The Globilisation of Feminism

[Adama]

Adama,

I suppose someone who fits the mold of the false teacher of II Peter 2 could also be a feminist promoting feminist doctrine. But this passage is talking about false teachers who infiltrate the brethren, the church, not just all the deluded pagans in society. They haven't all escaped the corruption of the world through faith in Jesus Christ and become entangled in them again. A lot of them are on the first serving of dog vomit, and haven't returned to vomit.

Some of the descriptive phrases may fit feminists and plenty of non-feminist people in their sins. But I don't see that passage as referring to feminists in particular.

Feminists who fornicate and pull others into their messed up world view can also repent and be saved by faith in Christ Jesus, just like MGTOW or P4P fornicators can.

That seems to be a very narrow view and application for scripture. It's talking about reprobates who often come in the form of false prophets. These activities are descriptions of what reprobates do, not just false prophets. And I don't think you have an understanding of what this means.

Do feminists defile the flesh? Do they often hate God? Have they ascended out of their place? Do they promise them liberty but really serve corruption? Do they cause divisions? Do they set up distinctions? Do they go after strange flesh? Do they speak lies in hypocrisy? Are they filled with reviling, slander, scorn? Are they proud and arrogant, contemptous boasters? Are they without natural affection? Are they inflated with self conceit? Are they merely sensual, carnal, worldly minded people? Are they corrupted by the evil they do?

In Romans one where Paul writes about fornicators and those without natural affection, someone with a narrow point of view would say that ONLY applies to homosexuals. No, it applies to ALL reprobates. Homosexuals and false prophets are just two subsets of reprobates, but it applies to all of them.

Anyone who is teaching you lies will face the greater condemnation. The person who does and instructs others in the same. A false teacher is the same as a false prophet.

Anyone who can believe can be saved. The question is, can they believe. Are they able to believe?

[MrMan]

Do feminists defile the flesh? Do they often hate God? Have they ascended out of their place? Do they promise them liberty but really serve corruption? Do they cause divisions? Do they set up distinctions? Do they go after strange flesh? Do they speak lies in hypocrisy? Are they filled with reviling, slander, scorn? Are they proud and arrogant, contemptous boasters? Are they without natural affection? Are they inflated with self conceit? Are they merely sensual, carnal, worldly minded people? Are they corrupted by the evil they do?

That seems to be a very narrow view and application for scripture. It's talking about reprobates who often come in the form of false prophets. These activities are descriptions of what reprobates do, not just false prophets. And I don't think you have an understanding of what this means.[/quote]

I Peter 2 says that there will be false teachers among you, and then gives a long list of wicked characteristics. Now, if a false teacher is 'ministering' to the church who fits those characteristics nowadays, such a person might be a feminist also, and the passage might fit the person to a T. But it isn't talking about a feminist who never claimed to be a teacher. That doesn't fit the description. An individual might display some of the wicked traits in that passage, and that's a bad thing, but that's not what the passage is about. Read the whole passage in context and see what Peter, and the Holy Spirit, is actually saying in the passage.

I see that you strung together a number of sins and traits from different passages, Without looking it up, it appears to be from II Peter 2 and Jude. I think part of that is from Romans 1 and maybe another passage or two. Each of these passages has it's own message.

Can you really say that the feminist atheist who has never believed in Jesus is like a natural brute beast, made to be taken and destroyed? Do you think feminists are created to be destroyed, or can they be saved?

Do feminists go after strange flesh? that's an odd choice to quote. Maybe you can find a few who are trying to engage in perceived homosexual rape of angels, but that seems unlikely. It is likely that the vast majority of feminists have never even engaged in homosexual behavior, much less tried to gay gang rape angels.

In Romans one where Paul writes about fornicators and those without natural affection, someone with a narrow point of view would say that ONLY applies to homosexuals. No, it applies to ALL reprobates. Homosexuals and false prophets are just two subsets of reprobates, but it applies to all of them.

Paul was talking about men who did not want to retain God in their knowledge. The idolatry, sexual impurity, homosexuality and the list of other wicked behaviors of men flowed out of that. Paul builds his case for condemning mankind for sin, both Jew and Gentile. He doesn't single Jews out as more wicked than all other men in the book either.

A false teacher is the same as a false prophet.

s

Peter seems to be making a distinction there in II Peter 2. Teachers teach and prophets prophesy. False teachers teach falsely and false prophets prophesy falsely. I'd imagine there is quite a bit of overlap. But the genuine ministries aren't the same thing, so why would the counterfeits be the same?

Anyone who can believe can be saved. The question is, can they believe. Are they able to believe?

Feminists? Some of them repent and believe. That's another reason not to interpret Jude as talking about feminists. A feminist could fit the description, but not all do.

[Adama]

Feminists? Some of them repent and believe. That's another reason not to interpret Jude as talking about feminists. A feminist could fit the description, but not all do.

And what kind of repentance are we talking about?

It doesn't matter to me whether you believe my interpretation or not. Don't believe it. My life goes on.

[Adama]

Paul was talking about men who did not want to retain God in their knowledge. The idolatry, sexual impurity, homosexuality and the list of other wicked behaviors of men flowed out of that.

That's reversed cause and effect. They didn't want to retain God in their knowledge because they wanted to dishonor their own bodies between themselves. They didn't just happen to reject God for no reason. They rejected Him because they wanted unrighteous pleasure. They already wanted it, which is why they denied the truth of God in favor of unrighteous pleasure. They refused the knowledge of God because their deeds were already evil because the light reproves the darkness, and when they rejected the truth that they might be saved, God gives them over to be corrupted by the perversions they loved more than Him and His truth. They preferred to have pleasure in unrighteousness. So they refused to receive the love of the truth to be saved. The love of wickedness is why they refused God.

And it isn't just talking about men. It is talking about anyone.

It's apparent to me now that there is the letter and there is the spirit. Some people go letter by letter and they think it is exactly like that, when in reality, the application is not as narrow as that but much broader than those with the narrow view can see.

For example, I never had anyone interpret "going after strange flesh" as literally trying to rape angels. Going after strange flesh and defiling the flesh doesn't necessarily mean the persons are trying to rape angels. It can simply mean they are homosexual fornicators, adulterers, rapists or any combination thereof. It doesn't mean that the person was attempting to rape an angel. The person doesn't necessarily need to be a rapist at all. So you see there are those who read and only see the exact letters in front of them and that's as far as they go. Then there are those who read and see things in the spirit.

Do feminists go after strange flesh? that's an odd choice to quote. Maybe you can find a few who are trying to engage in perceived homosexual rape of angels, but that seems unlikely. It is likely that the vast majority of feminists have never even engaged in homosexual behavior, much less tried to gay gang rape angels.

By your definition, even pedophile priests do not qualify, because they are not attempting to rape angels, and they aren't in a gang of rapists. This is an extremely narrow view and application of scripture, bordering on merely academic. And from my point of view, such a narrow interpretation of scripture renders the Word of God inoperative.

[Adama]

I Peter 2 says that there will be false teachers among you, and then gives a long list of wicked characteristics. Now, if a false teacher is 'ministering' to the church who fits those characteristics nowadays, such a person might be a feminist also, and the passage might fit the person to a T. But it isn't talking about a feminist who never claimed to be a teacher. That doesn't fit the description. An individual might display some of the wicked traits in that passage, and that's a bad thing, but that's not what the passage is about. Read the whole passage in context and see what Peter, and the Holy Spirit, is actually saying in the passage.

It describes the reprobate acts of the reprobates. It is a list of things that reprobates do. Some reprobates happen to be false teachers, some false prophets, some are homosexuals, and some seem like "normal" people. Reprobates encompasses more than just false prophets. Do you understand this? You don't have to be a fake Christian minister to be a reprobate. These are descriptions of reprobate activities, not simply "Christian" false prophets.

Also, a prophet is a teacher. That is why James says masters shall receive the greater condemnation. Masters, teachers, rabbis, and prophets. How is it that you don't understand this? And why does Peter put the two terms together? False prophet and false teachers. A false prophet is a false teacher. That's clear as day. A false teacher is a person intentionally teaching you lies, especially for their own benefit, or to exalt themselves and their clique, and the words they speak are great swelling words of vanity, meant to allure through the lusts of the flesh. You think only "Christian" false prophets do these things?

You're unaware of the nature of what "strange flesh" means. I don't think you are qualified to reprove me or teach me here, MrMan.