invite response« First « Previous Comments 57 - 64 of 64 Search these comments
57
AmericanKulak
2024 Jan 8, 7:34pm
AmericanKulak
2024 Jan 8, 7:34pm
Oh, forgot the #1 BS Line of all time, one that I knew was bullshit back in the 90s right after High School:
"I've only ever had 2-3 boyfriends".
"I've only ever had 2-3 boyfriends".
58
AmericanKulak
2024 Jan 9, 6:15pm
AmericanKulak
2024 Jan 9, 6:15pm
PeopleUnited says
This is a femidolizing complementarian excuse.
The Curse of Eve exists, and the biblical order of family is for the women to be under the guidance of the husband. Modern Churchians twist this into "Servant of the Wife Who is Leader". There is no XO or first mate role for the wife in the Bible, and even if there was, XOs who disobey the commanding officer get disciplined, no? And XOs don't have to be consulted or have their advice listened to, either.
remember Adam sinned because he was NOT deceived. He knew full well that God did not lie. The scripture implies that Eve was deceived, which is why Adam takes the blame for the fall of man even though Eve was the first to eat the forbidden fruit. The fact that you’re laying blame on women more than men is consistent with Adam’s excuse, when he basically said to God “the woman you gave me, made me do it.”
This is a femidolizing complementarian excuse.
The Curse of Eve exists, and the biblical order of family is for the women to be under the guidance of the husband. Modern Churchians twist this into "Servant of the Wife Who is Leader". There is no XO or first mate role for the wife in the Bible, and even if there was, XOs who disobey the commanding officer get disciplined, no? And XOs don't have to be consulted or have their advice listened to, either.
59
stereotomy
2024 Jan 10, 3:01am
stereotomy
2024 Jan 10, 3:01am
AmericanKulak says
In other words, Adam had agency - the power and the responsibility to choose, and then live with the consequences. Eve had no agency - she was essentially Satan's foil to undermine Adam. She had no agency, no power other than to deceive, no responsibility for her actions.
God said, "Eat of this fruit, and you will surely die." It was true, man became mortal, and must surely die. Eve, that ignorant slut, thought it meant immediate death, because she is unto an animal and incapable of thinking more than 10 minutes ahead.
Why is there no prohibition in the Bible about women laying with women? Why do the 10 commandments essentially state "Don't even think about fucking another man's wife, let alone doing it." Where does this occur elsewhere in the 10 commandments? Nowhere. The seductive power of the pussy was well known to the ancients.
PeopleUnited says
remember Adam sinned because he was NOT deceived. He knew full well that God did not lie. The scripture implies that Eve was deceived, which is why Adam takes the blame for the fall of man even though Eve was the first to eat the forbidden fruit. The fact that you’re laying blame on women more than men is consistent with Adam’s excuse, when he basically said to God “the woman you gave me, made me do it.”
This is a femidolizing complementarian excuse.
The Curse of Eve exists, and the biblical order of family is for the women to be under the guidance of the husband. Modern Churchians twist this into "Servant of the Wife Who is Leader". There is no XO or first mate role for the wife in the Bible, and even if there was, XOs who disobey the commanding officer get disciplined, no? And XOs don't have to be consulted or have their advice listened to, either.
In other words, Adam had agency - the power and the responsibility to choose, and then live with the consequences. Eve had no agency - she was essentially Satan's foil to undermine Adam. She had no agency, no power other than to deceive, no responsibility for her actions.
God said, "Eat of this fruit, and you will surely die." It was true, man became mortal, and must surely die. Eve, that ignorant slut, thought it meant immediate death, because she is unto an animal and incapable of thinking more than 10 minutes ahead.
Why is there no prohibition in the Bible about women laying with women? Why do the 10 commandments essentially state "Don't even think about fucking another man's wife, let alone doing it." Where does this occur elsewhere in the 10 commandments? Nowhere. The seductive power of the pussy was well known to the ancients.
60
PeopleUnited
2024 Jan 10, 4:44am
PeopleUnited
2024 Jan 10, 4:44am
People don’t understand servant leadership. Jesus is a servant leader. Not every man is capable of being a servant leader, at least not without the help of the Holy Spirit. But every man justifies himself and his own actions even when they are wrong just like Adam did.
When people badmouth women they insult God and men. God created women, the first one was created from Adam’s own rib so in a sense she is part of Adam. Furthermore every man since Adam was born of a woman, just as God had planned. Women are hormone sensitive and emotional but other than that they are not so different than men. Anyone who breaks God’s rules and does things wrong is guilty and there are consequences for themselves and the world around them.
When people badmouth women they insult God and men. God created women, the first one was created from Adam’s own rib so in a sense she is part of Adam. Furthermore every man since Adam was born of a woman, just as God had planned. Women are hormone sensitive and emotional but other than that they are not so different than men. Anyone who breaks God’s rules and does things wrong is guilty and there are consequences for themselves and the world around them.
61
AmericanKulak
2024 Jan 10, 9:16am
AmericanKulak
2024 Jan 10, 9:16am
PeopleUnited says
Jesus is the King of Kings over the Church, who must submit and obey him in all things.
I call this the "Ephesians 5:25 and 28-32, but ignore 5:22-24 and skip over 26-27" half-truth modern mentality.
Pastors deliberately skip over female accountability, lest they get shrieked at by rebels in their pews.
Does God do everything the Church asks for? Nope! Does he do things to the Church they don't want, for their own good? Yep! Against the objections of the Church? Absolutely!
Servant Leader has been corrupted by Churchians to "Servant of the wife who is Leader".
The relationship is clearly detailed in the Bible: Man is over the woman as Christ is head of the Church, and as the Church should obey Christ in everything. It's obedience and faith brings the Cherish. Modern Churchians emphasize the Cherish and disappear the Obedience and Submission.
PeopleUnited says
Women were never given authority in all Christendom until now. Amazing how modern soft-handed, wire-framed glasses wearing theologians married to gluttons think they know more than Knox, Augustine, Aquinas, Melanchthon, Erasmus, and heck, Paul.
Here is rank simpery and rebellion about a man and wife from modern Churches - warning, take pepto before reading:
https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/erik-raymond/how-do-you-love-your-wife-like-christ-loves-the-church/
Great example of "Forget female submission and obedience, but men must Cherish" attitude.
Jesus is a servant leader.
Jesus is the King of Kings over the Church, who must submit and obey him in all things.
I call this the "Ephesians 5:25 and 28-32, but ignore 5:22-24 and skip over 26-27" half-truth modern mentality.
Pastors deliberately skip over female accountability, lest they get shrieked at by rebels in their pews.
Does God do everything the Church asks for? Nope! Does he do things to the Church they don't want, for their own good? Yep! Against the objections of the Church? Absolutely!
Servant Leader has been corrupted by Churchians to "Servant of the wife who is Leader".
The relationship is clearly detailed in the Bible: Man is over the woman as Christ is head of the Church, and as the Church should obey Christ in everything. It's obedience and faith brings the Cherish. Modern Churchians emphasize the Cherish and disappear the Obedience and Submission.
PeopleUnited says
When people badmouth women they insult God and men.
Women were never given authority in all Christendom until now. Amazing how modern soft-handed, wire-framed glasses wearing theologians married to gluttons think they know more than Knox, Augustine, Aquinas, Melanchthon, Erasmus, and heck, Paul.
Here is rank simpery and rebellion about a man and wife from modern Churches - warning, take pepto before reading:
https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/erik-raymond/how-do-you-love-your-wife-like-christ-loves-the-church/
Great example of "Forget female submission and obedience, but men must Cherish" attitude.
62
PeopleUnited
2024 Jan 10, 4:09pm
PeopleUnited
2024 Jan 10, 4:09pm
AmericanKulak says
Fixed it for you.
Many pastors fail to be good shepherds for various reasons. But even a good shepherd cannot force the flock to obey.
I understand and agree that men and women have defined Biblical roles and that today those roles are ignored by most churches and probably most men and women. But If the solution was as simple as becoming a grass eating doll owner then we’d have been given instructions on that by the Creator. The solution is, was and will always be the gospel. When men and women follow Jesus they learn their roles. When they don’t follow Jesus, it is chaos, which is where we are at today. Follow Jesus and teach others to follow Him.
Many pastors deliberately skip over female accountability, lest they get shrieked at by rebels in their pews.
Fixed it for you.
Many pastors fail to be good shepherds for various reasons. But even a good shepherd cannot force the flock to obey.
I understand and agree that men and women have defined Biblical roles and that today those roles are ignored by most churches and probably most men and women. But If the solution was as simple as becoming a grass eating doll owner then we’d have been given instructions on that by the Creator. The solution is, was and will always be the gospel. When men and women follow Jesus they learn their roles. When they don’t follow Jesus, it is chaos, which is where we are at today. Follow Jesus and teach others to follow Him.
63
AmericanKulak
2024 Feb 3, 12:45am
AmericanKulak
2024 Feb 3, 12:45am
I already have two kids, and can avoid burning. It's simply too risky to engage, and "Just chose better bro" fails to take into account the onslaught of media and social messaging and prssure on women, who are generally much more vulnerable. Also, almost half of all women have NO regular male figure in their lives growing up these days AT ALL. Beyond Uncle Marty on the holidays. Finally, the indulgent, materialistic, and 'there's plenty of good men to settle in case of emergency everywhere" mentality women have - and the makework do-little economy set up for them, and then a huge welfare state underneath that should that easy street be untenable for them.
Not engaging is a viable strategy for older men. For the younger guys, it will have to be abroad until the laws are more compatible with Biblical Marriage.
Not engaging is a viable strategy for older men. For the younger guys, it will have to be abroad until the laws are more compatible with Biblical Marriage.
64
AmericanKulak
2024 Feb 3, 2:50pm
AmericanKulak
2024 Feb 3, 2:50pm
stereotomy says
Yes, Adam ignored the natural order and instead of remembering his first duty to obey God, was more concerned with pleasing the woman.
In other words, Adam had agency - the power and the responsibility to choose, and then live with the consequences. Eve had no agency - she was essentially Satan's foil to undermine Adam. She had no agency, no power other than to deceive, no responsibility for her actions.
God said, "Eat of this fruit, and you will surely die." It was true, man became mortal, and must surely die. Eve, that ignorant slut, thought it meant immediate death, because she is unto an animal and incapable of thinking more than 10 minutes ahead.
Yes, Adam ignored the natural order and instead of remembering his first duty to obey God, was more concerned with pleasing the woman.
« First « Previous Comments 57 - 64 of 64 Search these comments
During the early stages of their lives, typically before turning 40, men often believe in the concept of love. However, once they reach the age of 40, their perception and attraction towards this idea changes significantly, regardless of whether they are in a relationship or not. It is common for long-term marriages to deteriorate between the ages of 40 and 55, leading to an increase in divorces. This trend often emerges when their eldest child reaches adulthood, usually around 18 years old, revealing that their primary reason for staying together was solely for the sake of their children.
In societies where divorce carries a social stigma, such as the period before the 1960s in the United States, individuals would remain married but avoid emotional intimacy. Instead, they would engage in social events and gatherings to maintain the façade of a contented union. This phenomenon was aptly portrayed in the 1967 movie "The Graduate" directed by Mike Nichols. The character Mrs. Robinson does not feel love or attraction towards Ben; rather, she rebels against her unhappy marriage and the fact that she was only with her husband for the sake of their daughter.
During this era, staying married for the sake of the children became a common practice. However, individuals started realizing this pattern and made a conscious decision to stop pursuing romantic relationships as they approached the age of 40. At this point, they lose interest in seeking conventional partnerships and instead turn to sugar babies or escort girls to satisfy their physical needs. In the 2020s, this trend has extended to using sex dolls and AI Chat Boxes, which offer virtualized interactions, making such experiences more affordable and easily accessible.
This lifestyle allows them the freedom to enjoy their social lives without the burden of a committed partner or the disappointment often associated with blind dates, which are typically arranged by well-meaning friends using social events as a means to introduce two single individuals.