Why Social Justice is Marxism, and Why it Applies to Your Marriage.

[mkgal1]

When have you seen a feminist check their "rights" anywhere? That would be a retreat, an abandonment of principle, a blow to the movement, that is why I think that it is antithetical to the Gospel.

But, my comment wasn't about feminists, it was about your expectations.....your assumption that if a man finds himself in divorce court it's because of feminism or humanism being involved. I'm not asking about the attitudes of feminists, but about your attitude---and how you come to that conclusion.

Jesus called his followers to self-sacrifice, on the other hand many feminists as I have demonstrated are unwilling to even ever concede a single point. How does that work in marriage? My way or the highway?

I'm not going to posit the leading cause of divorce in "Christian" marriages but I would wager it either is or is closely related to "irreconcilable" differences. How does that happen with two who are ostensibly members of the body of Christ? We're going to spend eternity together, how irreconcilable are those differences, really? I think that faith would require that any and all differences are reconcilable in Christ. Suggesting otherwise is a lack of faith (IMO).

I see humanism, Marxism as the setting of false standards ahead of God's standards. I see humanistic based ideologies, Marxism, "social justice", feminism as an impostion of our version of justice over what the Bible says it (from a right to happiness, to free health care/abortions, fulfillment, and/or housing). When we get in the habit of doing that we start developing "rights" based on our own vain imaginations instead of what God says they are. What "rights" did Jesus have? How many did He give up? What has He called for his followers to do?

You realize that's ALL HIs followers.....right? All it takes is one spouse that's NOT willing make unity a priority, and instead vows to live for self.

 

[I Art Laughing]

But, my comment wasn't about feminists, it was about your expectations.....your assumption that if a man finds himself in divorce court it's because of feminism or humanism being involved. I'm not asking about the attitudes of feminists, but about your attitude---and how you come to that conclusion.


You realize that's ALL HIs followers.....right? All it takes is one spouse that's NOT willing make unity a priority, and instead vows to live for self.

My conclusion is based on what I see as the "new" foundational principles of thought in our society. What her rights are and what his are, what she is lead to expect from her husband, for example. There is also what I see as the total breakdown of restraining morality in the culture brought about in large part by the "sexual revolution", promiscuity and a eagerness of so many to trade themselves for money had made an environment that is highly corrosive to marriage WHILE contemporaneosly raising an entitlement attitude of instant gratification on the part of the cultures participants. What was the "sexual revolution" about, what was it trying to accomplish and what did it actually accomplish?

I'm not so willing to let the ideology that I see as largely responisble for our modern predicament off the hook so easily. I'm not willing to laud it as "justice" and "liberty" just because that's what its proponents do.

 

[mkgal1]

My conclusion is based on what I see as the "new" foundational principles of thought in our society. What her rights are and what his are, what she is lead to expect from her husband, for example. There is also what I see as the total breakdown of restraining morality in the culture brought about in large part by the "sexual revolution", promiscuity and a eagerness of so many to trade themselves for money had made an environment that is highly corrosive to marriage WHILE contemporaneosly raising an entitlement attitude of instant gratification on the part of the cultures participants. What was the "sexual revolution" about, what was it trying to accomplish and what did it actually accomplish?

I'm not so willing to let the ideology that I see as largely responisble for our modern predicament off the hook so easily. I'm not willing to laud it as "justice" and "liberty" just because that's what its proponents do.

You seem to be missing my point.

So....let's say she isn't expecting much from her husband---just that he love God and love her as himself......and he has the same expectations of her.....and both are laying themselves down in favor of serving the other---out of a true desire to honor one another (as unto the LORD). I'm just saying that's equitable....and I don't see how it would be probable that those two would be in divorce court. The rest of the world can have their own values (promiscuity....trading themselves for $$...instant gratification....entitlement issues, etc)----it's not going to come between a couple like that. They will be the light against the darkness.

 

[I Art Laughing]

On the contrary, you seem to be understanding my point perfectly. When both are sacrificing they generally are not heading for divorce, however when one of them gets a bad case of "my ways are higher than God's ways", that is humanism, then they are heading for trouble. Keep the humanism out of marriage and you'll have a much better chance of staying out of divorce court.

 

[I Art Laughing]

Do you punish your kids when they haven't done anything wrong?

Why would God?

But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ. Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ, And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith: That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death; If by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead. Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect: but I follow after, if that I may apprehend that for which also I am apprehended of Christ Jesus. Brethren, I count not myself to have apprehended: but this one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before, I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus. Let us therefore, as many as be perfect, be thus minded: and if in any thing ye be otherwise minded, God shall reveal even this unto you.
(Php 3:7-15)

 

[mkgal1]

On the contrary, you seem to be understanding my point perfectly. When both are sacrificing they generally are not heading for divorce, however when one of them gets a bad case of "my ways are higher than God's ways", that is humanism, then they are heading for trouble. Keep the humanism out of marriage and you'll have a much better chance of staying out of divorce court.

I just can't wrap my mind around "my way or the highway" (even a momentary lapse of "dig your heels in") even occurring when the overall spirit of the relationship is about laying down one's life and serving the other. Since you are mentioning "feminism" as being the demise....then, let's say it's the woman that has this momentary lapse into selfishness.....let's say she all of a sudden voices an opinion about something, something the husband had voiced earlier a bit of a different opinion on. I imagine that being met with an openness to hear her out.....to listen to her thoughts. As long as there's an attitude to listen....understand....and work things out according to God's genuine standards, I don't see how that ("my way or the highway") can turn towards divorce.

 

[I Art Laughing]

I just can't wrap my mind around "my way or the highway" (even a momentary lapse of "dig your heels in") even occurring when the overall spirit of the relationship is about laying down one's life and serving the other. Since you are mentioning "feminism" as being the demise....then, let's say it's the woman that has this momentary lapse into selfishness.....let's say she all of a sudden voices an opinion about something, something the husband had voiced earlier a bit of a different opinion on. I imagine that being met with an openness to hear her out.....to listen to her thoughts. As long as there's an attitude to listen....understand....and work things out according to God's genuine standards, I don't see how that ("my way or the highway") can turn towards divorce.

Accept on those issues you find to be "deal-breakers" right?

 

[mkgal1]

Accept on those issues you find to be "deal-breakers" right?

.....deal-breakers like adultery? Still not wrapping my mind about a possible scenario. You may need to paint me a picture.

 

[I Art Laughing]

.....deal-breakers like adultery? Still not wrapping my mind about a possible scenario. You may need to paint me a picture.

A deal-breaker is anything that you would be willing to divorce over. Does he take a job that puts him to work 80+ hours a week, does he develop and addiction to World of Warcraft ans spend every waking moment on that? Are you willing to suffer in your marriage to be obedient to Christ? Does he have a spending problem, is he backslidden or apostate, is he constantly negative, does he snore in his sleep, does he hang with his buddies at the bar, does he insist on Christmas with your in-laws? What can he do (short of lust or adultery) that would cause you to give up on your marriage? I'm sure there is something.

Whatever that reason is is selfish. I'm not talking about towards your husband, I'm talking about towards your God. It takes and places your desires and wishes above God's. In my experience this is a form of pride and when I do this I read in my Bible and I feel in my heart that God is opposing me. He opposes me for my own good, to get me to return to Him and quit trying to order my own steps. That is what mortifying the flesh looks like to me.

 

[ImperialPhantom]

...what is it about the internet that brings out the crazy, and worse, convinces the crazy to blame/credit God for their own craziness?

 

[mkgal1]

A deal-breaker is anything that you would be willing to divorce over. Does he take a job that puts him to work 80+ hours a week,

If that was done out of necessity, I don't see that as a deal breaker. A person can have an attitude of priority for another while working a lot of hours....or even working away from home (like being in the military).

does he develop and addiction to World of Warcraft ans spend every waking moment on that?

That doesn't sound like a very good steward of the time God gave that person. That doesn't sound like loving God with heart, soul, mind, and strength....and loving his wife as himself. That's what I'm saying.....that's not because of a woman getting selfish feminist ideals.

Are you willing to suffer in your marriage to be obedient to Christ? Does he have a spending problem, is he backslidden or apostate, is he constantly negative, does he snore in his sleep, does he hang with his buddies at the bar, does he insist on Christmas with your in-laws? What can he do (short of lust or adultery) that would cause you to give up on your marriage? I'm sure there is something.

Whatever that reason is is selfish. I'm not talking about towards your husband, I'm talking about towards your God. It takes and places your desires and wishes above God's. In my experience this is a form of pride and when I do this I read in my Bible and I feel in my heart that God is opposing me. He opposes me for my own good, to get me to return to Him and quit trying to order my own steps. That is what mortifying the flesh looks like to me.

Wait! Are you saying it's selfish on behalf of the husband or wife? (Because your list was about his vices). So far.....you haven't listed anything that sounds like a divorce caused by feminist ideals, and your list also doesn't sound like a man sacrificing for his wife (and His God---as I assume you mean the same standards apply for the husband as you gave for the wife---that his desires and wishes ought not be above God's).

I agree with you about pride (although I believe your point was a bit different than mine). We are told that pride comes before destruction....right? Again.....that's not because of feminism if a husband is unrepentant of his pride and selfish ways.

 

[I Art Laughing]

If that was done out of necessity, I don't see that as a deal breaker. A person can have an attitude of priority for another while working a lot of hours....or even working away from home (like being in the military).




That doesn't sound like a very good steward of the time God gave that person. That doesn't sound like loving God with heart, soul, mind, and strength....and loving his wife as himself. That's what I'm saying.....that's not because of a woman getting selfish feminist ideals.



Wait! Are you saying it's selfish on behalf of the husband or wife? (Because your list was about his vices). So far.....you haven't listed anything that sounds like a divorce caused by feminist ideals, but your list doesn't sound like a man sacrificing for his wife (and His God---as I assume you mean the same standards apply for the husband as you gave for the wife) and forgoing his rights in favor of serving her.

You do realize that sacrifice means giving but not getting right?

And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing. Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up, Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil; Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth; Beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things. Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.
(1Co 13:3-8)

When your husband is selfish does that give you license to be selfish too? Do you only love because you are loved? And yes, you are right this applies both ways.

The problem I have with feminism is it DOES throw this notion on its ear. It tells us that women shouldn't sacrifice because doing so perpetuates the "patriarchy". This notion robs women of there ability to follow Christ in obedience.

 

[mkgal1]

You do realize that sacrifice means giving but not getting right?

And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing. Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up, Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil; Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth; Beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things. Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.
(1Co 13:3-8)

When your husband is selfish does that give you license to be selfish too? Do you only love because you are loved? And yes, you are right this applies both ways.

The problem I have with feminism is it DOES throw this notion on its ear. It tells us that women shouldn't sacrifice because doing so perpetuates the "patriarchy". This notion robs women of there ability to follow Christ in obedience.

I see men being robbed of their ability to follow Christ in obedience in this portrayal.

I don't know what you are saying about "women shouldn't sacrifice" because originally I had said that I see a marriage "working" if BOTH spouses are obedient to God and BOTH forgo their own rights in favor of serving their spouse---BOTH. Same standard.....for BOTH. This is basically where this specific point began:

That's quite a leap of logic that if one is finding them self in a divorce that somewhere feminism had a role in it....UNLESS, we are back to rights again. It seems that what you are saying is that women need to check any and all rights at the door of the chapel before they get married......am I reading correctly? Because if BOTH spouses are forgoing their rights in favor of serving the other spouse, I hardly believe that would cause divorce.

You seem to be making my point....that it's not feminism.

 

[I Art Laughing]

I see men being robbed of their ability to follow Christ in obedience in this portrayal.

I don't know what you are saying about "women shouldn't sacrifice" because originally, I had said that I see a marriage "working" if BOTH spouses are obedient to God and BOTH forgo their own desires in favor of serving their spouse---BOTH. Same standard.....for BOTH.

So much for equality, you seem to be saying BOTH, but him first. That somehow he would be robbed of his obedience if you were to maintain obedience to Christ. Is you're argument that he can't obey and love sacrificially if YOU love sacrificially? That "charity" is reserved for husbands only? I'm really curious, how does you loving him sacrificially rob him of his ability to follow Christ?

It seems like an unwillingness to give without getting attached to a vague sense of doing him a favor by only loving him if he loves first. Again, you'll have to point me to a Scripture to convince me, for now I'm chalking this up to feminism. The notion that the wives are "responders" and not "initiators" and that if they love sacrificially as 1 Cor 13 commands them that they are stealing something from their husbands. Can wives sacrificially love other men in their lives? How about other people or do they reserve the role of "responder" solely for their husbands? Again, is there a place we see that in the Bible?

 

[I Art Laughing]

If that was done out of necessity, I don't see that as a deal breaker. A person can have an attitude of priority for another while working a lot of hours....or even working away from home (like being in the military).




That doesn't sound like a very good steward of the time God gave that person. That doesn't sound like loving God with heart, soul, mind, and strength....and loving his wife as himself. That's what I'm saying.....that's not because of a woman getting selfish feminist ideals.



Wait! Are you saying it's selfish on behalf of the husband or wife? (Because your list was about his vices). So far.....you haven't listed anything that sounds like a divorce caused by feminist ideals, and your list also doesn't sound like a man sacrificing for his wife (and His God---as I assume you mean the same standards apply for the husband as you gave for the wife---that his desires and wishes ought not be above God's).

I agree with you about pride (although I believe your point was a bit different than mine). We are told that pride comes before destruction....right? Again.....that's not because of feminism if a husband is unrepentant of his pride and selfish ways.

Also here you miss my point, you are setting yourself up as the qualifier, the judge. What if he does these things and you don't "approve", that makes all these things potential deal breakers. What if he knows that God want's him to be a missionary to Mozambique, and you don't approve, does God have to reason with you on every point like Job? Your whole position is loaded with feminist ideals, you get to determine the best use of his time, whether he is sacrificing enough, whether his motives are pure, did the Bible give you that role or did feminism/humanism? What happens if he decides he never really believed in God but was willing to "remain", would you still require him to love you sacrificially before you would obey 1 Cor 13. I have to say I don't see any such loophole in 1 Cor 13.

 

[mkgal1]

I'm just waiting for you to come up with an explanation of your statement that if a person finds them self in divorce court, it's because of feminism. And basically your OP---that social justice is Marxism, and your explanation as to how it (Marxism) applies to our marriages.

 

[Exegesis1]

What is this topic about

 

[I Art Laughing]

I'm just waiting for you to come up with an explanation of your statement that if a person finds them self in divorce court, it's because of feminism. And basically your OP---that social justice is Marxism, and your explanation as to how it (Marxism) applies to our marriages.

You don't like where the conversation is going and now you are deflecting. I would really like to help you understand what I'm saying but I don't think you'll let yourself go there. We can't take God's place at the center of our marriages, we can't set the conditions of obedience to God, only He can. Our spouses may be unfair, unloving, ungodly, but we are still commanded to love them even if they don't love us. Any type of humanism is telling us all of the reasons that we shouldn't have to put up with a spouse that we don't think is worthy. It has a whole box of tools that tells us that we don't really have to take God seriously and love sacrificially. To follow the example of Christ. Feminism is only one of these various human centered ideologies that is particularly pernicious and nearly ubiquitous in the West, that is why I pointed to it as a cause of most of the "Christian" divorces. It only takes one to leave.

 

[Exegesis1]

I'm just waiting for you to come up with an explanation of your statement that if a person finds them self in divorce court, it's because of feminism. And basically your OP---that social justice is Marxism, and your explanation as to how it (Marxism) applies to our marriages.

What is this topic about

 

[I Art Laughing]

What is this topic about

It started in what I consider to be the humanistic ideologies of "social justice" and Marxism, it has meandered into feminism. I equate most human centered thought as anti-Christ and so I sometimes am guilty of what some might consider conflation, maybe over-generalization.

The overall theme I talk about (and this thread is about) is how we are influenced by society and want to place our values ahead of God's. How we don't think that He'll judge us, correct us, ask and expect us to obey. How we equate God's love and grace with license and His long-suffering with tacit approval. I think we (as a society and much of the Church) are largely and woefully mistaken. God's economy, His ways, is not our economy. We value things quite differently from Him (and I am thankful that there is higher standard than us).