If You Are Not Following Paul, Then You Are Not Following Jesus

Whose words have more weight? The words of Jesus Christ or the words of the Apostle Paul? This is the question that many Christian feminists pose to us as Bible believing Christians.  Yesterday Lori Alexander published an interesting article on her Transformed Wife blog entitled “Do Not Be a Red Letter Christian” were she addressed a statement by the Christian feminist Beth Moore which goes as follows:

“No, I was not subtweeting the apostle but I would like to say something here. I believe wholeheartedly that ALL Scripture is inspired by God. Authoritative. Truth. But the persons themselves – Paul and Jesus – are not equals. I know this is hard for some to swallow, but Paul is not our Savior. Paul would be horrified, I believe, by the way he has been deified.”

Lori then pointed out the problem with Beth’s statement:

“This is a very slippery slope, dear women. I know too many people who have begun elevating the words of Jesus in the Bible over Paul’s words and end up walking away from the faith altogether. I know no one who has deified the apostle Paul, do you? I do know that his words are as valuable as Jesus’ words since the Holy Spirit used Paul to write what he wrote (2 Timothy 3:16).”

Lori also pointed out some responses by some Christian teachers to Beth Moore’s statement:

“James White wrote this about Beth’s tweet, “All egalitarians end up diminishing Paul’s authority. It is a necessary step, even if taken in slow, little movements.”
Another man wrote, “Being a ‘red-lettered’ Christian is dangerous. You’re on a path towards liberalism, if you’re not already there yet.”

The last statement is where Lori got her title “Do Not Be a Red Letter Christian”.

The Gospel is the Most Important Doctrine in All the Bible

I have said it many times on this blog.  Believing in and practicing the doctrines of Biblical gender roles will not save you.  This is why on the main menu for this blog right at the top I have a link to my article entitled “What is the Gospel?” and in that article I give the Gospel as follows.

The word “gospel” literally means “good news”.  The Apostle Paul tells us in his epistle to the Roman Christians what the Gospel of Jesus Christ is all about:

“That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.” – Romans 10:9-10 (KJV)”

And then I give what we must do to be saved according to the Scriptures:

  1. We must confess that we have sinned against God. (I John 1:9)
  2. We must believe that Christ died and rose again to pay the penalty for our sins. (Romans 10:9 -10)
  3. We must believe that Jesus Christ was God in the flesh, the sinless and spotless Son of God. (Philippians 2:5-8)

The Gospel truly is the most important doctrine in the Bible for two reasons.  The first is that it is the only doctrine we must fully understand and fully believe to inherit eternal life.  If we disbelieve any part of the Gospel, we will one day find ourselves in a place called hell.  The second reason that the Gospel is the most important doctrine in the Bible is because only when we have believed and been indwelled by the Holy Spirit of God can we live the life God has called us to live through his power.  We cannot transform ourselves and we cannot live the life he has called us to live in our power – we need him each and ever day of our lives.

However, just because the Gospel is the MOST important doctrine in the Bible does not mean it is the ONLY important doctrine in the Bible.  The Scriptures tell us in 2 Corinthians 5:15 “And that he died for all, that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him which died for them, and rose again”.  We were not saved to live for ourselves and do whatever makes us happy, we were saved to live for Christ!  This then leads us to our next question.

How Do We Live for Christ?

In the Gospel of Luke Christ tells us how we are to live him:

“And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.”

Luke 4:4 (KJV)

Living for Christ is living by “every word of God”.

This leads us to our next question.

What is the Word of God?

Jesus made the following statement about the Word of God:

“17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. 18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. 19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.”

Matthew 5:17-19 (KJV)

In the passage above Jesus alludes to the moral law of God found throughout the Old Testament.  Those who think they can throw out the Old Testament will be called least in the kingdom of God, that is what Christ said.

Jesus gave authority and supernatural power to his Apostles to speak and write the very Word of God.

“18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. 19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost”

Matthew 28:18-19 (KJV)

And he gave the following warning for those who would not hear the words of his Apostles:

“14 And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet. 15 Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city.”

Matthew 10:14-15 (KJV)

The Words of the Prophets, Christ and His Apostles Are All Equal in Authority

In Hebrews 3:3 the Scriptures tell us concerning Christ that “For this man was counted worthy of more glory than Moses, inasmuch as he who hath builded the house hath more honour than the house” .   And Apostle Paul speaking of Christ in Philippians 2:9 wrote “Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name”.

Believing that the words of the Prophet Moses and the Apostle Paul are equal in authority to Jesus’s words is not “deifying” Moses or Paul or placing them above Christ.  It is simply a recognition of the truth that “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness” (2 Timothy 3:16).

To all the Beth Moore Christian feminists out there, while it is true that “Paul and Jesus – are not equals” it is true that the words of Christ and the words of Paul ARE equal.  Why? Because Jesus stated of himself “I and my Father are one” (John 10:30) meaning he was God in the flesh.

The Word of God, all of it from Genesis to Revelation is Christ’s Words.  That means Moses’s Words as recorded in the Scriptures are Christ’s Words.  That means the Apostle Paul’s Words as recorded in the Scriptures are Christ’s Words.   So, it is for this reason that every letter in the Bible should be considered a “red letter”.

Babes in Christ Who Don’t Know Paul’s Words

The Bible encourage us to grow in our faith and go further than our just understanding the Gospel and repentance:

“As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby”

1 Peter 2:2 (KJV)

“Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God, 2 Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment.”

Hebrews 6:1-2 (KJV)

We are called to “go unto perfection” which means “completeness”.  In other words, we need to have a complete understanding of God’s will and plan for our lives and then by his power live out that plan.

Some people don’t reject the doctrines of gender roles.  They simply don’t know them because our churches have failed in their duty to teach “all the counsel of God” (Acts 20:27).

And this is the reason God burden me to start this ministry more than five years ago to stand in this gap that most churches have left and he has truly blessed this ministry.  If you would have told me when I started this blog 5 years ago that this blog would reach more than 8 million views, I would not have believed you.

It is so encouraging for me to hear from young Christians for whom God has used this ministry to literally change the course of their lives.  Over the 5 years I have had this ministry, I have seen numerous young women quit college to become home makers as God has intended them to do.  Just last week I had a young woman write me telling me that she had dropped out of college where she had just begun pursuing a degree in law to pursue being a wife and homemaker.  And just in the last week I was so encouraged to hear from a young 17-year-old man who was standing for Biblical gender roles in his church youth group taking other teens through the doctrines of Biblical gender roles as shown in the Bible.

And this is why it is so important that we as Christians disciple and teach other believers in these important doctrines.  Yes, you can be saved without knowing or believing in the doctrine of Biblical gender roles, but you cannot live a holy life or the life God has called you to live without knowing and incorporating these doctrines into your life decisions.

Blasphemers Who Know What God Spoke Through the Apostle Paul

But some people are not babes in Christ who simply don’t know about the doctrine of Biblical gender roles that was given by the inspiration of God through Paul.  Some are ignorant regarding the concept of the inerrancy the Scriptures, that all the Bible is the Word of God.  Others blaspheme and distort it because they refuse to live by what it says.

The Apostle Peter warned of such ignorant blasphemers in the following passage:

“15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; 16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.”

2 Peter 3:15-16 (KJV) 

And the Apostle Paul also stated that those who reject God’s role for women are blaspheming the Word of God:

“4 That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, 5 To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.”

Titus 2:4-5 (KJV)

So yes, based upon the Word of God we must see Beth Moore as an ignorant blasphemer for falsely pitting the words of Christ while he walked this earth against the words Christ which he gave to the Apostle Paul after he ascended to heaven.

Beth Moore stated that “Paul would be horrified” by Christians ascribing the same value to the Word God gave him as the Word Christ spoke while he walked this earth.  Well we know how Paul would feel about this because he told us so in his first letter to the Thessalonians:

 “For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe.”

1 Thessalonians 2:13 (KJV)

Rather than being horrified, he would be thankful.  But you know what Paul would be horrified by? He tells us that in his first letter to the Corinthians:

“34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law. 35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.”

1 Corinthians 14:34-35 (KJV)

The Apostle Paul would be horrified and ashamed to see Beth Moore standing in a pulpit preaching to men.  He would be ashamed of her teachings telling women they do not have to be under obedience to men in all areas of their lives especially in the church and in the home.

If You Are Not Following Paul, then You are not Following Jesus

Another ignorant, blaspheming feminist blogger wrote that when Lori Alexander warned against the dangers of elevating “the words of Jesus in the Bible over Paul’s words” instead of treating them equally that she was saying “Don’t Follow Jesus, Just Follow Paul”.

Just listen to her ignorance and blasphemy on full display:

“Let that sink in for a moment. Jesus, the figurehead of everything to do with Christianity, a religious named for him. A man that suggested you should be nice to everyone, and hung out with prostitutes, tax collectors, fishermen and others society sneered at. God in the flesh according to the Bible, part of the Holy Trinity, yet Lori is telling you to ignore his words and rely on the words of someone who never even met Jesus? That is just wacky!”

Jesus is no more “the figurehead” of Christianity than a husband is “the figurehead” of his wife.  He is “the head of the church” as “the husband is the head of the wife” according to Ephesians 5:23. Lori’s warning against “elevating the words of Jesus in the Bible over Paul’s words” said nothing about ignoring Christ’s Words.  She was saying they should be treated equally. It is this ignorant, blaspheming feminist blogger who ignores even the words of Christ when he told us we must listen to the words of his Apostles.

And this feminist blogger displays her ignorance yet again in saying Paul was “someone who never even met Jesus”. Has she not read Acts 9:1-6? Or she is rejecting Luke’s account as well?

She also makes the false statement that Christ and the Apostle Paul had “radically different takes toward women” in the following statement:

Funny how Paul and Jesus have such radically different takes towards women. Jesus talked to women like they were equals, equally valuable in the eyes of God, not walking, cooking, cleaning uteri.”

Really? Did Christ view women as social equals to men? Do you see any women listed among the twelve apostles in the Scripture passage below?

“1 And when he had called unto him his twelve disciples, he gave them power against unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal all manner of sickness and all manner of disease. 2 Now the names of the twelve apostles are these; The first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother; James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother; 3 Philip, and Bartholomew; Thomas, and Matthew the publican; James the son of Alphaeus, and Lebbaeus, whose surname was Thaddaeus; 4 Simon the Canaanite, and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed him.”

Matthew 10:1-4 (KJV)

And surely if Christ was such a feminist, he would have chosen a woman to replace Judas but he goes and replaces him with the Apostle Paul, another man.

Some feminists point to the story of Mary and Martha below to falsely saying Christ was a feminist:

“38 Now it came to pass, as they went, that he entered into a certain village: and a certain woman named Martha received him into her house. 39 And she had a sister called Mary, which also sat at Jesus’ feet, and heard his word. 40 But Martha was cumbered about much serving, and came to him, and said, Lord, dost thou not care that my sister hath left me to serve alone? bid her therefore that she help me. 41 And Jesus answered and said unto her, Martha, Martha, thou art careful and troubled about many things: 42 But one thing is needful: and Mary hath chosen that good part, which shall not be taken away from her.”

Luke 10:38-42 (KJV)

It is true that Jesus did break many social taboos of the Jews by talking with tax collectors and others of lower social classes.  His encouragement for women to sit and hear his words alongside of men most likely would have broken some taboos of the Jews as well.

But the question is this. Did he do anything that was “radically different” than Paul? Did He teach anything that would contradict what Paul would later write under the inspiration of God? The answer is no.

Did he ask Mary to lead the teaching? No. But rather the Scriptures tell us she simply listened and “heard his word”.

Jesus never encouraged women to teach, but rather it was the Apostle Paul which encouraged women to teach other women:

“3 The aged women likewise, that they be in behaviour as becometh holiness, not false accusers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things; 4 That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, 5 To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.”

Titus 2:3-5 (KJV)

Paul even singled out a woman and her husband who had a church in their home:

“3 Greet Priscilla and Aquila my helpers in Christ Jesus: 4 Who have for my life laid down their own necks: unto whom not only I give thanks, but also all the churches of the Gentiles. 5 Likewise greet the church that is in their house. Salute my well-beloved Epaenetus, who is the firstfruits of Achaia unto Christ.”

Romans 16:3-5 (KJV)

Does the Apostle Paul sound like some misogynist hater of women and is his approach to women so “radically different” than Christ’s? The answer based on the Bible is no.

Conclusion

The Apostle Paul wrote almost half of the books of the New Testament with his 14 epistles.  To ignore his teachings as the inspired Word of God equal to what is recorded in the Gospels is to have an incomplete and ignorant view of God.

It is patently absurd to say that if Christ did not speak on a topic, that we can ignore clear teachings on that topic found elsewhere in the Bible.  To do such a thing is to tear down the entire inerrancy of the Scriptures.  It is also an inconsistent position for those who hold it.

You cannot say you live only by the words of Christ during his earthly ministry while ignoring the words of the prophets before him or his Apostles after him. In the Gospels Christ said that you must live by the Word of God given through the prophets and the Word of God given through his Apostles together with his Word which then forms the complete Word of God.

As the Apostle Paul said so let us be.

“Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.”

1 Corinthians 11:1 (KJV)

Why Socialism and Communism Are Unbiblical

Yesterday President Trump stated at the U.N. General Assembly that “One of the most serious challenges our countries face is the specter of socialism. It’s the wrecker of nations and the destroyer of societies”.   He also stated that “Socialism and communism are about one thing only: Power for the ruling class”.

In my previous article on his speech, “President Trump Speaks Against the “religious pull” of Globalism”, I stated that atheism, environmentalism, globalism, socialism, communism, multiculturism and feminism are all “denominations” of the same evil religion of humanism.

In response to that statement I had a commenter write in making the following statement which ended with a challenge to me:

“Socialism and communism are political ideals, comparable to capitalism, which American Christians seem to collectively elevate. If you are going to say these first two are “denominations” of secular humanism, you must be able to defend capitalism as viewed through the same lens, or your argument is unbalanced. I’m curious to know how you would you back this up?

Yes, I can defend capitalism, not only from a political and economic perspective, but most importantly from a Biblical perspective and that will be the emphasis of this article.

The heart of capitalism is private property rights. In a purely capitalist society, each person retains 100% control of their private property which includes all the money they earn from their ideas, use of their lands or other properties as well as their labors. America was founded on private property rights and capitalism and the Constitution originally banned the concept of income taxes.

The United States government, including the military, was almost completely funded by something Trump is using today to crack down on China – Tariffs (taxes on goods coming in from Foreign countries).

There were incomes taxes during the Civil War and some attempts at income taxes afterwards until the courts ruled income taxes to be a violation of the Constitution.  It was then that President Woodrow Wilson spearheaded the effort to put in a Constitutional amendment for an income tax promising it would only be a 1 percent tax on the very rich.  This resulted in the 16th Amendment being passed in 1913.

Fast forward just a couple of decades and then FDR raised that income tax to 95 percent on the rich to fund his Socialist makeover of America.  JFK lowered the top rate from 90% to 70% and then Reagan did the largest tax rate drop in history lowering the top rate to 28%.

The Bible supports the concept that what a man earns is his and this God given right is found in the 10th commandment:

“Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour’s.”

Exodus 20:17 (KJV)

The Bible speaks of it being God’s gift to man that he is able to work and then enjoy the fruits of his labor:

“Every man also to whom God hath given riches and wealth, and hath given him power to eat thereof, and to take his portion, and to rejoice in his labour; this is the gift of God.”

Ecclesiastes 5:19 (KJV)

In Matthew 20:15, Jesus when telling the parable of the land owner and his workers and how he paid them for different amounts of work said “Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own? Is thine eye evil, because I am good?

God authorizes the government only to takes pay for the salaries of government officials and the necessary functions of government.

“For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God’s ministers, attending continually upon this very thing.”

Romans 13:6 (KJV)

And this is also a tenant of capitalism that the government should only take taxes to pay for the services of government officials and things that government should be doing like building roads, bridges, law enforcement and the military.

The Bible also strongly encourages free will giving for the poor and Jesus Christ talked about giving to the poor in the Gospel of Mark:

“For ye have the poor with you always, and whensoever ye will ye may do them good: but me ye have not always.”

Mark 14:7 (KJV)

Notice two important concepts though that Christ taught about giving to the poor.  First, Christ said “ye have the poor with you always”, meaning we will never eliminate poverty in this sin cursed world.  Only God can eliminate poverty when he removes sin and makes the world anew.  Secondly, Christ reaffirmed that giving to the poor is to be done based on the free will of the giver when he stated “whensoever ye will”.

The Apostle Paul reaffirmed the concept of free will giving both for the poor as well as giving to support local churches when he made the following statement:

“Every man according as he purposeth in his heart, so let him give; not grudgingly, or of necessity: for God loveth a cheerful giver.”

2 Corinthians 9:7 (KJV)

And God builds on this by admonishing those who are rich in this world to be rich in their giving:

“17 Charge them that are rich in this world, that they be not highminded, nor trust in uncertain riches, but in the living God, who giveth us richly all things to enjoy; 18 That they do good, that they be rich in good works, ready to distribute, willing to communicate; 19 Laying up in store for themselves a good foundation against the time to come, that they may lay hold on eternal life.”

1 TImothy 6:17-19 (KJV)

Socialism and Communism trample the God given right of private property.  Communism does it to a greater extent than Socialism in that Communism allows no private property as all property is owned by and distributed by the state.  But Socialism still violates God’s law by having the government come in and seize a man’s private property and then distributing that property to another.

In essence both Communism and Socialism are the legalized theft of private property by government and the policies of these systems effectively nullify  God given private property rights.

God only gave the government power to tax to pay for government officials and the normal functions of government, not for re-distributive purposes.

In God’s design, the poor and those on the lower economic side of the scale are to be cared for by close family or even extended family and only if they don’t have family then they are cared for by the church.

“If any man or woman that believeth have widows, let them relieve them, and let not the church be charged; that it may relieve them that are widows indeed.”

1 Timothy 5:16 (KJV)

Conclusion

There are four ways in God’s order, which is the natural order, that an individual may righteously gain property(including money).

1. By exchanging their direct labor or ideas to others to gain property or by lending out their existing property to others for their use. (Deuteronomy 24:15,1 Timothy 5:18)

2. By receiving such property as the spoils of war. (Deuteronomy 20:14)

3. By receiving an inheritance. (Proverbs 13:22)

4. By receiving a freely given gift. (Hebrews 13:16)

Socialism and Communism violate the natural order and God’s design by forcibly taking one person’s property and then giving it to another which did not earn such property.

And this is why President Trump is right that socialism and communism are “the destroyer of societies”.  They destroy societies for the same reason that feminism destroys marriages, because they violate God’s design of human nature and the rights he has given to mankind.

President Trump Speaks Against the “religious pull” of Globalism

Today in his address to the U.N. General Assembly, President Trump used a very interesting word in his speech regarding globalism.  And that word was “religious”.  He stated that “Globalism exerted a religious pull over past leaders causing them to ignore their own nationalist interests. But as far as America is concerned those days are over”.

President Trump probably does not understand where that “religious pull” from Globalism originates from. But as Christians we must under that the “religious pull” of globalism is a pull toward humanism, and specifically secular humanism.

Secular Humanism – the Religion that Claims Not to be a Religion

Secular humanists deny that Humanism is a religion, yet Humanism has all the core tenants of a religion.  It worships something and it has a system of values just like a religion does.

Humanists claim that because they do not worship a deity or believe in the supernatural, that humanism it is not a religion.   But you can worship something that is not supernatural or a deity.  And that is exactly what Humanism does.

The Bible speaks of Humanism in Romans 1:18-27 (KJV):

“18 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles.

24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25 They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.

26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.”

Does this not describe what we are seeing today in our world?

We need to recognize that atheism, environmentalism, globalism, socialism, communism, multiculturism and feminism are all “denominations” of the same evil religion of humanism.   They all have the same end goals even though they may slightly disagree among themselves as to how to get to those goals.

Humanism is a religion that denies the existence of God, even though God’s existence is plainly seen in nature.  It is a religion that worships education making people think they are wise when they truly are fools.  It is a religion that glorifies nature rather than glorifying God.  It worships “created things rather than the Creator”.  And it leads to rampant sexual immorality including homosexuality and transgenderism.

Some Christians have tried to claim that they are “Christian Humanists”.  The unfortunate reality is that while a humanist a few centuries ago simply meant someone who believed in “free inquiry” the secular humanists morphed this into something much broader while making atheism its foundation from which all humanist values flow.

Paul Kurtz , the Council for Secular Humanism founder, wrote the following in “The Humanist Alternative” (pg 82):

“Humanism cannot in any fair sense of the word apply to one who still believes in God as the source and creator of the universe. Christian Humanism would be possible only for those who are willing to admit that they are atheistic Humanists. It surely does not apply to God-intoxicated believers.”

Professing Christians must come to the realization that the tenants of humanism along with the tenants of its evil spawns like environmentalism, globalism, socialism, communism, multiculturism and feminism do not mesh with a Biblical worldview.  They are completely contradictory.

President Trump – God’s Imperfect Instrument Against Humanism

President Trump is not a perfect man.  He claims to have faith in Christ but he certainly is not a perfect Christian in either his understanding of the Bible or of the Christian faith. And sadly, President Trump, like many professing Christians and churches today, is not completely unstained by the evil influences of humanism.  He has shown support for some feminist tenants as well as support for the LGBTQ community.

However, God has used him to be great defender of Israel as well as the rights and freedoms of Bible believing Christians here in the United States.  God took a man who was previously pro-abortion and turned him into the greatest defender of unborn human life this nation has seen since the Roe v Wade decision was handed down by the Supreme Court in 1973.

Speaking on the topic of innocent unborn human life President Trump made the following statement today at the U.N. General Assembly:

“Americans will also never tire in defending innocent life. We are aware the many United Nations projects have attempted to assert a global right through tax payer funded abortion on demand right up until the moment of delivery.   Global bureaucrats have absolutely no business attacking the sovereignty of nations that wish to protect innocent life. Like many nations here today, we in America believe that every child born and unborn is a sacred gift from God.”

There is absolutely no denying that God has chosen President Trump at this point in history as his imperfect instrument.  Yair Netanyahu, the son of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, said the Jewish people look at President Trump as they did King Cyrus who helped them rebuild Jerusalem. Listen to what the God said about King Cyrus:

“I have raised him up in righteousness, and I will direct all his ways: he shall build my city, and he shall let go my captives, not for price nor reward, saith the Lord of hosts.”

Isaiah 45:13 (KJV)

And Cyrus was not a perfect man by any stretch of the imagination and he was not even a Jew.  But God used Cyrus as instrument of his will and that is exactly what he is doing in raising a warrior in the form of President Trump to take on globalism and environmentalism which are major pillars of humanism.

President Trump’s Stand Against Globalism

President Trump made the following declaration regarding globalism and the threat it poses to freedom:

“The free world must embrace its national foundations. It must not attempt to erase them or replace them. Looking around, and all over this large magnificent plant, the truth is plain to see.  If you want freedom take pride in your country.  If you want democracy hold on to your sovereignty. And if you want peace love your nation.  Wise leaders always put the good of their own people and their own country first.

The future does not belong to globalists. The future belongs to patriots.  The future belongs to sovereign and independent nations who protect their citizens, respect their neighbors and honor the differences that make each country special and unique.

Today, I have a message for those open border activists who cloak themselves in the rhetoric of social justice: Your policies are not just, your policies are cruel and evil. You are empowering criminal organizations that prey on innocent men, women and children. You put your own false sense of virtue before the lives and well-being of countless innocent people. When you undermine border security, you are undermining human rights and human dignity.

Many of the countries here today are coping with the challenges of uncontrolled migration.  Each you has the absolute right to protect your borders. And so of course does our country.”

Again, this is one of those areas where President Trump may not even realize the full extent as to why globalism is bad.

Yes, globalism threatens freedom because whenever you consolidate power,  freedom is lost.   This is why America’s founders believed in limited government and breaking up powers between the federal, state and local governments.  And even when the power was divided between these three levels, they believed that the ultimate power rested in the people.

But there is more to why globalism is bad then just it threatening freedom. It also threatens God’s institution of nations which was one of three of the institutions he created.   In the following three Scripture passages we see that is was God who divided mankind into nations giving them each a different language and sending them across the face of the earth:

“Therefore is the name of it called Babel; because the Lord did there confound the language of all the earth: and from thence did the Lord scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth.”

Genesis 11:9 (KJV)

“When the Most High divided to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel.”

Deuteronomy 32:8 (KJV)

“And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation

Acts 17:26 (KJV)

Humanism Aims to Destroy the Three Institutions God Created

As we have just shown from the Bible, the concept of a nation state, which President Trump so strongly believes in, is one of three institutions which God created.  And those three institutions are the family, the church and the nation.  He created each of these institutions for different purposes and divided powers and responsibilities between these three institutions of society.

SecularHumanism.org states the following in an article entitled “What is Secular Humanism”:

“secular humanism incorporates the Enlightenment principle of individualism, which celebrates emancipating the individual from traditional controls by family, church, and state, increasingly empowering each of us to set the terms of his or her own life.”

As we can see from the statement above, Humanism seeks the destruction of the traditional controls of the patriarchal family, the local church and the concept of nation states.   Their goal is to replace these traditional God given institutions with an atheistic, individualist and globalist society.

Humanism’s War on The Church

For over 150 years, humanists have been successfully waging a war on local churches both from without and within.  In the late 19th century humanists infiltrated the churches from within causing them to doubt the Bible which lead to the great modernist controversies and the rise of Christian fundamentalism to fight it.  In the 20th century they began attacking churches and Christianity in schools using the courts.  They were successful in having prayer and the Bible banned from schools and threatened churches with losing their tax-exempt status if they spoke out on political issues or if they publicly supported politicians who supported their values.

Humanism’s War on Biblical Gender Roles

During the same period humanists were attacking the churches, they also began attacking traditional and Biblical gender roles as God designed them with the rise feminist groups in the mid-19th century.  The roles of women in marriage and society began to be challenged and God’s order of male leadership in society, the church and home was undermined. This of course led to a weakening of marriage, the family unit and sexual morality.

In 1996, Congress passed the Defense of Marriage Act to stand against the rising tide of gay marriage advocates.  While this reflected the will of the American people at the time, it outraged the left and especially those in Hollywood.  Hollywood elites looked to a new plan to gain public support for gay marriage.  They started incorporating more gay characters into TV shows and movies and documentaries as much as they could to desensitize the American public to the gay lifestyle.   After almost 20 years of Hollywood doing this, national polls showed that public sentiment regarding gay marriage had changed and gay rights advocates took their case to the Supreme Court.

On June 26, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down all state bans on same-sex marriage thus legalizing it in all fifty states.  Chief Justice Roberts in his decent on the courts gay marriage decision knew exactly what would happen because of the decision when he wrote:

“Today’s decision,for example, creates serious questions about religious liberty. Many good and decent people oppose same-sex marriage as a tenet of faith, and their freedom to exercise religion is—unlike the right imagined by the majority—actually spelled out in the Constitution. Amdt. 1.”

In essence the court set the stage for many future court battles between the First Amendment which guarantees free speech and the free exercise of one’s religious beliefs against against the 14th amendment which guarantees due process and equal protection(this is what all discrimination laws and cases are based on).  In other words the battle is between freedom of speech and religion verses discrimination.

Humanists believe that the First Amendment and its guarantee of the free exercise of one’s religious beliefs takes a back seat to discrimination concerns.  Those on the right whether they be libertarians or evangelical Christians believe that the exercise of one’s free speech rights and religious beliefs trumps discrimination concerns.

And these are the battles that we are seeing raging in our courts over the past 4 years.  Our side has  had some victories and the Humanists have had their victories.

Humanism’s War on the Concept of Nation States

One of the first law’s that America passed was the 1790 Naturalization Act which stated that only “free white person[s] … of good character” could become citizens of the United States.  While these laws would today be considered “racist” they were in fact in keeping with the tradition of nations throughout history that protected their dominant ethnic groups as a unifying factor of a nation.

After the Civil War, Socialist Humanists began the new narrative that America was a “nation of immigrants”.  This is when “the melting pot” ideology began to spread. America’s motto of “E pluribus unum” which is found on our nation’s currency originally referred to the 13 colonies becoming one nation.  But the 19th century socialist humanists reinterpreted this famous American phrase for their own multicultural and globalist goals. They changed the mean of “E pluribus unum” from a reference to the 13 colonies becoming one to “Out of many nations one nation”.  The idea was to water down America’s White Anglo-Saxon Protestant culture with many other religions and cultures to break down the unity of the American nation.

Humanists won a major victory with the 1964 Civil Rights Act.  While there were certainly issues with Jim Crow laws that needed to be addressed the law undermined private property rights and the freedom of association.   It also laid the foundation for gay rights and now transgenders are trying to use it to shove their wicked ways in the faces of Christian business owners. Humanists won another major victory with the 1965 Immigration Act which abolished racial quotas which favored immigrants from northern European nations.

In the 20th Century, American Humanists began using the courts to push their humanist agenda on the nation.  If they could not pass a law to get what they wanted, they would simply go to a court and find judges who would agree with them.  American humanist judges used the philosophy of “if the words of the Constitution don’t say something, just reinterpret the words to make them say what you want”.

But in more recent years Humanists have taken off all pretenses and they are calling for the outright abolishment of national borders in their quest for globalism and a one world government.  In 2015, a year before President Trump was elected to office, the Atlantic ran an article entitled “The Case for Getting Rid of Borders—Completely” with the sub heading being “No defensible moral framework regards foreigners as less deserving of rights than people born in the right place at the right time”.  Trump ran on exactly the opposite premise and won the 2016 election in large part because it.

We as Bible believing Christians must take a stand.  We must get out and vote. We must use all the legal means at our disposal to fight back against the humanist assaults on our God given liberties.  That means Christians need to engage in law suits using the first Amendment’s protections for freedom of speech and religion to protect themselves and their businesses from Humanist lawsuits.  We need to use the very legal weapons that Humanists use against us against them.

We must defend and uphold God’s three institutions of the family, the church and the nation state.

Some on both the right and left have called this a “cold civil war” while others have called it “the Second American Civil War”. And I agree with them in those descriptions.  That is exactly what is happening in our nation and we must face this reality.

We must stop allowing leftists to paint us into a corner and shame us for believing such “radical” concepts like the one Mark 10:6 states that “God made them male and female”.  God did not make people transgender; the corruption of the sin nature makes people transgender.

We must stop allowing leftists to redefine what love is by saying that that two men or two women can love each other in the special way that God only meant for men and women to do in marriage.  We must acknowledge that there are some kinds of love and some kinds of desire that are indeed “vile affections” according to God’s Word in Romans 1:26.

We must stop allowing leftists to tell us that we are acting “inhumanely” for believing a nation should have borders that are enforced.

President Trump today also raised another God given right that we should not be afraid to defend:

“The United States will uphold the right to keep and bear arms. We will uphold our Second Amendment.”

The Bible affirms the God given right to self-defense in passages like Exodus 22:2 and Nehemiah 4:14 and we read in Ecclesiastes 3:3 that there is indeed “A time to kill” and in Ecclesiastes 3:8 that there is “a time of war”.

And just as God used a non-Jewish person in the form of King Cyrus to accomplish his will, so too we as Christians must be willing to form political coalitions with those who hold to and believe in liberty and freedom as we do.  We must be willing to stand shoulder to shoulder with those who defend basic American values like freedom of speech, freedom of religion and the right to keep and bear arms.  We should be able to stand shoulder to shoulder with those who still believe in the concept of a nation state and national borders. And we certainly should be able to stand with anyone who stands for the life of the unborn.

 

 

 

Discharged from Military Due to False Accusations of Sexual Harassment

“I was recently separated from the military under a GENERAL administrative separation, and the result was the loss of both my GI Bill and Unemployment benefits (due to accusations of sexual harassment). Maybe you can help me through the healing process, and perhaps fighting back on this. – glassadonis”

glassadonis,

I am sorry to hear of your troubles. The unfortunate truth is that when it comes to sexually related crimes our judicial systems, both civilian and military, have basically thrown out the American, English and Biblical concept of “innocent until proven guilty”.

The Bible tells us the following about God’s standard for establishing guilt for committing a crime:

One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, or for any sin, in any sin that he sinneth: at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established.

16 If a false witness rise up against any man to testify against him that which is wrong; 17 Then both the men, between whom the controversy is, shall stand before the Lord, before the priests and the judges, which shall be in those days; 18 And the judges shall make diligent inquisition: and, behold, if the witness be a false witness, and hath testified falsely against his brother;19 Then shall ye do unto him, as he had thought to have done unto his brother: so shalt thou put the evil away from among you.

20 And those which remain shall hear, and fear, and shall henceforth commit no more any such evil among you.”

Deuteronomy 19:15-20 (KJV)

Under God’s standard of justice, there had to be a minimum of two witnesses to a crime for it be established.  And if the two witnesses were proven to have lied then the same punishment that would have happened to the accused would happen to them.  Imagine if we had that standard today?  I don’t think we would have all these false accusations of harassment.

Does this mean that sometimes guilty men will go free? Yes.  But God considered it a greater injustice for an innocent man to be convicted than for a guilty man to go free. This used to be the standard of American justice for all crimes.

But today we have given women a free ticket.  They can falsely accuse any man they want with no proof and they suffer nothing for it.  And when it comes to sexually related crimes – the person accused is considered guilty until proven innocent.  If you can’t find multiple witnesses to prove your innocence, then you are guilty.

All you can do is fight back with lawyers the best you can and even then you may not prevail.

When you have done everything you can to fight back and prove your innocence yet still you suffer wrongly for something you did not do, then you must look to Christ’s example of “suffering wrongfully”:

“19 For this is thankworthy, if a man for conscience toward God endure grief, suffering wrongfully. 20 For what glory is it, if, when ye be buffeted for your faults, ye shall take it patiently? but if, when ye do well, and suffer for it, ye take it patiently, this is acceptable with God.”
1 Peter 2:19-20 (KJV)

I am very sorry that your military career was destroyed by the false accusations of this woman. But what you don’t want to do is get stuck in a pattern of self-pity and bitterness.  That will only hurt you and prolong you getting on with your life.  There is an old saying about bitterness that is very true.  “Being bitter at someone is like taking poison hoping for the that person to die”.

Give this injustice to God.

We’re Not Here Because of Men At All?

According to Elizabeth Warren “we’re not here because of men at all”. This is what she said this last Monday to a roaring crowd of over 20,000 people who came to hear her speak at Washington Square Park in Lower Manhattan.

She even emphasized the word “men” so everyone would know what she meant.

Now those who will try and defend Warren against charges of man-bashing or misandry will say she was just trying to show the accomplishments of a great woman.

Here was her statement in a larger context:

“We’re not here today because of famous arches or famous men. In fact, we’re not here because of men at all. We’re here because of some hard-working women

So, what did one woman — one very persistent woman, backed up by millions of people across this country — get done? Social Security. Unemployment insurance. Abolition of child labor. Minimum wage. The right to join a union. Even the very existence of the weekend”.

Warren was using this area, not far from the site of the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory where 146 people, most female immigrants, lost their lives in a fire in 1911 to highlight the life of a woman named Frances Perkins.

Frances Perkins (1880-1965), was a socialist who worked in the woman’s suffrage movement. She witnessed the 1911 Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire first hand and later went on to become FDR’s labor secretary and the first female cabinet member.  Perkins was indeed the brainchild behind much of FDR’s new deal leading up the drafts for Social Security, minimum wage laws, union laws and child labor laws.

So, what is the problem with what Elizabeth Warren said on Monday?

First, she did not say “we are not here to celebrate famous men, but to celebrate a famous woman”.  That would have been fine.  When she said “We’re not here today because of famous arches or famous men. In fact, we’re not here because of men at all. We’re here because of some hard-working women” the “here” she meant was the modern culture and society we live in.  A society that has a 40-hour work week, social security, child labor bans, unions and a minimum wage.

The problem is that while it might sound cool to say “we’re not here because of men at all” the fact is Francis Perkins worked with FDR and without FDR’s larger vision, charisma and political mastery Perkin’s ideas may have never come to past.

So, no Elizabeth Warren – you were there, speaking in our modern social welfare state, because of a woman AND a man, not just because of a woman.

And is that not the case for all us in this life? We live because a man and a woman came together as God designed them to do.

“Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord”.

1 Corinthians 11:11 (KJV)

But now that we have established that we are in fact “here” in a modern social welfare state because of both men and women we must ask ourselves another question.  Were the changes that the New Deal brought about a good thing for America?

Was the New Deal Good for America?

In their article “FDR’s Folly: How Roosevelt and His New Deal Prolonged the Great Depression”, Jim Powell and Burton W. Folsom made the following observations of FDR’s New Deal:

“The Great Depression of the 1930s was by far the greatest economic calamity in U.S. history. In 1931, the year before Franklin Roosevelt was elected president, unemployment in the United States had soared to an unprecedented 16.3 percent. In human terms that meant that over eight million Americans who wanted jobs could not find them. In 1939, after almost two full terms of Roosevelt and his New Deal, unemployment had not dropped, but had risen to 17.2 percent. Almost nine and one-half million Americans were unemployed.

On May 6, 1939, Henry Morgenthau, Roosevelt’s treasury secretary, confirmed the total failure of the New Deal to stop the Great Depression: “We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work. . . . I say after eight years of this Administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started. . . . And an enormous debt to boot!

the National Recovery Administration, which was Roosevelt’s centerpiece, fixed prices, stifled competition, and sometimes made American exports uncompetitive. Also, his banking reforms made many banks more vulnerable to failure by forbidding them to expand and diversify their portfolios. Social Security taxes and minimum-wage laws often triggered unemployment; in fact, they pushed many cash-strapped businesses into bankruptcy or near bankruptcy. The Agricultural Adjustment Act, which paid farmers not to produce, raised food prices and kicked thousands of tenant farmers off the land and into unemployment lines in the cities. In some of those cities, the unemployed received almost no federal aid, but in other cities — those with influential Democratic bosses — tax dollars flowed in like water.”

FDR’s agenda was not just bad economic policy, but it was actually an attack on some fundamental principles that America was founded on.  Burton Folsom explains this in his article  “Which Strategy Really Ended the Great Depression?”:

“According to Charles Merriam, vice president of the NRPB, “[I]t should be the declared policy of the United States government, supplementing the work of private agencies as a final guarantor if all else failed, to underwrite full employment for employables. . . .” That idea launched what Merriam and the NRPB dubbed “A New Bill of Rights.” FDR would call it his Economic Bill of Rights. Included was a right to a job “with fair pay and working conditions,” “equal access to education for all, equal access to health and nutrition for all, and wholesome housing conditions for all.”

New Bill of Rights

FDR viewed this Economic Bill of Rights as his tool for guaranteeing employment for veterans (and others) after World War II. But it was more than a mere jobs ploy; it had the potential to transform American society. The first Bill of Rights, which became part of the Constitution, emphasized free speech, freedom of the press, and freedom of religion and assembly. They were freedoms from government interference. The right to speak freely imposes no obligation on anyone else to provide the means of communication. Moreover, others can listen or leave as they see fit.

But a right to a job, a house, or medical care imposes an obligation on others to pay for those things. The NRPB implied that the taxpayers as a group had a duty to provide the revenue to pay for the medical care, the houses, the education, and the jobs that millions of Americans would be demanding if the new bill of rights became law. In practical terms this meant that, say, a polio victim’s right to a wheelchair properly diminished all taxpayers’ rights to keep the income they had earned. In other words, the rights announced in the Economic Bill of Rights contradicted the property rights promised to Americans in their Declaration of Independence and in the Constitution.”

A guaranteed income, “equal access to education for all, equal access to health and nutrition for all, and wholesome housing conditions for all” sounds like something we are hearing today from many Democrats whether they deny the “Socialist” label or not.  As the old saying goes “If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck”.

This ideology is not new.  Its been tried time and time and again and it continues to fail.  It fails because it violates how God has designed human nature and it also fails to take into account how sin corrupts God’s design of human nature.

How the New Deal Hurt American Culture for the Worse

People are told a false narrative today that before the New Deal there was no social safety net when in fact there was.  The social safety net was the one that God designed – which was the family and the church.

The Scriptures tell us that God has declared that it is the family and the church that are to care for the poor and needy. The first level of God’s social safety net is the family.

“4 But if any widow have children or nephews, let them learn first to shew piety at home, and to requite their parents: for that is good and acceptable before God…

8 But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel.”

1 Timothy 5: 4 & 8 (KJV)

“If any man or woman that believeth have widows, let them relieve them, and let not the church be charged; that it may relieve them that are widows indeed.”

1 Timothy 5:16 (KJV)

And it is only if a person has no family to help them, that the church should then step in to help the poor.  And then this giving for the poor is to be given of one’s free will, not under compulsion.

“6 But this I say, He which soweth sparingly shall reap also sparingly; and he which soweth bountifully shall reap also bountifully. 7 Every man according as he purposeth in his heart, so let him give; not grudgingly, or of necessity: for God loveth a cheerful giver.”

2 Corinthians 9:6-7 (KJV)

Even in the Old Testament theocracy of Israel where God commanded giving for the poor, there was no such thing as tax collector.  The giving was freely done by individuals to help the poor and needy around them.

And this is one the big divides between Leftists and those who believe in freedom.  In his article “Whatever You May Think of Republicans, Don’t Call Them ‘Stingy’” John Tamny writes:

“Republicans are greedy. They’re “out for themselves” as evidenced by their reflexive support of “tax cuts for the rich.” According to New York Times columnist Paul Krugman, the GOP is the party of “hate.”

Conversely, it’s safe to say that the Democrats are rather charity minded. Figure that their voting habits are invariably informed by compassion for the have nots. Democrats feel, and their intense emotions are deep when it comes to correcting what they see as societal injustices of the economic variety.

Except that such an impression about charity and charitable giving would be incorrect

According to Times columnist Paul Sullivan, “Red counties, which are overwhelmingly Republican, tend to report higher charitable contributions than Democrat-dominated blue counties.” Sullivan was referencing a study published last month in the academic journal, Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly. The study was a creation of four research professors “who set out to explore how political differences affect charitable giving.” As Sullivan noted in his analysis of the report, the “more Republican a county is, the more its residents report charitable contributions.”

As Arthur Brooks showed in his 2006 book Who Really Cares, U.S. households in the top 10 percent of income accounted for at least a quarter of all money donated, while U.S. households with net worths of over a million dollars were the source of over half of all charitable gifts. Brooks’s study also confirmed what the more recent one did: Republicans give more than Democrats do to charity, and do so at all levels of income.”

In other words, most Leftists, Socialists and Democrats are only generous with other people’s money.  While most Conservatives and Republicans who believe in the God given right of private property, are highly generous with their private property in helping the poor and needy around them through their churches or private charitable organizations.

And this was one of the worst impacts of the New Deal on American culture.  People no longer saw it as their duty to take in their parents or other relatives in their old age. Extended family members no longer saw it as their duty to care for the poor relatives.  And this affected giving and participation in church charitable organizations as well.

This change gave powers and responsibilities that were meant for families and churches to the government and in the process this change weakened both the institutions of the family and church.

No, Socialists Did Not Give Us the Weekend – God did

I just had to chuckle when I read Elizabeth Warren’s statement that Francis Perkins and the New Deal gave us “the Weekend”.  Actually, it was God who gave us the concept of the weekend.

“9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:

10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the Lord thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates”

Exodus 20:9-10 (KJV)

Now we know under the New Covenant that we do not have to take our day of rest on Saturday, we can do it on Sunday or even another day of the week.

“Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days”

Colossians 2:16 (KJV)

But the concept of a day of rest, a “weekend” of sorts, was God’s design. And Americans believed in this long before the New Deal. In fact, it was illegal in many parts of the United States to work on Sunday throughout the 18th and 19th centuries and even in the first half of the 20th century.

Conclusion

Elizabeth Warren was flat wrong that society has come to where it has only because of women and not “because of men at all”.  Men have cooperated with and helped women and women have cooperated with and helped men to get us where we are today.  And where we are today is not good thing from God’s perspective.

I would argue that men cooperated with women in many ways that they should not have.  One of the biggest mistakes men cooperated with women on was in voting for woman’s suffrage in 1919 and 1920.  After woman’s suffrage, the New Deal helped to further weaken the place of the family and the church in society.

And just as feminism has proven to be a failure, so too has socialism.  Every time socialism is tried, it fails.  And in the same way that feminism can only exist on the backs of men if they allow it, so too social welfare states can only exist based on the success of capitalism within their nations.

On the subject of child labor laws, I would encourage you to read Jeffery’s Tucker’s article for the Mises Institute entitled “The Trouble With Child Labor Laws” .  And on the subject of Minimum wage laws you should check out this article by Jon Miltimore entitled “The New York Times Explains Why the Minimum Wage Should Be $0.00” .

A Christian Young Man’s Guide to Life and Finding A Wife in a Post-Feminist World

Recently I received the following email from a young Christian man which ended in a challenge from him to me.

“Dear BGR, I am a 17-year-old male who will be graduating high school in this next year.  I have attended a Bible preaching Baptist church for all of my life. I was taught both at my church and in the public schools I have attended that women being given equal rights with men was and still continues to be a good thing for society.   My parents are conservatives and I have considered myself a conservative for a long as I can remember.  Like many conservatives, I believed that equal rights for women was good thing.  But this is no longer the case for me.

Because of your blog I have had my “cultural blinders” as you call them removed.   

I did not make the connection between the rise of feminism in the mid-1800s and the rampant sexual immorality, divorce, abortion and problems with LGBTQ that we face today until I read your blog.  I cannot believe how blind I was and how blind the adults around me still are to this connection.

I love how deep you dive into the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures and how you base everything you believe on the Bible, the whole Bible and not just the parts people like.  I also love how you dissect and tear apart liberal, socialist and secularist arguments against the Bible.   With that said I have a favor to ask you or maybe more of a challenge for you.

Can you write a simple list, like a step by step list, of how young Christian men like me who have had our eyes opened to the evils that feminism has brought on our society can navigate this Post-Feminist world and live in a way that honors God and his design of gender roles?  And here will be the hardest part for you – can you do it in 1000 words or less? I just know that a lot people my age don’t have the attention span that I do and I think if you made it short, they might just listen.

Jonathan”

Jonathan – challenge excepted.

Step 1 – Know Your Purpose in Life

God created you to be “the image and glory of God” and he created woman to be “the glory of man” (I Corinthians 11:7).  This means you were created as a man to display or live out God’s attributes in your life’s work outside the home and as a husband and father in your home.

Companionship, sex and having children are all benefits of marriage and commanded by God in marriage but they are not the reason for marriage.

Ephesians 5:23-24 tell us “the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church” and “as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing”. It also tells us in Ephesians 5:25 that husbands are to love their wives “even as Christ also loved the church”.  It is “for this cause” (Ephesians 5:31), the cause of picturing the relationship between God and his people, that we are to seek and enter into marriage.

Step 2 – Read Your Bible from Genesis to Revelation

You cannot be the kind of spiritual leader and teacher to your future home that God has called you to be without becoming a student of his Word (2 Timothy 2:15, 1 Corinthians 14:35, Ephesians 6:4).

Step 3 – Keep Sexual Relations for Marriage

The only sexual relations that God calls “honorable” (Hebrews 13:4) is that which occurs within marriage between a man and woman. When you have sex with a woman before entering into a covenant of marriage with her you pervert God’s design for man, woman, marriage and sex.

Step 4 – Build Your Career First, Then Seek A Wife

In Proverbs 24:27 we read “Prepare thy work without, and make it fit for thyself in the field; and afterwards build thine house”.  Build your career first, then get build a home and family.  In Ephesians 5:29 we read that husbands have a responsibility to nourish or provide for the physical needs of their wives “even as the Lord the church”.  A man’s ability to provide for his future wife and children is a critical aspect of him picturing the relationship of God to his people in marriage. No man should ever even begin to seek marriage until he is fully prepared to be a provider for his future wife and children.

Step 5 – Look for A Woman Who Knows Her Purpose

Just as you must know your purpose in God’s creation as a man, so too you should seek out a woman who fully embraces her purpose in God’s creation as well.

“4 That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, 5 To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.”

Titus 2:4-5 (KJV)

The women you seek should fully embrace the teaching found in the passage above.  No part of it should be uncomfortable for them.

Step 6 – Avoid Sexual Temptation While Waiting on Marriage

Some men may be able to provide for a family and therefore can marry in their late teens or early twenties because they enter a lucrative skilled trade or family business.  Others may have to wait till their late twenties or early thirties after they finish college and then spend several years in their career before making enough to be the provider God has called them to be.  A good example of those who would have to wait much longer are doctors and lawyers as it takes them almost a full decade to be firmly established in their careers.

So how does God want you to handle your unmet, yet God given sexual desires during this waiting phase of your life?  The answer is one word and it is an uncomfortable word for some while others have been taught it is a sin.  And that word is masturbation.

The scriptures condemn lust, not masturbation.  And then we must understand how the Bible defines lust verses how we define it today.  Romans 7:7 teaches us that lust is not mere sexual arousal or sexual fantasy, but it is in fact covetousness as defined in the 10th commandment. It is not a sin for you as a young man to be sexually aroused by or even have sexual fantasies about women.  It is not even a sin for you to masturbate to such thoughts or images.

Lust, in the Biblical sense, is when you think about or desire to entice a woman into having sex with you outside of marriage.  So, you don’t have to suppress your sexual nature until you are married, but rather you must exercise it within the bounds of God’s law.  And a big part of avoiding sexual temptation before marriage is to set a boundary for yourself that you will never be alone with a woman that is not your wife or your blood relative.

Step 7 – Be Diligent in Your Search for A Wife

Jesus said in Matthew 7:7 “seek, and ye shall find”.  You cannot hope to find a wife by simply sitting around and waiting for one to fall from the sky.  40 percent of couples who married in 2017 met online.  Use all resources at your disposal and do not limit your search to only your local area, but look nationally and globally. And yes, if you look outside your local area it will require a lot more money for travel. So, start saving.  Concentrate your efforts on rural areas as urban areas are often filled with women who don’t follow God’s purpose for their lives.

Step 8 – Do not Date but Instead Court

Dating leads to relationships based on emotion rather than compatibility.  The Courtship process helps protect a couple from the temptation to have premarital sex while at the same time allowing parents the ability to offer an objective analysis of the compatibility of the couple.