Hillary Clinton

Rachel Maddow offended at Bill Clinton for calling Hillary “a girl”

/ biblicalgenderroles / 5 Comments

Apparently Bill Clinton committed a mortal sin by checking out his wife before he knew her name and just referring to her as “the girl”.  This is the opinion of the raging feminist Rachel Maddow.  We can all agree that Bill Clinton has committed a lot of sexual immorality.  The Public record testifies to this fact.  But checking out his wife as student in college before he knew her name was not one of his sins.

This is what Bill Clinton said that was apparently so offensive to Rachel Maddow’s feminist ideology:

“In the spring of 1971 I met a girl.

The first time I saw her we were, appropriately enough, in a class on political and civil rights. She had thick blond hair, big glasses, wore no makeup, and she had a sense of strength and self- possession that I found magnetic. After the class I followed her out, intending to introduce myself. I got close enough to touch her back, but I couldn’t do it. Somehow I knew this would not be just another tap on the shoulder, that I might be starting something I couldn’t stop.

And I saw her several more times in the next few days, but I still didn’t speak to her. Then one night I was in the law library talking to a classmate who wanted me to join the Yale Law Journal. He said it would guarantee me a job in a big firm or a clerkship with a federal judge. I really wasn’t interested, I just wanted to go home to Arkansas.

Then I saw the girl again, standing at the opposite end of that long room. Finally she was staring back at me, so I watched her. She closed her book, put it down and started walking toward me. She walked the whole length of the library, came up to me and said, look, if you’re going to keep staring at me…

…and now I’m staring back, we at least ought to know each other’s name. I’m Hillary Rodham, who are you?

I was so impressed and surprised that, whether you believe it or not, momentarily I was speechless.

Finally, I sort of blurted out my name and we exchanged a few words and then she went away.

Well, I didn’t join the Law Review, but I did leave that library with a whole new goal in mind.”

http://time.com/4425599/dnc-bill-clinton-speech-transcript-video/

And now we get to see Rachel Maddow’s feminist response to Bill Clinton’s speech.

Rachel Maddow’s Response to Bill Clinton’s speech

“I think the beginning of the speech was a controversial way to start, honestly,” she said. “Talking up ‘the girl,’ ‘a girl,’ leading with this long story about him being attracted to an unnamed girl, thinking about whether he was starting something he couldn’t finish.

“Building her whole political story for the whole first half of the speech around her marriage to him. I think, unless there were worries that this was going to be too feminist a convention, that was not a feminist way to start … I’ve got to say, the top of the speech I found shocking and weird.”

http://freebeacon.com/politics/maddow-beginning-bill-clintons-speech-shocking-rude/

Now let’s break down the sins against feminism that Bill Clinton committed in his speech.

The 3 commandments of feminism that Bill Clinton broke

  1. Thou shalt not refer to a woman as “a girl”
  2. Thou shalt not attribute any of a woman’s success to her marriage or her husband.
  3. Thou shalt not be attracted to an unnamed girl based solely on her body.

Before I continue – I am not saying there are only three commandments of feminism.  In fact someday I will compile a list of what I think all the commandments of feminism are.  But he definitely broke these three commandments.

Why feminists think it is so horrible to refer to Hillary as “a girl”

What Bill Clinton was seeking to do by referring to Hillary as “a girl” was to try and demonstrate that she has the softness, gentleness and empathy of a typical woman – in essence he was seeking to present her feminine side. Now in truth based on how she as acted in the public eye since her husband was President more than 20 years ago we know she is anything but feminine.

So I say to President Clinton you get an A for effort, but  a F for substance because no one is buying what you tried to sell about your wife.

Hillary Clinton was one of the manliest first ladies this nation ever had as far as her demeanor and feminists love that about her! Feminists having a seething hatred for women who act like women.  They only respect women who act like men.

This is why Rachel Maddow literally had a cow about the description of Hillary Clinton as “the girl” because it took away in her mind Hillary Clinton’s greatest strength – the fact that she is such a masculine woman.

Connecting a woman’s success to her marriage and her husband is “shocking and weird”?

In feminism it is just fine to say “behind every great man was great woman” but apparently it is a mortal sin in their religion to say “behind every great woman was a great man”.

While I might agree with them that “tooting your own horn” and telling people how you helped make someone else become great is not exactly cool – I don’t see that in Bill Clinton’s speech.  He was simply trying to humanize Hillary Clinton and speak about her from a very personal level.  But for the foaming at the mouth feminist Rachel Maddow any mention of her as a girlfriend, wife or mother and somehow associating that to her success was the height of evil!

Before we continue though I want to just let my readers know that while I respect the offices that Bill and Hillary Clinton have held – I do not respect their persons.  While most politicians to a certain extent are liars and cheats – this couple has wrote the book on scheming, lying and manipulating people to get what they want.

Anyone who has watched “House of Cards” would see Bill and Hillary Clinton in that show.  Also anyone who is honest with history would admit Hillary Clinton has rode her husband’s coat tails since he was the Governor of Arkansas and she has little real accomplishments in her political career and many more failures than successes.  It is simply her last name that has brought her where she is today.

And this is for you Rachel Maddow.  You may find it “shocking and weird” when a man talks about how he was first attracted to his wife.  But I think the majority of Americans would find the behavior you and the rest of the LGBQT community engage in as FAR more “shocking and weird”.

How dare a man check out a beautiful woman without even knowing her name!

This last violation of the feminist religion is the most interesting one.  This is a violation to even many women who don’t think of themselves as feminists – even some conservative Christian women who are opposed to feminism.

“How can a man be so attracted to and mesmerized by a woman simply because of her body and appearance? He does not even know her name let alone anything about her! How shallow! How crass! He is objectifying her!”

What I am about to say I have said many times on this blog and it will continue to be one of the primary themes of this blog.

Man need to stop being ashamed of their masculine natures and the way God designed them as men.

Yes our masculine natures as men have been corrupted by sin just as feminine nature in women has been corrupted by sin. But this behavior in men is NOT a corruption of man’s nature.

A man is not shallow or childish by allowing himself to be attracted to a woman without even knowing her name or anything about her.  It is by the design of God himself and we as fathers and husbands must instill a healthy respect for this part and other parts of the masculine nature in our daughters and our wives.

When we hear our wives or daughters talking down about men checking them out or them noticing men checking out other women we as men need to call them out. I know this brings up the question “Well wouldn’t you be offended if some guy checked out your wife or daughter?” If I respect another man’s masculine nature as much as I want him to respect mine then no it should not bother me and it does not bother me.

What I mean by “checking out” a woman

Now I need to clarify what I mean by “checking out” a woman because I am sure all sorts of definitions are going through people’s minds.  But before I can define what I mean by “checking out” a woman I need to help the ladies understand the masculine nature a little better.

Let me explain this in a way that women can understand and I think most men if they are being honest about themselves will verify what I am saying to be true.

Here is the formula that all women must be made to understand:

Crying for Women = Staring for Men

Ladies have you ever just heard a story or watched a scene in a movie or television show and you have involuntary tears coming out of your eyes? In these moments your emotional response is completely involuntary and it just a natural response by your feminine nature to certain stimuli.

In the same exact way sometimes when a man sees a beautiful woman he may also experience an involuntary response to seeing her beauty – he may he may stare and he may even get erection simultaneously.

Women need to be taught that what I have just described is a normal masculine response to female beauty and this type of natural response to feminine beauty by men should never be criticized or looked down upon by women.

Am I contradicting my previous statements about men not gawking at women?

I know for those who have read other articles I have written on men looking at women that what I may have said might seem to contradict what I have previously written.  In my post “How should Christian women respond to their men looking at other women? Part 3” I gave this advice to men after spending most of the article addressing how women respond to men looking at women.

“What that means men is that while glancing at beautiful women may be natural for you, and give you pleasure, you have to make sure you are not mastered by this. Eating is something we are naturally driven to do as well, but we can eat too much, and too often, the same principle applies to our God-given male sexuality.

There is a difference between Glancing and Gawking

While I would say that woman are wrong for condemning men for taking discreet glances at other women, I would say men are equally wrong when they gawk at women. The classic seen of construction works whistling and saying obscenities to a random woman as she walks by is an example of unconstrained, uncontrolled male sexuality, and that does not honor God or women.”

I talk a lot about men “glancing, not gawking” and to do this requires self-control on the part of the man. Now some Christians would say a man should not even glance at another women – or take a second look at her.  To do so is lust in their view. I have dispelled this unbiblical belief in my article “What is Lust?”.

But where we can agree is that it is not appropriate for men to gawk. So let me further define what I mean by gawk.

For the purposes of this blog – I define gawking as “a man purposefully staring at a woman that may cause her or others in the area to feel uncomfortable”.  

This is not the same as a man involuntarily staring and not even realizing he is doing it.  Sometimes we as men are accidentally mesmerized by your beauty ladies in the same way sometimes something just makes you cry – remember that.

Now that I have given all that as background I will now define what I mean when say it is ok for a man to “check out” a woman.

For the purposes of this blog when I say “check out” as in a man “checking out a woman” I mean that a man is either involuntarily staring at a woman or he is taking purposeful tasteful glances of a beautiful woman.

Now all of us men at a certain point will realize we are involuntarily staring at a woman and at that point we can and should catch ourselves and then if we still want to check out that woman we should move to tasteful, yet purposeful glances. If we continue staring at a woman after we catch ourselves and thus we are doing it purposefully then this would be the very definition of gawking and not something we as gentlemen or as Christians should do.

How should women respond to men checking them out?

Well I already wrote a three part series on this subject that I still get a fairly large amount of email on to this day.

How should Christian women respond to their men looking at other women? Part 1

How should Christian women respond to their men looking at other women? Part 2

How should Christian women respond to their men looking at other women? Part 3

But I will add this advice to those articles. Ladies if you catch a guy accidentally staring at your cleavage or your rear end cut the man some slack. Wives if you catch your guy accidentally staring at another woman cut the man some slack.  There is a big difference between involuntary staring or tasteful glances and purposefully staring (gawking).

Ladies respect the way God made the men in your lives – whether they be your father, your brother, your husband or your sons.

Men respect your masculine nature and stop condemning yourself every time you are drawn to feminine beauty and have the natural responses God made you to have.  Just practice self-control and exercise your God given masculine nature within the bounds of God’s law.

Photo Source: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Bill_Clinton_by_Gage_Skidmore.jpg

Why women don’t belong in politics

/ biblicalgenderroles / 18 Comments

Do women belong in the political arena? Should we encourage our daughters to emulate the lives of women like Hillary Clinton or Sarah Palin? Some Christians believe examples of women like the prophetess Deborah in the Bible answers this question with a resounding “Yes!” This was the position taken by a young Christian woman named Justice Forte who recently wrote a comment on my post “How to Help Women Learn Their Place”.

But does the example of Deborah and other prophetesses and prominent women in the Bible show us that God wants women involved in the political arena?

Before we seek to answer this question let me share Justice’s story.

Justice Forte’s Story

Larry Solomon,

While scrolling through my Facebook feed, I came across your intriguing post. Though I usually do not take the time to read articles shared by my friends, as I am a pre-law college student with hundreds of pages of reading assigned to me each night, the striking words “How to Help Women Learn Their Place” piqued my interest. I visited your blog and read the biographical information you provided and several of your comment threads. As a Catholic, made in the image of God, I share many of your beliefs and I have read most of the passages that you listed in your article during my years attending Catholic institutions. I have been fortunate in that I have had numerous mentors that have guided me in my faith, including my father, mother, and several teachers. I have had the opportunity to analyze philosophical and theological works, including those of St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas with the great educators I encountered in my time at Pope John XXIII High School in Sparta, New Jersey. I have studied these topics with fervor, and I have strengthened my faith through constant inquiry, as my religion is not something that I take for granted.

However, I believe that your article reflects not only the loving messages given to us by God, but also several sexist attitudes embedded in our society. While it is clear that God created men and women with differing characteristics, strengths, and weaknesses, I do not think that it necessarily follows that the two genders must adhere strictly to narrow roles. While the Bible includes passages that guide women to be reverent and respectful to men, it also offers direction to men to love women and to treat them with kindness and understanding, and to acknowledge them as companions and partners in life.

As an 18 year old woman, I have struggled throughout my lifetime to discover exactly what your article claims to offer an answer to. I have struggled to learn my place in this world with this life that I have been given. The wave of feminism that you readily criticize has afforded me the ability to explore the vast possibilities of who I could be. It has allowed me to receive an education, and to read the works of insightful minds who have contemplated and established their places in life.

Through this education, I have found role models such as Deborah the fifth judge of the Old Testament referenced in Judges 4 and 5 and Hebrews 11:32-34. A thoughtful and effective leader, Deborah lifted the spirits of the downtrodden Israelites as she prophesied the word of the Lord under her famous palm tree. A courageous warrior, she led her army of 10,000 against the 100,000 Canaanites and proved victorious. The mother of Israel, the wife of Lapidoth, and the prophetess of God, Deborah serves as the ultimate example of a woman using her specific gifts to lead and to change the world in which she lived.

My education has also allowed me to ascertain and to ruminate on various attitudes and viewpoints regarding sexuality and gender roles that exist in the present day and to solidify my position on these crucial topics. Before beginning my studies at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, I had always referred to myself as a “traditionalist feminist.” I viewed myself as equal to my male classmates, as I had continually been able to interact and compete with them academically. However, I did not feel that I could properly call myself a feminist and all that this term has come to mean, as I agree with many of the roles set out for men and women. This internal conflict continued until I came across a page in my international relations textbook during my first semester at college which separated feminism into two distinct categories.

The definition of liberal feminism was familiar to me; it was an idea that I had heard recurrently, an idea that I could never bring myself to agree with. The theory of liberal feminism claims that there are no fundamental differences between men and women and that any perceived distinctions are merely the result of societal stereotyping.

To me, this theory seems entirely unrealistic, as I have experienced the inherent differences between the genders in countless situations, specifically during my time playing for the men’s ice hockey team at my high school. It is indisputable that I was not physically equal to the men on the ice, as I was mentally equal in the classroom. But, Authors Joshua Goldstein and Jon Pevehouse offer the definition of another strand of feminism, difference feminism, which focuses on “valorizing the feminine…valuing the unique contributions of women as women.” Difference feminism provides a way for a woman like me to both accept many gender roles and to work to compete academically and intellectually to shape their societies and to learn their places within them.

In your article, you stressed the need for parents, teachers, and pastors to teach young women how to behave as daughters of God and you argued that feminism has resulted in disrespectful behavior by women to their fathers and their husbands. Throughout my life, I have looked to my mother and father for guidance and they have been the measure against which I have evaluated myself. My mother is a devoted wife and homemaker, and she has worked tirelessly to instill in my brother and me values of compassion, kindness, and honesty. However, my mother has also served as my greatest advocate, and she has consistently demanded that I be afforded the same opportunities as my brother. She has taught me to be ambitious, and to embrace every task with passion and diligence.

My father, for whom I have immeasurable respect, has provided me with every possible chance to both better and challenge myself. He supported me throughout my eight year long career as a hockey player, understanding that this activity, though male-dominated, was important to me and would present many occasions for self-growth. It was my father who pushed me far beyond my own perceived limitations and encouraged me to apply to the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, a school 1,250 miles from my home, and it was him who all but forced me to accept my full tuition scholarship to attend this institution of higher education. While my mother and father have taught me what it means to be a daughter of God, bringing me to mass, showing me how to present myself in word, deed, and dress, and providing examples through their own lives, they have never allowed my gender to inhibit my desire to learn and participate in my society.

In concluding your article, you offered a list of Bible verses to be used by women to guide their behavior. While I disagree with the connotations of several of your brief summary headings, as I feel you have misinterpreted some of the text due to the gender biases that our society poses, I have tried to model my life based off of teachings and verses such as these. I work hard to be trustworthy, to show discretion when it is necessary, to speak with wisdom kindness, and love, to dress modestly, and to look to my parents and grandparents for guidance when I have needed it.

Though I have copious aspirations, including earning a college degree, attending and graduating from law school, and using all I will have learned to pursue a career in politics, I also hope one day to be a wife and mother.

Like your daughter, I look forward to fulfilling my role in God’s design and I intend to embark on that endeavor with the same ambition that I have put into my education, the same ambition that has been fostered for 18 years by my parents and teachers. I will treat my husband with respect and I will gladly support him in all that he does, and I will expect that he show me the love and kindness that God commands.

However, right now, I am an 18 year old woman, and I am subject and accountable to no one but my parents, educators, and myself. Right now I am a student and I intend to learn all that I can so that I may one day change my world, because my ambitions stretch far past the nuclear family unit and home. I urge you to contemplate my viewpoint, because I have combated attitudes similar to the one you expressed throughout my life. I have had boyfriends who claimed I showed them disrespect by simply having conversations with other males. I have had young men on opposing hockey teams cast disparaging remarks at me such as “make me a sandwich, bitch,” in an effort to help me learn what they think should be my place. I urge you to reflect on the possibility that there is more than one way for a young woman like myself, and like your daughter, to fulfill her role as a daughter of God and to learn their true place. I ask you to cogitate on my position because I feel it is imperative for today’s young women to understand that their faith does not have to stand in contrast with their aspirations, and you and I both have the power to spread this message. I respectfully ask you to take the time to read and respond to my post, as I would be interested to hear more about your perspective.”

My Response to Justice Forte

First and foremost Justice – I want to commend you for what I believe is a genuine faith in Jesus Christ and your belief in his Word.  I also want to commend you for your respect and admiration for your parents as this is something highly lacking in many young people today. I also commend you for listening to wise teachers and being curious about and studying schools of theological and philosophical thought. Being a critical thinker is never a bad thing but unfortunately in most generations there have been few of us that are critical thinkers.

What I want to do next is to zoom in on a few statements that you made and respond to them from the perspective of Christians who believe in a patriarchal view of society and marriage as well as more “strict” Biblical gender roles.

Prominent women in the Bible

First let’s take a look at some female characters that are often used by feminist Christians to assert that God encourages women to take active leadership in political and church arenas and see if any of these women resemble a modern feminist.

Miriam – prophet. – It never specifically says she exercised authority over men.

Deborah – prophet; judge; led the army of Israel into battle with Barak, their commander. She was a spiritual and moral leader. She did not seek to lead with Barak, he begged her to. She shamed him by telling him God would hand their enemies into the hands of a “woman”. It is interesting the Bible says she sat under a tree, and not at the city Gates as leaders typically did.

Hulda – prophet during the reign of Josiah. She served at a time when Israel had forsaken God, one of their darkest hours. Josiah sought to restore worship and the Word of God and sent messengers to her to seek the will of God.

Anna – a widow who became a prophet and pronounced Jesus to be the redeemer of Israel

Lydia – business woman in the Philippian Church, but the Bible never refers to her as a leader or a Pastor.

Priscilla – helped Paul while he was establishing churches at Corinth and Ephesus; with her husband Aquila, corrected Apollo’s preaching and helped him to learn of the new way in Christ.

Junias – contrary to feminist teachings, she was not an Apostle, but she was honored by the Apostles for her work in the Lord.

Phoebe – a servant in the Church at Cenchrea, She was not a deacon as feminists assert.

There is absolutely no Biblical evidence that any of these women sought to raise the social status of women or to challenge the role of a woman in the home and in her relationship with her husband.

Is Deborah a feminist role model for women?

Your Statement:

“Through this education, I have found role models such as Deborah the fifth judge of the Old Testament referenced in Judges 4 and 5 and Hebrews 11:32-34.”

I challenge you to present any Biblical evidence that Deborah was a “warrior”. She was nothing more than moral support and reluctant moral support at that.  If you look at the passage from Judges 5 Deborah only went with Barak because he asked her to and he refused to go if she would not go with him.  She was not the proud feminist that she is portrayed as.   In fact she said God would hand their enemy into the hands of a “woman” and this was not said in a proud way, but to shame Barak for refusing to go without her.  God did eventually give the honor of killing Sisera to a woman (Jael) to shame the men for their cowardly behavior.

The truth is this.  We have no evidence that Deborah neglected her duties to her home in her role as prophetess.  In fact we have no idea how old she was when God called her to this position. She may have been barren or raised her children and taken on this role much later in life after her children were grown and gone.

Women in leadership positions were the exception to God’s design not the norm

In no way does the Bible EVER paint women in leadership roles as a positive thing, but it is something God uses to shame the men into action.

“As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths.” -Isaiah 3:12 (KJV)

God is allowed to make exceptions to his own rules

God made these exceptions to his own design at limited and specific times:

God allowed a donkey to speak to a Balaam in Numbers chapter 22.

God tells the prophet Isaiah to go and prophesy naked for 3 years in Isaiah chapter 20.

God tells the prophet Hosea to go marry a prostitute (something clearly forbidden for priests) in Hosea chapter 1.

God took Enoch (in Genesis 5) and Elijah (2 Kings 2) directly to heaven without them first experiencing physical death.

In the same way that God made these exceptions to his rules God has sometimes allowed women to occupy positions of spiritual authority in an effort to shame the men of their society into action and obedience to God.

Are “sexist” beliefs always wrong?

Your Statement:

“However, I believe that your article reflects not only the loving messages given to us by God, but also several sexist attitudes embedded in our society. While it is clear that God created men and women with differing characteristics, strengths, and weaknesses, I do not think that it necessarily follows that the two genders must adhere strictly to narrow roles. While the Bible includes passages that guide women to be reverent and respectful to men, it also offers direction to men to love women and to treat them with kindness and understanding, and to acknowledge them as companions and partners in life.”

Let me first address the term “sexist”.  This term is often used synonymously with “misogynist” but the two words really mean two different things.

The truth is that while all misogynists (haters of women) are sexists not all sexist people are misogynists.

If by “sexist” you mean a person who believes that one gender may typically excel in certain tasks over the other gender than I and those others who believe that men and women excel over one another in different areas could be labeled as sexists. For example, men generally speaking are better at most physical sports than women and women generally are better at tasks that require nurturing and empathy than men.

This is why if you take the typical woman and throw her in a sports game with men she will get beat.  It is also why if you put a man in a room with toddlers and infants he will not do as well caring for their needs as the typical woman.  Are there exceptions to these norms? Of course there are.  But exceptions do not negate norms.

But based on your belief in “Difference Feminism” I would guess that this is not something you are including in what you think are “sexist attitudes embedded in our society”. You accept these types of differences between genders.  However, you do seem to believe though that it is “sexist” for a person to believe that a woman’s place is in the home.  If that is what you mean by “sexist” then I plead guilty.

To be fair to your position – I recognize that you are not condemning women who choose to be homemakers as your mother was.

But you seem to feel that it is “sexist” for a person to believe God did not give women a choice but instead directly commanded that a woman should spend the majority of her time, talents and energy in direct service to her husband, her children and her home.

Coed Sports force men to violate their natural God given instincts toward women

You reference the fact that you played hockey – a sport you readily admit is dominated by men. The reason that hockey is dominated by men is because it is not only physically demanding but it also a very aggressive sport not unlike football although football is even more aggressive.

I have allowed and even encouraged my daughter to play basketball on a church league in our area – but it was not coed.  They have a separate league for girls and a separate league for boys. I would not encourage my daughter to do what your father encouraged you to do and play hockey with men.  There are two reasons I would not have done what your father did.

The first reason is that men will often instinctively hold back and do not play as aggressively when women are involved.  The second reason is that coed sports can also bring out frustration in men as they realize at a conscious or unconscious level that God meant for men to protect women and not to physically compete with women.  This is why I am firmly against any type of coed sports leagues because I believe anything that causes men and women to go against their God given gender specific design, nature or instincts is not something we should encourage.

This is also one of the reasons women do not belong in the military as men will instinctively afford more protection to female unit members which affects unit cohesion and effectiveness.

The Bible does not call a man’s wife his partner

You talked about a wife being her husband’s “companion and partner”.  While the Bible does refer to man’s wife as his companion it never refers to her as his partner – despite the NIV Bible translation which tries to use “partner” in some verses with no textual support for doing so. I dive into these passages in great detail in these posts.

https://biblicalgenderroles.com/2014/05/20/is-marriage-a-partnership-or-patriarchy/

https://biblicalgenderroles.com/2015/03/03/is-christian-marriage-a-master-servant-relationship/

7 Questions for young women with political ambitions

Question 1

How do you explain Biblical characters like Deborah as any more than an exception to God’s design and purpose for woman in light of the fact that God calls it a shame for women to rule over men (Isaiah 3:12), he calls it a shame for women to speak in the church (I Corinthians 14:34-35) and he says the head of the woman is the man (I Corinthians 11:3)?

Question 2

How can a woman occupy a position of political authority which would most like make her an authority over her husband when God calls women to be in subjection to their husbands in “everything” as the Church is subject to Christ in everything? (Ephesians 5:23-24, I Peter 3:1-6)

Question 3

How can a woman be the “keeper of her home”(Titus 2:5) and serve the needs of her husband, her children and her home while being gone 40 to 70 hours a week as most political jobs require?

Question 4

Do you think God is ok with other people raising your children and experiencing all the special firsts those children will have(like walking and talking) while you are gone pursing you political career 40 to 70 hours a week?

Question 5

If a woman pursues a career and her husband must dutifully stand behind her and support her in this career is this not a reversal of the creation order that woman was made for man, not man for woman (I Corinthians 11:9)?

Question 6

Could you honestly say if you pursue this course of action that you would be dedicating the majority of your time, talents and energy to serving your husband, your children and your home if you pursue this course of action?

Question 7

Are you willing to sacrifice seeing your child walk for the first time, talk for the first time and all those other special firsts as you most likely will if you are gone so much from your home?

I would invite you to read a recent post I did “Don’t fall for the feminist lie that women can “have it all”. In that post I show a comment I received from a woman who used to think as you do.  She believed she could have it all and found out years later that she was sacrificing her family and her marriage as well as not fulfilling the role God gave her by following her selfish ambitions. I encourage you to read her story.

Conclusion

Justice – there is nothing wrong with you having a love for studying the Bible and also other great writers in history. You could use your love of reading and desire to impact the world by teaching other women in your local church as Paul exhorts women to do (Titus 2:3-5). You might even consider having a Christian woman’s blog.

Neither of these uses of your talents would contradict with the primary mission God has given you.

For a man PART of his mission from God in this life is to lead, protect and provide for his home.  If he fails to model the love, leadership, provision, protection, teaching and discipline that God does for his people he will fail his mission.  But for a man the other part of his mission is to do what you are presuming to do and make an impact his world through his career.

For you as a woman your husband, your children and your home are not just a part of your mission as they are for a man. Your future husband, your future children and your future home ARE your mission.  Anything that takes away from your service to your husband, your children and you home must be put aside or you will fail your mission.

I encourage you to read my post “Young ladies – If you pursue a career you may fail the Christian race”.

Also see Does the Bible allow for a woman to be President of the United States?

Photo Sources:

Photo Source:https://www.flickr.com/photos/gageskidmore/15142791621
This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 Generic license.

By Gage Skidmore, CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=46897599

Does the Bible allow for a woman to be President of the United States?

/ biblicalgenderroles / 11 Comments

WomenForPresident

Why were there no female priests in Israel and no female Apostles? Why were there no female queens appointed by God to rule over Israel? Was it just cultural sexism or was the lack of women ruling over men based on the what these people understood and accepted about God’s design of gender roles?

Moving forward to our modern culture, does the Bible allow for a woman to President of the United States?

A brief history of Women seeking America’s highest office

Contrary to popular belief, Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton are not the first women in American history to seek America’s highest office. In 1884, Belva Lockwood, an activist for voting rights for women and for African Americans campaigned for president.

In 1872 and 1892, Victoria Woodhull ran for President of the United States the first time from the Equal Rights Party, and the second time from the Humanitarian Party.

Many other women since then have either run for President from very small parties, or have sought the nominations of the Republican or Democratic parties.

What does the Bible say about a woman being President?

Obviously there was no such thing as a President in Biblical times, so the Bible would not specifically mention it. But the Bible does teach Patriarchy (male leadership over women).

The Bible tells us Man is to lead Woman in the Home:

“For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.”

Ephesians 5:23(KJV)

The Bible tells us Man is to lead Woman in the Church:

“This is a true saying, if a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous; One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity;”

I Timothy 3:1-4(KJV)

The Bible tells us Man is to lead Woman in Society:

“But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.”

I Corinthians 11:3(KJV)

Other Biblical facts that go against women in leadership positions over men

Christian Feminists have spent the last century attempting to explain away the clear teachings of God’s Word that I have mentioned above. In addition there are many more facts they cannot overcome.

Never in Israel’s history was there ever a female high priest, or female priest period.

Never in Israel’s history did God appoint a female Queen to rule over Israel.

None of the Apostles were women (you would think if God believed in gender equality, he could have carved out at least one slot out of 12 right?)

There is not one recorded instance of a female Pastor in the New Testament.

While I would agree with my feminist Christian friends that the absence of something does not necessarily forbid that thing, it certainly makes for a stronger case when we have verses that clearly say that man is the head of woman, the husband is the head of the wife, and in the church a Bishop is “a man” who is “the husband of one wife” and one that “ruleth well his own house”.

But what about women leaders in the Bible?

This is the primary weapon that Christian feminists have used to assault the patriarchal system that is clearly taught from Old Testament and into the New Testament. Below I will mention each one of these women who are raised as an objection to the Bible’s teaching on Patriarchy in society, the church and the home. Then I will mention a brief note on each explaining her role.

Miriam – prophet. – It never specifically says she exercised authority over men.

Deborah – prophet; judge; led the army of Israel into battle with Barak, their commander. She was a spiritual and moral leader. She did not seek to lead with Barak, he begged her to. She shamed him by telling him God would hand their enemies into the hands of a “woman”. It is interesting the Bible says she sat under a tree, and not at the city Gates as leaders typically did.

Hulda – prophet during the reign of Josiah. She served at a time when Israel had forsaken God, one of their darkest hours. Josiah sought to restore worship and the Word of God and sent messengers to her to seek the will of God.

Anna – a widow who became a prophet and pronounced Jesus to be the redeemer of Israel

Lydia – business woman in the Philippian Church, but the Bible never refers to her as a leader or a Pastor.

Priscilla – helped Paul while he was establishing churches at Corinth and Ephesus; with her husband Aquila, corrected Apollo’s preaching and helped him to learn of the new way in Christ.

Junias – contrary to feminist teachings, she was not an Apostle, but she was honored by the Apostles for her work in the Lord.

Phoebe – a servant in the Church at Cenchrea, She was not a deacon as feminists assert.

Let’s address the Deborah and the Hulda in the room

Only two of the 8 women mentioned often by Christian feminists truly exercised spiritual leadership over men.

The time periods when Deborah and Hulda were prophets were times of great moral and spiritual decay for Israel. Men were no longer exercising moral or spiritual leadership as we can see in Barak’s refusal to go to war without Deborah by his side.

Let me be blunt – God called women into spiritual leadership roles, as an exception to his design, in order to shame the men into bringing the nation back to God, and into exercising their God given responsibility to lead in the church, the home and in the nation.

In no way does the Bible EVER paint women in leadership roles as a positive thing, but it is something God uses to shame the men into action.

“As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths.”

Isaiah 3:12(KJV)

God is allowed to make exceptions to his own rules

God made these exceptions to his own design at limited and specific times:

  1. God allowed a donkey to speak to a Balaam in Numbers chapter 22.
  2. God tells the prophet Isaiah to go and prophesy naked for 3 years in Isaiah chapter 20.
  3. God tells the prophet Hosea to go marry a prostitute (something clearly forbidden for priests) in Hosea chapter 1.
  4. God took Enoch (in Genesis 5) and Elijah (2 Kings 2) directly to heaven without them first experiencing physical death.

My point is – God can and does make exceptions to his design at various times. But unless God actually directly commands an exception to his design, as in the case with Deborah and Hulda, we have no right to deviate from his design of patriarchy in the home, the church or society at large.

What God says women are to do

Christian feminists spend so much time looking for exceptions to God’s design that they stumble and fall over God’s clear direction to women, as to the normal way a Christian woman should live her life.

God says his normal design is for women is to be helpmeets to men and this is how women are commanded to live:

“I will therefore that the younger women marry, bear children, guide the house, give none occasion to the adversary to speak reproachfully.”

I Timothy 5:14(KJV)

“The aged women… That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, 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)

The Bible is crystal clear here in regards to God’s design for women. Young women are to marry, have children and manage their homes for their husbands. They are to be obedient to their husbands, to love their husbands and children and to be discreet. When women are older they are then to teach the younger women how to be good Christian wives and mothers.

The Bible does not forbid women from spiritually leading other women, as long as that leadership does not contradict with a churches authority, or a husband’s or father’s authority.

This would allow for Christian women’s conferences, for Christian women to teach ladies Sunday school classes, and for women to write books or blogs as long they are not exercising spiritual or physical authority over men.

I have given all this Biblical evidence, and answered the false arguments of Christian feminists to say this – a Christian woman has no business running for or assuming the office of President of the United States. In fact a Christian woman has no business being in a leadership position over men, whether it is in the home, the church or society at large. God says “the head of the woman is the man” we would do well to follow his design.

But do we need to submit to female leaders in Government as Christians?

“Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.”

Romans 13:1(KJV)

God tells us that rulers, good or bad, are allowed to come to power by his will. We are commanded to pay taxes and be subject to our rulers. That includes if they are women. If a woman run’s for President, that is something between her husband and her, and between God and her. We can and should teach God’s design, but at the end of the day, we each have a personal responsibility before God.

Would I vote for a female President?

Depending on the situation, yes. The reason is if the female candidate comes closer to Christian positions than the male candidate, I must support the lesser of the two evils. For instance if the female candidate is pro-life and the male candidate is pro-choice, I will most likely vote for the female candidate unless she is way off in some other way.

Update 10/13/2016

The 2016 Election and the choice between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump

I originally wrote this article back in 2014 long before Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton became the candidates representing our two major political parties here in the United States.

As I write this update to this article today our nation is faced with a huge choice coming in less than a month.  This article has spiked on google as Christians search out the truth of how they should vote.

Is the fact that Hillary Clinton is a woman the only reason I as a Christian man am not voting for Hillary Clinton? No.

But in the world of politics we often have to choose the lesser of the two evils.

The prophet Daniel served under Kings that lead sinful and immoral lives and as long as they did not ask him to sin against his God he served them faithfully.  The point is sometimes we don’t get a simple choice between a godly person and an ungodly person in politics.  Sometimes the choice is between two ungodly and sinful people and I believe that is the choice we are being presented with in this 2016 Presidential election.

I would have considered voting for Hillary, despite her being a woman which is a violation of God’s design if she did not have these things on her record:

  1. She is a proponent of abortion and especially the heinous partial birth abortion.
  2. She is for forcing Christian businesses and other faith based organizations to violate their religious beliefs by making them provide contraceptives through their insurance.
  3. She is for forcing Christian businesses and other faith based organizations to violate their religious beliefs by making them accept and participate in gay marriage(bakers, photographers, wedding planners, county clerks and judges).
  4. She is for going after churches that endorse conservative Christian candidates and who call out liberal candidates as unchristian.
  5. She believes in legalized theft of private property through the government seizing the private property of some(money) and simply redistributing it to others.  It is one thing to take taxes to pay for basic government services – that is a Biblical concept.  It is another when you take what one man has rightfully earned and simply give it to another man who has done nothing to earn it.
  6. She does not believe that a nation has the right to defend its borders, language, culture and economy.  One of the first duties of government is to defend it’s nation from all outside threats whether they be military(including terrorists), cultural or economic threats.

Hillary Clinton has many other flaws including being a liar and a corrupt politician. Is Donald Trump a liar too? Yes he has been caught in many lies. So perhaps on this issue of lying they may be equally flawed.

Donald Trump despite his flaws(and they are many) is a candidate whose positions on the issues of our time comes far closer to a Biblical perspective than does Hillary Clinton’s.

These are the reasons I will be voting for Donald Trump in the next month:

  1. He proposes that we strike the IRS provision put in by Lyndon Johnson in 1954(Section 501(c)(3)) that punishes Church leaders for making political endorsements or criticizing political candidates by removing their status as non-profit organizations.  This was a major violation of the first amendment right to free speech as well as freedom of religion and it must be struck down.
  2. While he has been careful on the issue of gay rights and gay marriage in his statements, if he appoints any of the judges on his list of judges these judges will bring a screeching halt to the gay rights movement assault on religious liberty.
  3. Speaking of judges – these same judges that Donald Trump has pledged to appoint to our various levels of Federal courts will uphold private property rights(another Biblical concept) as well.
  4. He has taken a pro-life position and is against partial birth abortions.
  5. He believes one of the most important duties of government is to protect the nation from outside harm whether it be cultural, economic or military threats including terrorism.

I am glad that God has allowed us in this election cycle to be able to vote for a man in keeping with his design that men should rule over women. I am glad that the male candidate is closer to the Bible in his positions than the woman so we will not have to go against God’s design in voting for a female president.

Other related articles:

How a Christian wife should handle a controlling husband

You were made for him