The same ole feminization of Christianity bluster

I figured I’d comment on Rollo’s losing my religion simply because it seems like a lot of Christian men are commenting over there. His post is pretty much nothing that we haven’t heard before, but since he has a larger platform of audience it reaches many more people than any of our blogs save maybe Dalrock.

Debating the veracity of Christianity with those that deride it as foolish is futile: “Religion is to control the masses,” “Religion is belief in some imaginary dude in the sky,” “Religion is a business,” “Church is for betas,” “Religions is blue pill,” etc. There’s no point in discussing such a topic with those who have already hardened their hearts.

When I analyze Red Pill principles within social contexts I always have a hard time with religion. It grates on me because I’m of the opinion that one’s religious leanings, one’s interaction with existence and life, one’s consideration of the spiritual, ought to be something personal and private if it’s in anyway genuine. As such, and for some, it can be a source of real vulnerability and exploitation which is really nothing new to anyone. It’s one thing to be even agnostic and trapped in a Blue Pill world, but it’s quite another to have been raised to adulthood in a religious context and coming to terms with having some very deep ego-investments shattered by a new Red Pill awareness.

Rollo is absolutely wrong in this sense. If Christianity is true then nothing is amoral. The heart and the motivations of the heart matter. What you do with Jesus is literally a life changing decision. There is no vacuum to with which to muse on and apply so-called ‘red pill’ principles. The Truth is indeed the Truth. Human nature is already accurately exposed to us by the Scriptures.

If you are a Christian man and see how the deck is stacked against men and especially Christian men, why would you ever want to be a Christian man?

I’ve gone over this before, but let me go over this again. I’m not a Christian because I’m in it for the benefits of marrying a Christian woman. I’m not a Christian for the community. I’m not a Christian to do good works. I’m not a Christian to help those in need. I’m not a Christian because my psyche can’t handle a world without a God. I’m a Christian because Jesus was raised from the dead.

1 Corinthians 15:1 Now I make known to you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received, in which also you stand, 2 by which also you are saved, if you hold fast [a]the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain.

3 For I delivered to you [b]as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, 5 and that He appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. 6 After that He appeared to more than five hundred brethren at one time, most of whom remain until now, but some have fallen asleep; 7 then He appeared to [c]James, then to all the apostles; 8 and last of all, as [d]to one untimely born, He appeared to me also. 9 For I am the least of the apostles, [e]and not fit to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. 10 But by the grace of God I am what I am, and His grace toward me did not prove vain; but I labored even more than all of them, yet not I, but the grace of God with me. 11 Whether then it was I or they, so we preach and so you believed.

12 Now if Christ is preached, that He has been raised from the dead, how do some among you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13 But if there is no resurrection of the dead, not even Christ has been raised; 14 and if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is vain, your faith also is vain. 15 Moreover we are even found to be false witnesses of God, because we testified [f]against God that He raised [g]Christ, whom He did not raise, if in fact the dead are not raised. 16 For if the dead are not raised, not even Christ has been raised; 17 and if Christ has not been raised, your faith is worthless; you are still in your sins. 18 Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. 19 If we have hoped in Christ in this life only, we are of all men most to be pitied.

20 But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who are asleep. 21 For since by a man came death, by a man also came the resurrection of the dead. 22 For as in Adam all die, so also in [h]Christ all will be made alive. 23 But each in his own order: Christ the first fruits, after that those who are Christ’s at His coming, 24 then comes the end, when He hands over the kingdom to the God and Father, when He has abolished all rule and all authority and power. 25 For He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet. 26 The last enemy that will be abolished is death. 27 For He has put all things in subjection under His feet. But when He says, “All things are put in subjection,” it is evident that He is excepted who put all things in subjection to Him. 28 When all things are subjected to Him, then the Son Himself also will be subjected to the One who subjected all things to Him, so that God may be all in all.

29 Otherwise, what will those do who are baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why then are they baptized for them? 30 Why are we also in danger every hour? 31 I affirm, brethren, by the boasting in you which I have in Christ Jesus our Lord, I die daily. 32 If [i]from human motives I fought with wild beasts at Ephesus, what does it profit me? If the dead are not raised, let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die. 33 Do not be deceived: “Bad company corrupts good morals.” 34 Become sober-minded [j]as you ought, and stop sinning; for some have no knowledge of God. I speak this to your shame.

Not losing sight of the veracity of Christianity is why I have a tab at the top on the Evidence of the Resurrection. If Jesus was not raised from the dead, everything all Christians do is in vain.

Paul puts it succinctly : “If the dead are not raised, let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die.” That is how we should live if Jesus was not raised, and how all non-Christians live. If Christ is not raised, everything we do is futile. Who even cares about living according to so-called red pill principles (e.g. with the knowledge of human nature) if that is the case? We should all simply live to do whatever we want if that’s the case. There is no truth if that’s the case. If blue pill guy is happy in his blue pill world then more power to him. He could give two craps about your ‘red pill worldview’ and neither one is correct.

Moving on to the Church. As I’ve estimated before, it’s probably the case that only 10-20% of people in the Church [in the West] today are “true believers,” which means they actively attempt to obey Jesus’ commands. Most of the other people are there for reasons I mentioned. They think good works will get them to heaven. They want to do good or help people in need. They think Church is a good community. They feel guilty for what they’ve done and want to associate with ‘good people.’ Or whatever else.

The Church has struggled with infection from culture since the beginning. In regard to the feminization of the Church, it probably arose sometime in 1000-1300 AD. This is nothing new. The problem is that the vast majority of Churches and pastors allow culture and/or money to dictate what they are teaching and preaching to the congregation. Many pastors are none the wiser, and obviously most Christians that go to Church are even more ignorant. The willfully disobedient will always be the willfully disobedient, even if they are wolves in sheep’s clothing.

The thrust of this blog will continue to be about Christianity, masculinity, and rooting out heretical cultural [and feminist] ideas and practices that have seeped their way into the Church. Each Christian man is responsible for his own roles and responsibilities, whatever they may be at the moment. Single or married. Part of the leadership or a servant. Obedience to Christ.

We are to live set apart — sanctified — from the culture because we are in Christ. We are to take off the old and put on the new. We are to love how Jesus loved. We are to uphold and value the things that Jesus valued. Where else can you see a submissive, respectful wife? Where else can you see a husband who is a kind, loving, leader? Where else can you see a strong, confident single man of God who doesn’t bow to the idols of the world?

While many of us do not have influence from leadership positions, we can still lead by example within the Church.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Godly mindset & lifestyle and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

24 Responses to The same ole feminization of Christianity bluster

  1. Pingback: The same ole feminization of Christianity bluster – Manosphere.org

  2. The Question says:

    “We are to live set apart — sanctified — from the culture because we are in Christ.”

    That would include the church at this point. And that’s the problem. The people most resistant to you acting out a true biblical lifestyle – not some Ned Flanders effeminate “Good Samaritan” cultist behavior – are in the church.

    This is why so many Christian men don’t attend church. They want what the Bible actually teaches but the church doesn’t provide – in fact, in so many ways it offers the opposite.

    Fighting with people who claim to believe the same thing as you but rationalize anything they teach that isn’t in the Bible while blatantly dismissing parts of the Bible they don’t like is spiritually exhausting and depressing.

    I could live with outright persecution and being forced to live in catacombs. I could stomach poverty and homelessness if I was in the company of other persecuted faithful.

    What I can’t live with is watching the church that claims to represent me preach feminism and cultural marxism and then say men who refuse to sign up for that are not right with God.

    “If Christianity is true then nothing is amoral.”

    That also requires us to make very sobering conclusions about the state of the church in the Western world.

  3. Neguy says:

    Agreed. Rollo’s public writings are clearly not Christian. His book has a lot of good information, but advocates a completely immoral pattern of life. I do think it’s worth reflecting on why non-Christian men may be turned turned off by what they see in Christianity. But ultimately you are correct: we are Christians because it is true. We obey Jesus because he is Lord. We love God because he has revealed himself to us as Father.

  4. The Feminine Imperative has easily assimilated almost all variations of mainstream Christianity for the past 5 generations. For the more absolutist Christian man, to have Red Pill aware (PUAs) explain this to them is understandably uncomfortable.

    I don’t necessarily disagree with you, I do think your faith is genuine and this blog is a good effort in addressing masculinity in a Christian context, but you mistakes my purpose in writing my essay.

    It’s not an attack on genuine faith, but rather to address how that genuine faith has been put to the use of the Feminine Imperative. It’s meant to unplug Christian men from the Religio-Matrix that the FI and feminism have made of their otherwise genuine investment in it.

  5. @ The Question

    I could live with outright persecution and being forced to live in catacombs. I could stomach poverty and homelessness if I was in the company of other persecuted faithful.

    What I can’t live with is watching the church that claims to represent me preach feminism and cultural marxism and then say men who refuse to sign up for that are not right with God.

    Eh. People in the early Church were doing some pretty screwed up things like marrying their father’s wife and visiting temple prostitutes.

    The early Church had it much worse than we did, especially because Christianity had just started growing. In most cases, it appears that lots of Christians were holding onto a lot of things from prior religions and cultures and implementing them into Christianity.

    I definitely agree with what you’re saying in that it is definitely one of the most frustrating things. However, to say that the early Church didn’t experience a lot of the things we are (much worse, I might add) is not taking their culture into context either.

  6. @ Rollo

    I don’t necessarily disagree with you, I do think your faith is genuine and this blog is a good effort in addressing masculinity in a Christian context, but you mistakes my purpose in writing my essay.

    It’s not an attack on genuine faith, but rather to address how that genuine faith has been put to the use of the Feminine Imperative. It’s meant to unplug Christian men from the Religio-Matrix that the FI and feminism have made of their otherwise genuine investment in it.

    I don’t think your writings are an attack on Christianity at all, unlike many of the [Christian] commenters over there. From my point of view, you’re mainly just commenting on the “state” of Western Christianity from a secular point of view.

    The state of Christianity must be looked at primarily through the lens of Christ as the Way, the Truth, and the Life first, and the lessons learned from the establishment of Church and it’s history. A “red pill lens” so-to-speak is already off the mark given that the Scripture already teaches us about human nature (e.g. garden of Eden, David and Bathsheba, the Prophets, Hosea, NT writings, etc.). The modern feminization of the Church is nothing new, and will continue to be nothing new (e.g. Revelation 2 — letter to Church in Thyatira).

    This is why I also eschew “game” — however you define it. But that has been discussed many times already throughout various blogs.

    In lieu of Christianity’s premises (namely, the resurrection of Christ), atheistic and agnostic points of view come into stark contradiction due to the the nature of absolute morality present in Christianity and the moral relativism in other such beliefs. The comments on your blog of people only reinforces the point that it’s mixing oil and water.

  7. @ Neguy

    I do think it’s worth reflecting on why non-Christian men may be turned turned off by what they see in Christianity.

    Good point. That is precisely what Rollo’s post aims to do as he is basically outlining the feminized “state” of Western Christianity from a secular point of view.

    It is worth reflecting on in that sense, since there have been a bunch of “misguided” attempts to bring masculinity to the forefront in Christianity.

    Mark Driscoll is one of the most apparently examples, which, ironically has turned many Christians off to masculinity in the Church. We did end up discussing that in the feminization of Christianity post a week or two ago:

    https://deepstrength.wordpress.com/2016/08/24/the-feminization-of-christianity/#comment-7466

  8. SnapperTrx says:

    So then, if the church has been spoiled, what is the answer? Should those of us “in the know” of RP theology and who actually believe the words of the bible have meaning and intent start to meet on our own? I, personally, know of NO men at my previous church that would be willing to hear that man is the head of woman and take it at face value. They would have to have some kind of buffer, like they do now. Either that the verses must be considered with cultural reference in place or that they simply don’t mean what they say! They have all been indoctrinated and infected!

  9. Looking Glass says:

    @SnapperTrx:

    No structure, just like The Law, will save anyone. But you need Structure & Order and you can make quite a lot of things work, if you understand where & how they will fail. Then have plans laid out to deal with it.

    What we’ve been dealing with is a multi-century undercutting of the way Christians are supposed to operate, though what’s really happened is trading one bad set of issues for much, much worse ones. (Unless you were a Christian under during Iron Curtain era; you’re living in the Promised Land in comparison right now.)

    At the functional level, it’s going to be rolling back several hundred years of Theological “improvements”, completely redoing the inter- & intra-Church structures and a much better set of Biblical Translations. But the real core issue is always this: Who is on the Lord’s side? The real problem is that the answer is “not many”. Which always starts by changing yourself.

  10. The Question says:

    The difference is that the people in the early Church came out of a pagan culture and were in the process of adopting new values.

    It’s the opposite today. Christians are taught outright unbiblical teachings as though they are fundamental parts of Christian doctrine. Dalrock had documented extensively the sort of inane views the mainstream church holds on men and women.

    Nobody argued back then that marrying your father’s wife was a Christian thing to do. However, today the entire “man up” movement within the church is centered around the unspoken belief that Christian men have a moral obligation to marry women who have made sexual choices that in any sane society would have made them utterly unfit for marriage.

    The difficulty of the early church was removing their old ways and turning the right way. Today, what is taught as the “right way” is the wrong way.

    Back then new believers turned to the church leaders for guidance. Today, church leaders are the blind leading the blind.

    I don’t say this out of cynicism but through dispassionate observation, so that we can figure out what the problem is and how to address it.

  11. Anonymous Reader says:

    “If Christianity is true then nothing is amoral.”

    Reallly. This looks a lot like the femist slogcan “The personal is politicla”, so I will ask you the same question I asked them. When you get out of bed in the morning and urinate in the toilet, is it moral or immoral? Are you urinating in a way that glorifies Christ? Peeing for Christ? How is your bathroom procedure in any way different from that of a Communist atheist? Viewed through a window, how would you look different from an un-Believer?

    Please explain in as much detail as you can. Don’t hold back. I want to learn how void in a moral fashion. Don’t ask me to avoid facing Mecca, though….

    To put it another way, are you fully prepared to explain / justify each and every action you take each and every day in Bible terms? That’s what “nothing is amoral” leads to. Hey, maybe you could code all those rules you come up with in a book. You could call it “Book of Rules for Believers”. That’s never been done before. And you could assert that anyone not obeying YOUR particular rule set is not a real Christian. That’s never been done before, either.

    See where your position leads?

    Or are there, after all, some things that are amoral, like … breathing?

  12. @ Anonymous Reader

    I was deciding whether to answer the question seriously or not. I was leaning toward not seriously, but I decided why not.

    1 Thess 5:12 But we request of you, brethren, that you [i]appreciate those who diligently labor among you, and have charge over you in the Lord and give you [j]instruction, 13 and that you esteem them very highly in love because of their work. Live in peace with one another. 14 We urge you, brethren, admonish the [k]unruly, encourage the fainthearted, help the weak, be patient with everyone. 15 See that no one repays another with evil for evil, but always seek after that which is good for one another and for all people. 16 Rejoice always; 17 pray without ceasing; 18 in everything give thanks; for this is God’s will for you in Christ Jesus.

    Can we give thanks that we’re healthy enough to pee and breath? Sure. There’s people who need catheters and breathing machines. Can we pray for those who are in those circumstances? Yes. That’s why we thank God for the day He has made and that we’re glad in it.

    Yes, you can quite literally be thankful in ALL circumstances and pray ALWAYS according the the Scriptures.

    However, that’s not the point. My overall comment was a generalization and taking it literally like you did is commenting in bad faith.

  13. Anonymous Reader says:

    Can we give thanks that we’re healthy enough to pee and breath? Sure. There’s people who need catheters and breathing machines. Can we pray for those who are in those circumstances? Yes. That’s why we thank God for the day He has made and that we’re glad in it.

    That is a fair answer but it is woefully incomplete. You have asserted that nothing is amoral.
    Therefore every action of any sort is moral, or it is immoral. Therefore there is a moral way to urinate and an immoral way to do so. It is not an accident that I reference Islam in passing, that is a very legalistic religion…but your sweeping statement is beyond legalism, beyond Leviticus in its obvious coverage.

    My overall comment was a generalization and taking it literally like you did is commenting in bad faith.

    Your comment was in fact very sweeping in its scope. Perhaps you did not think through the implications of your words? And being challenged bluntly to defend them rankles your pride?
    Of course you’ll falsely accuse me of bad faith. The alternative would be to admit you might be wrong…

  14. Hegelian says:

    Rollo is a 100 percent correct! your citing of the scriptures is as totally useless as the Feminized religion itself! You follow because it is true? I purposely go to many Christian faith churches, just to see what is going on. Maybe you should too! If you believe in what you espouse, you are truly Blue pill. Being made “red pill aware” is not immoral. Hiding behind scripture, when the plague of feminism is proliferating into the mainstream religion IS!!!
    Hey, maybe feminisms tenets are Christian, right?????

  15. @ Anonymous Reader

    I already said the main point *is* that the post is a generalization. We’re talking about the overarching feminization of the Church here and things that adhere to Christ’s teachings or not.

    It’s was a semi-serious reply for that reason.

  16. Kyle says:

    The crux of the matter is the institutional church is corrupt in its very being, in every Augustinian stripe; a stumbling block to unbelievers who blaspheme God on account of churchianity.

    The gnostic heresy and its feminist fruit despoiled the body of Christ through authoritative religious organization, supplanting the headship of Christ with that of man. Its premise? Man is incapable of knowing Truth, therefore the established philosopher-king/priest/pastor must divine knowledge from the heavenly realm to be manifested in the earthly realm through his subjects. Easy prey for wolves, the sheep remain as infants, wholly dependent upon the mother for their needs, hence the worship of females. This goddess cult demands resalvation through a perpetual tyranny of death and rebirth.

    The Blue Pill=elemental spirits: influence mythological constructs and rituals.

    The Red Pill=fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, the false promise of becoming like God.

    The church as revealed by scripture is a family: an assembly (ekklesia) of Christ’s body joined together by one Spirit under the Father’s love, maturing alongside leadership by godly men; the only feminist-proof church.

  17. @ Kyle

    Good overview.

    As I’ve stated before, I think as the culture and government becomes more hostile to Christianity what will happen is that Church tax exempt status will be challenged. Gay marriage will definitely be one of the driving issues. We will find out which Churches side with the devil and what Churches will get out of bed with the government.

    Persecution will be a tempering ground for the body: the chaff will be separated from the wheat.

    The church as revealed by scripture is a family: an assembly (ekklesia) of Christ’s body joined together by one Spirit under the Father’s love, maturing alongside leadership by godly men; the only feminist-proof church.

    Amen.

    Though the Church will struggle with it until the end times: Revelation 2 the Church in Thyatira.

  18. Cane Caldo says:

    He should change his name to Trollo.

    @The Question

    Nobody argued back then that marrying your father’s wife was a Christian thing to do.

    Yes, they did. St. Paul wrote:

    5 It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and of a kind that is not tolerated even among pagans, for a man has his father’s wife. 2 And you are arrogant! Ought you not rather to mourn?

    […]

    Your boasting is not good.

    The gist is that the members of the Church in Corinth abused their freedom in Christ to specifically excuse that man’s sexual immorality.

    @Anonymous Reader

    Reallly. This looks a lot like the femist slogcan “The personal is politicla”, so I will ask you the same question I asked them. When you get out of bed in the morning and urinate in the toilet, is it moral or immoral? Are you urinating in a way that glorifies Christ? Peeing for Christ? How is your bathroom procedure in any way different from that of a Communist atheist? Viewed through a window, how would you look different from an un-Believer?

    See where your position leads?

    Or are there, after all, some things that are amoral, like … breathing?

    DS is correct. In fact one can piss immorally, as common sense and even many laws will attest. The fact that it is easy to piss in a moral fashion (thanks to bathrooms, plumbing, parental guidance, laws, etc.) doesn’t negate its morality. Some things, like taking a piss, are so needful according to the natural order that God blesses us with an abundance of morally correct options so that even commies and atheists get it right the vast majority of the time. Breathing is even more needful and so even more grace abounds in regards to it.

    And there are times when it is immoral to breathe. For example: You should not close yourself in a garage and willfully breath carbon monoxide so that you are poisoned to death. Nor should you immerse yourself in water and willfully breathe it in so that you drown. If one were on a secret mission and right under the noses of your enemy it would be immoral to breathe without regard to the noise caused. Otherwise we should breathe away, secure in the knowledge that it is moral because it is good.

    You can see how this works: Once we’ve established there are immoral ways to do a thing, then whatever is left is moral. All you’ve shown with your standard question on the morality of pissing, AR, is that you’re ignorant about morality.

  19. Chris says:

    I gave some words of support for the guys who fell prey to the genophobia that’s become so pervasive in the Evangelical movement. I empathize.

  20. The Question says:

    @ Cane Caldo

    St. Paul wrote an epistle directly calling out a specific church for behavior that they thought was acceptable, not morally obligatory on the part of every man in the church or a vital aspect of the faith. The feminism taught in the modern church is considered by the vast majority of churches to be doctrinal and an essential component of godly male behavior. Deferring to your wife and submitting to her authority as being closer to God is not a lifestyle choice in their minds; it is required.

    This type of thinking is promoted at the highest levels by the top apologists and theologians in the West, as Dalrock has shown. There are almost no modern, major theologians calling out this behavior.

  21. Cane Caldo says:

    @The Question

    Gotcha. Perhaps if you had wrote “Nobody argued back then that marrying your father’s wife was the Christian thing to do.” I would have understood you.

  22. HayeksGhost says:

    I guess when I read Rollo’s post I took it as more evidence of the wisdom of going MGTOW. If you’re an authentic christian spinning plates as he puts it isn’t a viable option. I’ve quit going to church altogether. I’ll go back once I’m living the live I want to live. The closest thing a Christian man can do to spinning plates is to have his life in order in such a way that he can afford to pursue his hobbies, I want to be in a position where I can look a woman in the eye and ask her what is there about you that would make me want to get to know you better? I want to have enough fun things to do that I have the power of Next.

  23. @ HayeksGhost

    There are pockets of good women, usually in more traditional communities.

    The closest thing a Christian man can do to spinning plates is to have his life in order in such a way that he can afford to pursue his hobbies, I want to be in a position where I can look a woman in the eye and ask her what is there about you that would make me want to get to know you better? I want to have enough fun things to do that I have the power of Next.

    No. Christian men, who are committed to stay single, should serve God.

    1 Corinthians 7: 7 [c]Yet I wish that all men were even as I myself am. However, each man has his own gift from God, one in this manner, and another in that.

    Whatever gifts of the Spirit he has he should use to serve the Church and community as God directs him.

  24. Good stuff. Debating people with such deride towards Christianity, as you say, is futile. I have devoted my blog to defending Christianity, and it seems to be working pretty well.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s