy is something that is not that easy to get rid of and perhaps is a natural part of society and second that the more a nation becomes equal the more genders become different which shows that making things more equal actually brings out the differences and this shows that much of the claims about the patriarchy being the cause of inequality may be wrong.
But we know that patriarchy is an issue in other western countries. We know that women and girls are discouraged from participating in those fields even from a young age. This is worth a read: The STEM Gap: Women and Girls in Science, Technology, Engineering and Math – AAUW : Empowering Women Since 1881
Yes the patriarchy is a problem perhaps in all western nations but it’s just not the only problem or reason females are not represented in certain jobs and fields. The problem I am highlighting is that for some like feminists and the left it is the only reason why women females are underrepresented and there is a pay gap. So the issue is about degrees and not whether it happens at all.

The problem is as with your article is that assumptions can be made about why females don't end up in fields like STEM. Its assuming they want to at young ages when they dont know exactly what they want to do. Its pushing that assumption and later blaming a patriarchy when females drop out when it may have ben they were pushed into something that did not suit them. Its a PC society trying to make something fit that may not fit in reality.

The fact is regardless of helping girls to improve in subjects like math working in STEM is more than that. Its also liking STEM and that usually comes from what comes natural. The research shows that women are more in tune with working with people and care industries and STEM is alien to this. So we have to ask are we just trying to make a square peg fit a round hole. We can justify that females are just as smart but its more than that. Research shows that it is also about spacial awareness and males are naturally inclined to think spacially. Its something that cannot be taught.

Patriarchy is only one factor, true. There are other issues, such as the way poverty perpetuates itself in our economic system. But that these problems disproportionately affect women show us that, even when men are not directly oppressing women, we have a patriarchal system which does not take into account the particular needs of women.
I disagree and this is a good example of how the feminist view is skewed towards women being the most affected rather than taking the overall balanced view of how everyone is affected. So when we balance things up we can see for example men are more likely to die on the job, end up in jail, are more likely to be in poverty, be unemployed, made redundant, less likely to be re-employed after losing their job, are less educated and are more often homeless.

Here are some facts that most don’t realize; Men are just as likely to be affected by domestic abuse as women, married men were also equally likely as women to be victims of non-sexual family abuse, while for partner abuse and stalking, a greater proportion of men were victims than women. So when we balance the facts we can see that its not just about women and depends on which stats you want to use.

This is a common misunderstanding when we talk about the problems of patriarchy. But as I said, patriarchy has to do with the systems we construct, and the way those systems affect men and women. It's not just directly about men "being bad" (although that happens, far more than it should), it's about systems which geared to and perpetuate a male-dominated world. The book Invisible Women: Data Bias in a World Designed for Men is a really useful insight into this aspect of patriarchy.
Funny that you should mention such a book when there is evidence of the very opposite happening in today’s society where it is women who receive positive bias and men the negative bias. For example
Contrary to expectations from the pervasive misogyny theory, across a variety of topics, samples, and research teams, recent findings in psychology suggest that such biases positive often favour women.
Ironically, these pro-female preferences may explain why mainstream narratives focus so assiduously on the possibility of anti-female biases: society cares more about the wellbeing of women than men and is thus less tolerant of disparities that disfavour them.

The mainstream view is that we live in a sexist patriarchy that is persistently unfair toward women and privileges men in nearly all ways. And any claims to the contrary are treated as the protestations of benighted conservatives or other masculinist cranks. A Google Scholar search for misogyny yielded 114,000 results, whereas a search for misandry yielded only 2,340. We suspect this difference in interest in misogyny over misandry reflects not the relative prevalence of each type of prejudice, but rather greater concern for the wellbeing of women than men. All of the arguments, anecdotes, and data forwarded to support the narrative that we live in an implacably misogynistic society, in fact, may be evidence of precisely the opposite.
The Myth of Pervasive Misogyny

Congratulations; you just discovered intersectionality.
Yes it’s sort of what I am talking about though for a slightly different point. I am describing how each minority group is affected by the system of capitalism and neoliberalism. Rather intersectionality is how an individual’s different identities such as their gender, race, class, disability and physical status give them privilege or discriminate against them.

Actually, often businesses do better when they offer their employees more flexibility, in part because they are able to recruit and retain the best at what they do, even across changing life circumstances.
It depends on what sort of business. But the idea that a business has to change its operations to accommodate parents with kids has always been an issue for industry in how they can do this without affecting production. Flexibility can only go so far and then it becomes a cost burden. I know from experience that parents find it hard to get work and its not because of businesses being inflexible. Its just a fact of work life.

Again, patriarchy isn't about "blaming males." It's about recognising that the current systems benefit men over women. That said, social changes which prioritise family bonds may well end up being of benefit when viewed through a feminist lens.
That would only apply to those organisations that can work flexibly. But to expect employers to change their work practices to accommodate parents of young kids is a bit unreal. It’s not going to increase productivity if they can only rely on those employees at certain times or have them not come into work or be called away due to young children being sick etc.
 
Upvote 0

Ohorseman

Take up your cross and follow Me
Oct 15, 2007
313
106
USA
✟33,711.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I am afraid if this stuff makes sense to you, then I must like in an alternative universe.
Alternative universe. Now, kind brother, that is an interesting way to say it, LOL. An alternate universe, or alternate reality, is a hypothetical self-contained plane of existence, co-existing within one's own mind. Or, in this case it exists in certain minds that have coalesced together... and they are forming something, something massive. The progressive theologies create an alternative universe outside of sacred tradition. Gay pride theology, egalitarian theology, feminists theology, black liberation theology, and there may be others that I don't know about. They re-interpret scripture, history, tradition, and even words... then use these constructs to tear down or re-define the Faith. Well, the Faith is still there... it is just getting superimposed, or counterfeited over, by an alternative church.

When I was a boy... gay pride, swinging, shacking up and other non-traditional ways were called "alternative lifestyles". Now, we have alternative everything. I came here basically to encourage husband and wife to stay together and be good parents, in accordance with the scriptures. The family is our ark in this flood of sin around us. If you read post #446, page 23 you will see the point.



Follow Jesus.jpg

I call this drawing: Follow Jesus.

"If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me."
- Jesus Christ
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Gregorikos

Ordinary Mystic
Dec 31, 2019
1,095
887
Louisville, Kentucky
Visit site
✟113,638.00
Country
United States
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
Actually patrarchy is still happening in countries like Norway and Scaninavia who are the most egalitarian nations in the world. So this shows two things. First that the Patriarchy is something that is not that easy to get rid of and perhaps is a natural part of society and second that the more a nation becomes equal the more genders become different which shows that making things more equal actually brings out the differences and this shows that much of the claims about the patriarchy being the cause of inequality may be wrong. Yes the patriarchy is a problem perhaps in all western nations but it’s just not the only problem or reason females are not represented in certain jobs and fields. The problem I am highlighting is that for some like feminists and the left it is the only reason why women females are underrepresented and there is a pay gap. So the issue is about degrees and not whether it happens at all.

Just like patriarchy, sickness also came to us at the fall. One could just as easily say, "Actually sickness is still happening in countries like Sweden and Denmark who are the most medically advanced nations in the world. So this shows two things. First that sickness is something that is not that easy to get rid of and perhaps is a natural part of society......."

And yet, we don't quit fighting sickness.

The persistence of patriarchy is exactly what we would expect. That's the nature of a curse- they are difficult if not impossible to break. But that doesn't mean we accept it as something great. We fight it because it is evil.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Paidiske
Upvote 0

Eloy Craft

Myth only points, Truth happened!
Supporter
Jan 9, 2018
3,132
871
Chandler
✟386,808.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Patriarchy established before the fall.

Gen 2-24
Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.


Note this happened before parents existed. The authority in families is parental. Children are bone of their bone flesh of their flesh. A man must leave his parents because he must get out from under the umbrella of authority of his parents to establish authority in his own family. The Scripture I posted established the order of authority in the future family of Adam and Eve.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Ohorseman
Upvote 0

Gregorikos

Ordinary Mystic
Dec 31, 2019
1,095
887
Louisville, Kentucky
Visit site
✟113,638.00
Country
United States
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
Patriarchy established before the fall.

Gen 2-24
Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.


Note this happened before parents existed. The authority in families is parental. Children are bone of their bone flesh of their flesh. A man must leave his parents because he must get out from under the umbrella of authority of his parents to establish authority in his own family. The Scripture I posted established the order of authority in the future family of Adam and Eve.

That doesn't say anything about rule or authority, so it isn't about patriarchy. The rule of the man is first mentioned in 3:16. THAT was the start of patriarchy.
 
Upvote 0

Philip_B

Bread is Blessed & Broken Wine is Blessed & Poured
Supporter
Jul 12, 2016
5,382
5,501
72
Swansea, NSW, Australia
Visit site
✟602,036.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
The progressive theologies create an alternative universe outside of sacred tradition. ... They re-interpret scripture, history, tradition, and even words... then use these constructs to tear down or re-define the Faith. Well, the Faith is still there... it is just getting superimposed, or counterfeited over, by an alternative church.

As this thread has now been moved one needs to be careful, we need to be careful about 'They' statements.

Conservative Christians represent a stream of Christian believers who seek to conserve (or preserve) the traditions once handed down stretching back to Jesus.

Radical Christians seek to return to the roots, to the very essence of the Gospel and see how that applies today.

Now these two groups have more to unite them than to tear each other apart.

There is, as you suggest, a number of movements which we might group as political theologies, and perhaps in our age that began with the work of the Liberation Theology Movement, which is reasonable easy to find a deal about. Now I take the view, rightly or wrongly, that these movements have a place in the context. The great caveat is surely that we must ensure that our faith informs our politics, and not the other way around.

We live in a world where many feel that their voice is not heard. Amongst the great and vast universe, is a tiny galaxy, the milky way, and in the vastness of the milky way is this tiny solar system revolving around it's star that we call The Sun, and whirling around that Sun is one blue dot, that is where we live. Those whose voices are not heard here in the corridors of power will know their voices echo large in the corridors of heaven where they are heard.

Now, the question really posed by this thread is about the centrality of the idea of Patriarchy to the Gospel.

Now you have, and others also, put the case that the idea of Patriarchy is central to the Gospel, that it is part of the fibre of the vine into which we have been grafted, that it is a central core to the story of salvation.

Now others have, myself included, the Patriarchy was part of the cultural milieu in which the narrative of salvation was first played, and that if we look deeply at the story we will find that Patriarchy is not part of the core.

One of the things I have learned is that some things we have in life help us move forward, to grow, to get better, and then we get to a point where these are the things that hold us back, and ultimately these old familiar things are the things we have to be let go of.

By the way, I love your drawings.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Ohorseman

Take up your cross and follow Me
Oct 15, 2007
313
106
USA
✟33,711.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
The persistence of patriarchy is exactly what we would expect. That's the nature of a curse- they are difficult if not impossible to break. But that doesn't mean we accept it as something great. We fight it because it is evil.
Patriarchy itself is not evil. It is only evil when it is made of evil people. And breaking the curse in that way, with social systems, it might be preached somewhere....

But Adam by the garden did not preach that. Noah of the ark and flood did not preach that. Moses in the law nor the prophets preached that. David by prayer and song did not preach that. John the Baptist from the desert by the river did not preach that. Jesus born to the Jews did not preach that. Mary, Peter, nor John, nor any of them with Jesus preached that. Paul blinded and seeing again did not preach that. The early Fathers and Martyrs did not preach that. My grandfathers did not preach that. My mom and dad did not preach that. Nor my pastors. But maybe I missed a nuance here and there.


devil tempts Christ BW.jpg
Ah, I know of this one place in the scriptures. Three times Satan proposed another way and three times Christ refused the temptation. I hear echoes of the time that or Lord Jesus Christ was taken “to a very high mountain and showed all the kingdoms of the world”. Satan proposed that the remedy for our sin be in earthy systems that Satan would give to Jesus. For worship. But Satan was made to keep his vile place, on his belly and eating dust. Because our Lord Jesus Christ did not go that way. It is only through Christ and His Way that we may enter the Kingdom of God.

Our Lord Jesus Christ cursed the fig tree, that same tree that first covered Adam and Eve at paradise lost. And later, in Gethsemane, again we are in a garden. And again there is sweat . In prayer, "His sweat became like great drops of blood falling down to the ground." The cursed ground. And on His way to paradise, I say paradise because He later told the thief, “today... paradise”, on His way He was captured and made prisoner. The beatings and the pain. And the Roman whip with how many lashes we guess. To say the name of each lash I can not without tears. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39. And then we see Christ crowned with those sharp, sharp thorns of the curse. And spit upon. Our Lord Jesus Christ hung on a tree, on a hill. The place of the skull. Some say Adam’s skull. Light left and the cursed ground did shake. “It is finished”, our Lord Jesus Christ did say. Forgive me if ever I say otherwise. Sunday morning, stone rolled away.

And now I am thinking of this song by Crowder.
 
Last edited:
  • Optimistic
Reactions: Eloy Craft
Upvote 0

Eloy Craft

Myth only points, Truth happened!
Supporter
Jan 9, 2018
3,132
871
Chandler
✟386,808.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
That doesn't say anything about rule or authority, so it isn't about patriarchy. The rule of the man is first mentioned in 3:16. THAT was the start of patriarchy.
So you say.
Why do you think parents are mentioned in that passage I posted and why the man must leave them but not the woman?
 
Upvote 0

Gregorikos

Ordinary Mystic
Dec 31, 2019
1,095
887
Louisville, Kentucky
Visit site
✟113,638.00
Country
United States
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
So you say.
Why do you think parents are mentioned in that passage I posted and why the man must leave them but not the woman?

Well of course, when he is younger he is under the authority of both of his parents. But that doesn't establish patriarchy any more than it establishes matriarchy. It doesn't establish either one of those, because, while it mentions father and mother, it doesn't say which, if either of them, is in charge.
 
Upvote 0

Gregorikos

Ordinary Mystic
Dec 31, 2019
1,095
887
Louisville, Kentucky
Visit site
✟113,638.00
Country
United States
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
Patriarchy itself is not evil. It is only evil when it is made of evil people.

Of course it is evil. However, I absolutely agree that patriarchy is much better when the man involved is a good man. But a benevolent dictator is still a dictator.


And breaking the curse in that way, with social systems, it might be preached somewhere....

But Adam by the garden, serpent, and curse did not preach that. Noah of the ark and flood did not preach that. Moses in the law nor the prophets preached that. David by prayer and song did not preach that. John the Baptist from the desert by the river did not preach that. Jesus born to the Jews did not preach that. Mary, Peter, nor John, nor any of them with Jesus preached that. Paul blinded and seeing again did not preach that. The early Fathers and Martyrs did not preach that. My grandfathers did not preach that. My mom and dad did not preach that. Nor my pastors. But maybe I missed a nuance here and there.


Ah, I know of this one place in the scriptures. Three times Satan proposed another way and three times Christ refused the temptation. I hear echoes of the time that or Lord Jesus Christ was taken “to a very high mountain and showed all the kingdoms of the world”. Satan proposed that the remedy for our sin be in earthy systems that Satan would give to Jesus. For worship. But Satan was made to keep his vile place, on his belly and eating dust. Because our Lord Jesus Christ did not go that way. It is only through Christ and His Way that we may enter the Kingdom of God.

Our Lord Jesus Christ cursed the fig tree, that same tree that first covered Adam and Eve at paradise lost. And later, in Gethsemane, again we are in a garden. And again there is sweat . In prayer, "His sweat became like great drops of blood falling down to the ground." The cursed ground. And on His way to paradise, I say paradise because He later told the thief, “today... paradise”, on His way He was captured and made prisoner. The beatings and the pain. And the Roman whip with how many lashes we guess. To say the name of each lash I can not without tears. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39. And then we see Christ crowned with those sharp, sharp thorns of the curse. And spit upon. Our Lord Jesus Christ hung on a tree, on a hill. The place of the skull. Some say Adam’s skull. Light left and the cursed ground did shake. “It is finished”, our Lord Jesus Christ did say. Forgive me if ever I say otherwise. Sunday morning, stone rolled away.

And now I am thinking of this song by Crowder.

There you seriously compared the righteousness of Christ with the patriarchy. That is really sad. If Jesus had made the stones into bread, if he would have thrown himself down from the temple, if he had worshipped the devil, in all these ways he would have sinned, going against his own perfect nature.

You might have a point if patriarchy were part of the perfect nature of God, but instead it is part of the fallen nature of man. There is no comparison.
 
Upvote 0

Ohorseman

Take up your cross and follow Me
Oct 15, 2007
313
106
USA
✟33,711.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
There you seriously compared the righteousness of Christ with the patriarchy. That is really sad. If Jesus had made the stones into bread, if he would have thrown himself down from the temple, if he had worshipped the devil, in all these ways he would have sinned, going against his own perfect nature.

You might have a point if patriarchy were part of the perfect nature of God, but instead it is part of the fallen nature of man. There is no comparison.
No, brother. That is not what I wrote. Read it again. Only Christ can break the curse. Not social systems made by human hands or the demonic. Not progressive theologies or governments . That was the Devil's offer on the mountain that Jesus rejected.

Where did I compare the righteousness of Christ with patriarchy? And how could you gather that from "It is only through Christ and His Way that we may enter the Kingdom of God" and " 'It is finished', our Lord Jesus Christ did say. Forgive me if ever I say otherwise."

Please quote me ... or better explain your takeaway.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

FutureAndAHope

Just me
Supporter
Aug 30, 2008
6,362
2,910
Australia
Visit site
✟732,859.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
If I ran a church I would ensure it was run according to the Bible's directive, which is that the men hold the positions of authority. A clear, unbiased reading of scripture, makes it clear that it is God's position on the matter. After talking about the submission, and silence of women in church Paul writes:

1Co 14:37 If any man seems to himself to be a prophet or to have the Spirit, let him take note of the things which I am writing to you, as being the word of the Lord.

Paul did not say these things were suggestions but rather commands of God. This is not to say women can not have a role in society, as the Bible makes no commands on such things, only in Spiritual matters.

The Bible in proverbs makes it clear that the virtuous woman, is a woman of work, trade, and ingenuity.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ohorseman
Upvote 0

Ohorseman

Take up your cross and follow Me
Oct 15, 2007
313
106
USA
✟33,711.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
@Eloy Craft , please help me understand something.

It keeps being said that patriarchy started at Genesis 3:16. But it actually only mentions rule of the husband... nothing about rule of the father.

Now, the man was made first. God put him to work in the garden. The man named the animals. After the Fall, the man named the woman, Eve. Naming is about authority as I have been taught.

That said, Eve names Cain, Able, and Seth. So, does this mean that Eve, their mother, is in authority over them. Sure, her husband rules her. But the text does not say Adam ruled them all. Is it possible that the husband rules the wife yet the mother rules the children? Is this more about the roles of husband and wife? I don't claim to understand. I am asking. If so, does that mean that patriarchy was a later development. Maybe by Cain when he built the city. Or maybe by Noah. I don't know. What do you think?

Now, we certainly know that patriarchy is pictured most clearly in Genesis 37:9-10.

"Behold, I have dreamed another dream. Behold, the sun, the moon, and eleven stars were bowing down to me.” But when he told it to his father and to his brothers, his father rebuked him and said to him, “What is this dream that you have dreamed? Shall I and your mother and your brothers indeed come to bow ourselves to the ground before you?”
There is no denying the symbols there with the sun (father), moon (mother), and eleven stars (brothers). Do you know of anything else early in the Bible that shows this pattern?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Ohorseman

Take up your cross and follow Me
Oct 15, 2007
313
106
USA
✟33,711.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Now, the question really posed by this thread is about the centrality of the idea of Patriarchy to the Gospel.

Now you have, and others also, put the case that the idea of Patriarchy is central to the Gospel, that it is part of the fibre of the vine into which we have been grafted, that it is a central core to the story of salvation.

Now others have, myself included, the Patriarchy was part of the cultural milieu in which the narrative of salvation was first played, and that if we look deeply at the story we will find that Patriarchy is not part of the core.

One of the things I have learned is that some things we have in life help us move forward, to grow, to get better, and then we get to a point where these are the things that hold us back, and ultimately these old familiar things are the things we have to be let go of.

By the way, I love your drawings.
I don't count patriarchy as central to the Gospel. But I do count the teachings of Paul to be part of it. Yet, the Bible does show or teach a pattern about family and church structure. I think this should be followed to the best of our ability. But even that is not central to the Gospel. It is not "core" as you say.

I hear you, brother. Yet I have a completely different understanding concerning the "things that hold us back" and "these old familiar things are things we have to let go of". Things, like patriarchy, husband headship and sacrificial love, submission of a wife, family and church authority structures, things like that... they are NOT the problem things. Some wrongly see it that way. But it is our sins that are the problem. John the Baptist preached:

“The voice of one crying in the wilderness:
‘Prepare the way of the Lord;
Make His paths straight.
Every valley shall be filled
And every mountain and hill brought low;
The crooked places shall be made straight
And the rough ways smooth;
And all flesh shall see the salvation of God.’ ”​

these stones.zoom.jpg

Those words, they are thunder in the desert. The path. The valley. The mountain. The crooked places. The rough ways. Do you hear the thunder rumble & the land shake. People do not preach about him. It is too hard to hear, too hard to understand. This is the Lord Christ Jesus introduced. And it was not a small thing what Christ said about John.

And as Paul taught, "For I determined not to know anything among you, save Jesus Christ, and Him crucified." The older I get the more I see this, and I feel it deep, deep in me, down to the bones of me. No, to me, nor anyone I know, patriarchy is not core.

Thanks, kind brother in the Vine. Glad you like my art. It is one way that I worship Him, like a song.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Philip_B
Upvote 0

Gregorikos

Ordinary Mystic
Dec 31, 2019
1,095
887
Louisville, Kentucky
Visit site
✟113,638.00
Country
United States
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
That said, Eve names Cain, Able, and Seth. So, does this mean that Eve, their mother, is in authority over them.

Or maybe the entire notion you have about naming and authority is incorrect.

You're the guy that has made much ballyhoo about "interpreting Scripture with Scripture," and I agree with you on that. But nowhere in Scripture is it stated that the person naming someone has authority over the person named. You've heard that somewhere, and you've made it a rule through which you interpret Scripture. But what if that rule is wrong? If it is, it will throw off all your interpretations. Let's test your rule by Scripture to see if it's valid:

So she named the LORD who spoke to her, “You are El-roi”; for she said, “Have I really seen God and remained alive after seeing him?” Genesis 16:13 (NRSV)

By your rule, Hagar would be in authority over God, and we know that isn't right. I think Scripture proves your rule is wrong.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Gregorikos

Ordinary Mystic
Dec 31, 2019
1,095
887
Louisville, Kentucky
Visit site
✟113,638.00
Country
United States
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
No, brother. That is not what I wrote. Read it again. Only Christ can break the curse. Not social systems made by human hands or the demonic. Not progressive theologies or governments . That was the Devil's offer on the mountain that Jesus rejected.

Where did I compare the righteousness of Christ with patriarchy? And how could you gather that from "It is only through Christ and His Way that we may enter the Kingdom of God" and " 'It is finished', our Lord Jesus Christ did say. Forgive me if ever I say otherwise."

Please quote me ... or better explain your takeaway.

I had to read it a few times to figure out why your brought up the temptation of Jesus by the devil into it. I still don't quite get it. You wrote a lot there. You even counted from 1 to 39, one by one. So many words!

But now you're telling me that you meant that only Christ can remove the curse, so we shouldn't try. Oh, but Christ DID remove the curse. (Galatians 3:13) We now live in the world of "already but not yet." The Kingdom is advancing. We pray, "thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven." There was no patriarchy in Eden, and there is none in heaven, so why won't you cooperate with the Kingdom ministry of opposing patriarchy now?
 
  • Winner
Reactions: Paidiske
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.