God’s will for women is to marry, bear children, and guide the home (1 Timothy 5:14). This is God’s perfect path for us, yet feminism has steered women in the opposite direction so that they end up unhappy, unmarried, and childless. This is Satan’s goal, not God’s. God created us for the home and for children. He didn’t created us for the workforce and the stress that comes from this. He created men for this since they have ten times the testosterone as women, but women in their fight for “liberation” lost what was most valuable in their lives.
….
The sexual liberation movement wasn’t liberation at all. It was bondage for women. They give sex away for free without the commitment of marriage. They cohabitate without commitment for life. Their children, if they have any, have no father so they’re single mothers in the workforce. This isn’t liberation at all. It’s bondage and exactly what Satan gives. He loves people’s lives to be miserable and unhappy. Christ came to set us free and give us life abundant. Choose you this day whom you will serve, women. God or Satan?
Well, I’m going to say something controversial that will absolutely delight atheists, ’cause they like to take… not all atheists… some internet atheists… like to take things out of context and use it to make me look bad. I don’t care… You’ve already hated me anyways. It’s not like anything changed. If anything, I’m just glad people, like, hate-follow me. Like, at least that’s there. You know, maybe they’re hearing the Gospel. Maybe, God willing, there’s, like, some truth of Christ that will eke through there…
So I’m gonna say something here: If God really told them to do it, then they were right.
If God didn’t tell them to do it, then they were wrong. And they were just a murderer. And a delusional murderer who’s blaming God, which just makes it worse.
God does have a right to tell… now, let me now let me give an analogy that might help people swallow this better, because I feel the rejection that people would have to this naturally.
Let’s say that… America gets involved in a… just war… Or… let’s just say that you have a police officer who is getting involved in… some kind of, like, school… horrible school shooting-type thing, right? And he gets permission from the government, and from the local police department and all that, that when he sees a person on campus with a gun, he just opens fire.
And so he shoots them. And then someone’s, like, “How dare you shoot that person?” And he goes, well, like, “The government told me to.” There’s an element of this that… really is the facts, like the government actually just gave him a badge and a gun and approved him and gave him policies that he’s supposed to operate by. And so, in a sense, the government just told him to, and that is an actual defense. Like, if that wasn’t in place, then you’d have to have other legal justifications other than… the government told him.
Maybe in court, they would say “No, no, this was urgent enough” or “We would we would break the normal rules,” that kind of thing. Military is the same way.
Now, the government’s flawed. So the government might tell you to do something, and they’re wrong. Like in military, there could be a war that’s unjust, and saying the government told you to isn’t a good enough excuse, because there is a God in Heaven who disapproves.
But if God Himself actually tells you, and He’s like, “Hey, I am the ultimate governor of all of life, and I have judicially said that person is going to die, and I’m telling you to do it,” yeah.
Now, historically, as a Christian, do I expect this to happen? Not really.
Biblically, does it happen? Do we have, like, is the Apostle Paul, like, every few years, he’s just, like, turns into Jason Bourne and he’s, like, “God told me to kill Simon the Sorcerer”? No. No, the worst thing the apostles have done was to tell someone you’re not part of our church anymore if you’re going to keep living in sin like that. You know, God takes care of them.
Jesus says, “My kingdom is not of this world, otherwise my servants would fight, so we don’t fight to establish the Christianity… to establish the kingdom.” Like, this is “God told me not to.” In other words, I don’t, because God told me not to.
So, as a Christian, in principle, if God tells you to kill someone, yes, you should. It’s God.
But in practical reality, I really don’t expect this to happen. Not that there could never be an exception, but if anybody comes up to me, and says, “God told me to kill so-and-so,” my default is to think they’re probably wrong, because there’s a lot more weirdos out there than there are people that God is telling to do something like that. There’s my answer.
Bruce Gerencser, 67, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 46 years. He and his wife have six grown children and thirteen grandchildren. Bruce pastored Evangelical churches for twenty-five years in Ohio, Texas, and Michigan. Bruce left the ministry in 2005, and in 2008 he left Christianity. Bruce is now a humanist and an atheist.
Satan works subtly. First, women give announcements in the churches. Then they read Scripture and become worship leaders with mini-sermons in between songs. They give their testimonies with some preaching added in. They give sermons when they pray. Finally, they preach behind the pulpits as pastors. This exact thing happened in our old church. It is an unbiblical church.
….
Women, feminism has so infiltrated the churches that they are far from what we are taught in Scripture. Be in the Word. Believe it as written. Don’t listen to those who twist it to their own destruction. Men are God ordained to be all of the leaders in all of the churches. His will is good. Stop fighting Him and trust Him. Now, go find a biblical church where there are no women in leadership positions.
— Lori Alexander, The Transformed Wife, Satan Works Subtly, September 28, 2022
Bruce Gerencser, 67, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 46 years. He and his wife have six grown children and thirteen grandchildren. Bruce pastored Evangelical churches for twenty-five years in Ohio, Texas, and Michigan. Bruce left the ministry in 2005, and in 2008 he left Christianity. Bruce is now a humanist and an atheist.
Susan-Anne White, a True Christian, So True She Can’t Find Any Church Pure Enough For Her
On 8th July this year as I listened to BBC NI’s Evening Extra, a Northern Ireland news and current affairs radio programme, the two male hosts began to discuss the menstrual cycle with a female contributor to the programme.
This discussion of an aspect of female biology was graphic and vulgar and should not be discussed on air by women but to hear two men speak about such a private matter was outrageous and despicable.
Feminists force men to speak of private female matters because they want to desensitise men and society and cause men and women to lose their natural reticence about taboo subjects. Feminism is vulgar and coarse and these wicked women are determined to cast off all restraint and coarsen society.
Men of my father’s generation and true gentlemen of all ages would blanche at hearing mention of menstruation.
The two male hosts in question had no shame or embarrassment and they disgusted me.
I sent a letter of complaint to the BBC and received the predictable “canned” response so I will not insult the intelligence of our readers by linking to it here.
The connection between manhood and unmown cheeks today has flowed down through church history, like oil running down the beard of Aaron (Psalm 133:2).
Augustine, commenting on Psalm 133, writes, “The beard signifies the courageous; the beard distinguishes the grown men, the earnest, the active, the vigorous. So that when we describe such, we say, he is a bearded man” (Augustine’s Commentary on Psalms, John, and 1 John). Or take Charles Spurgeon, who told his students that “growing a beard is a habit most natural, scriptural, manly and beneficial” (Lectures to My Students, 99). Or take ministers during the Reformation who grew manhood’s symbol to defy the celibate, clean-shaven faces of the Catholic priesthood.
Or overhear our day questioned by C.S. Lewis in The Screwtape Letters as the senior demon writes his nephew, “Thus we have now for many centuries triumphed over nature to the extent of making certain secondary characteristics of the male (such as the beard) disagreeable to nearly all the females — and there is more in that than you might suppose” (118).
So, what of the beardless?
Rome’s men were clean-shaven in biblical times (as were the Egyptians). When these beardless came to the bearded Christ, they did not need to grow one to enter the kingdom of God. They, like we, are saved by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone — apart from any strands of good works, lest the hairier among us boast. Of course, on the face of it, beards hold no salvific design, nor are they commanded. Even the shaved can be saved. Nor do beards make us men. Some boys living in basements, addicted to video games and porn, grow beards. But here we walk a fine line. Does this then relegate the beard, that ancient landmark, to a matter of obsolete decoration, of mere preference?
I know more than a few godly men who testify that though they try, the fig tree does not blossom, nor is fruit found on the vine. Little islands of hair sprout, but the lands never form the continent. They are more Jacob than Esau — whose mother glued “the skins of the young goats on his hands and on the smooth part of his neck” (Genesis 27:16) to pass as his hairy brother (and the older did come to serve the younger, Genesis 25:23; 27:15, 42). Chin wigs, my brother, are no solution.
The solution is to be the man God made you to be. Many today, if not most, will not have beards and are not the lesser for it. This article, with all its bearded banter, has nothing negative to say to you. We agree with Shakespeare that “he that hath a beard is more than a youth,” but not when he continues, “and he that hath no beard is less than a man” (Much Ado about Nothing, 2.1). For if you walk according to your God-given and God-matured masculinity, you are a bearded man, whether you have hair on your face or not. To understand that statement, consider the wonder of why God made beards.
Why did God make men with the capacity to grow beards? Why grow beards at all, or why not give them to children and women, like some speculate of the dwarves of Middle-earth?
Is it not because God delights in the distinctions he made? The day and the night, the land and the water, the heavens and the earth, the man and the woman — “Good.” For centuries, he hid the chromosomal signatures in every cell in our bodies, where only he could delight in them, but he did not leave himself without a witness, even to the unscientific. He shaded the man’s face with his pencil from the very beginning. What ecstasy of Adam observing the beautiful and smooth face of Eve — like me, yet not.
This appreciation is under assault in many places today. Figuratively speaking, our culture dislikes everything about beards. We paste false beards on women and shave the beards of men, catechizing the children that there isn’t any difference. Hair is just hair. With enough hormones, anyone can grow them. Claiming to be wise, we have become fools, exchanging the glory of God for images — and now we barter away our own.
That makes literal beards, in my opinion, worth having. Beards protest against a world gone mad. In other words, beards beard. They testify, in their own bristly way, that sex distinctions matter, that manhood will not be so easily shaven, shorn, or chopped by the Hanuns of this world. Its itchy and cheeky voice bears witness, “Male and female he created them” (Genesis 1:27).
Bruce Gerencser, 67, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 46 years. He and his wife have six grown children and thirteen grandchildren. Bruce pastored Evangelical churches for twenty-five years in Ohio, Texas, and Michigan. Bruce left the ministry in 2005, and in 2008 he left Christianity. Bruce is now a humanist and an atheist.
The reason I have dedicated myself to putting together the small book, Christian Fashion in the Teaching of the Church is because I am convinced that a life lived in a Christian way—and consistently so, especially for a woman—is partly expressed by the way one dresses, and that this is particularly important in today’s world. I will try to explain this briefly.
Allow me to present you with an image. In these summer days, not only holiday resorts, but also big cities like Rome or London are invaded by people—men and women—dressed in the most indecent manner. In my opinion, this phenomenon represents a brutal violence against Christians, because it jeopardizes one of the most important but also most fragile virtues of our faith: chastity.
In the streets and squares of large cities, scenes are imposed on passers-by that disturb the eyes, feed curiosity, provoke disordered desires and, in this sense, constitute a real assault. Yet we cannot deny that there is a certain consistency in this indecent attire: it corresponds to the dominant philosophy of life, which is materialism, hedonism and the dissolution of all values. Everything is permitted, and the pursuit of pleasure is the ultimate goal. There is a consistency in this scene.
….
The transition from the Middle Ages to the Renaissance, and humanism, can also be traced in the fashions of those times. Fashion was also the great vehicle to transmit the ideas of the French Revolution.
Fashion made the agitated year of 1968 into a radical turning point in Western social life. The criteria of beauty, decorum, harmony and elegance, which were already in crisis, were overcome by the egalitarian and anarchic spirit which was the very soul of the student movement. In 1968, most of the girls at demonstrations were in trousers. Jeans became a sort of uniform for the youth, the quintessential symbol of the new egalitarian fashion.
….
Along these lines, gender studies developed within American feminism in the seventies. Its advocates placed the denial of an authentic difference between men and women at the center of their conceptual approach. The notion of a fluctuating and subjective identity based on a social construction of gender replaced the objective reality of biological sex.
….
The concept holds that the male—female difference is merely a cultural and not a natural fact. Since culture can change, the next step is to suggest interchangeability in practice. Thus, the medical establishment offers surgical operations to make a man “a woman” and a woman “a man.” To make this utopian idea a normality, it must be imposed in schools, indoctrinating children from an early age.
Clothing is once again a revolutionary tool. In kindergartens and schools where gender ideology is applied, boys dress as girls and girls as boys. Boys can have their nails painted and are being taught embroidery and crocheting, whilst girls devote themselves to disassembling engines or playing with toy cars.
Fashion is therefore a formidable revolutionary weapon and needs to be opposed when it threatens to overthrow the principles of Catholic morality and the core values of Western culture.
….
That such danger is to be found everywhere today is a warning repeated, not only by the Church, but even by men who are outside the Christian faith; the most clear-sighted thinkers, those solicitous for the public good, strongly denounce the sinister threat to the social order and to the future of nations; the poisoning of the roots of life by the present multiplication of incitements to impurity; while the indulgence (which we would do better to call a denial) of an ever-more-extensive part of the public conscience, blind to the most reprehensible moral disorders, slackens the brakes even more.”
….
In the years immediately after the Second Vatican Council, many sought to separate doctrine from the modus—the style or form in which doctrine is expressed. Thus, these people expressed themselves differently from the past and brought about a cultural transformation that is deeper than it may seem. The way in which we presents ourselves—the styles in which we expresses ourselves—reveals a way of being and of thinking.
Fashion is basically a person’s style. Style expresses the ideas which guide us. Through our clothing we express a world vision. If it is true that examples count as much as ideas, then the way we dress also can express our “lived Christianity.”
Bruce Gerencser, 67, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 46 years. He and his wife have six grown children and thirteen grandchildren. Bruce pastored Evangelical churches for twenty-five years in Ohio, Texas, and Michigan. Bruce left the ministry in 2005, and in 2008 he left Christianity. Bruce is now a humanist and an atheist.
Clothes don’t have to be clean anymore. People can wear clothes that are deliberately ripped, stained and full of holes without fear of rejection. Clothes don’t even have to be clothes anymore. They can be shredded rags, the dingier the better.
….
Such tattered garments are called “distressed” clothes (rightfully so), and they are becoming increasingly fashionable. It’s not just amateurs haphazardly ripping up faded jeans or retailers making random tears anymore. It is going mainstream.
The world of high fashion has now embraced “distressed” clothing as chic. Fashion designers are using new technology and hiring special effects technicians to get that natural moth-eaten, threadbare look that makes it seem like you’ve been wearing the garment for twenty years.
….
You should not have to explain why you don’t wear ripped clothes. This is something your mother should have taught you at an early age. She would sew up your tears the minute she saw them. If she found a hole in a purchase, she would make you take back such clothes to the store for a refund.
Times have sadly changed, and so have some mothers. A lot of fashion conscious moms can now be found in shredded shorts and custom-holed t-shirts.
….
Perhaps the first place to start is by affirming that a ripped garment is not modest clothing because it is not real clothing. This claim is guaranteed to raise a firestorm, but from a purely metaphysical perspective, it must be admitted that such garments fail to fulfill their purpose.
Most people would object that it is still clothing, but just a different kind that is more comfortable and thus makes people happier. People should do that which makes them happiest. Therefore they should wear ripped clothes so as not to worry about their appearance or condition. It is all about comfort.
….
Deliberately ripped garments work against the purpose of clothes. They are caricatures of what clothing should be. Far from adorning the body, the process of ripping turns that which should be strong, beautiful and orderly into something weak, ugly and frayed. Tattered attire is disordered and therefore should not be worn.
….
The second reason why ripped clothing should not be worn is that it is immodest.
Again such a claim raises hackles. Most people would object that as long as tattered clothes stay outside the extreme point of undress that is considered morally and socially unacceptable, you cannot say that it is immodest.
And here is the crux of the problem. People have completely lost the notion of what modesty is and how it is manifested. People lack even a catechism definition of this virtue.
People confuse modesty with chastity and thus only associate it with sensuality. Modesty does play a major role in preserving chastity, but it is much more than that. It is often mistakenly associated only with female attire, but it also applies to men.
….
Modesty is the virtue that safeguards the dignity of a person in association with others. It benefits both the individual and society because it governs the exterior appearance and behavior of the person and thus helps make society civil and harmonious.
Beyond dress, modesty is concerned with the manner of speech, posture, gestures, and general presentation of the person. Modesty calls upon people to behave well with others and conform to standards of decency and decorum found in the healthy customs of an ordered society.
When you present yourself properly to others, you are modest. When you control yourself in your external actions and manners in society, you are modest. When you act erratically and speak in a manner that offends and disregards others, you are immodest.
….
In matters of Catholic dress, this means holding to all that is proper to a soul that is a temple of the Holy Spirit. That is to say, you dress in a manner that is ordered, dignified and reasonable to who you are. Adults dress like adults; children dress like children. Authorities dress in accord with their office.
It also means you should not dress carelessly. Saint Thomas Aquinas states that you are immodest when you are unduly negligent in your appearance and fail to present yourself according to your state in life. You are also immodest when you seek to attract attention to yourself by showing a lack of concern for presenting oneself well (Summa, II-II, q. 169, a. 1).
Immoral and revealing clothing is of course immodest. However, improper, soiled and ripped unisex clothing is also immodest. It is not proper to the dignity of a person made in the image and likeness of God. When Our Lady spoke out against immodest fashions at Fatima, she was referring to this kind of immodesty as well.
Bruce Gerencser, 67, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 46 years. He and his wife have six grown children and thirteen grandchildren. Bruce pastored Evangelical churches for twenty-five years in Ohio, Texas, and Michigan. Bruce left the ministry in 2005, and in 2008 he left Christianity. Bruce is now a humanist and an atheist.
When did humans first settle North America? According to the most common evolutionary view, this supposedly happened 16,000 years ago. But a new find of a mammoth tusk and bashed-in skull at an ancient butchering site in New Mexico is challenging this view and pushing the date back to 37,000 years. Of course, in a biblical worldview [alternate reality] we know that both of these dates are not correct—so when did Native Americans first arrive?
Let’s consider how biblical history can provide some boundaries for when this might have happened. God created everything in six days, finishing with the creation of the first couple. All humans are descended from this pair. The genealogies in Genesis tell us two thousand years passed between Adam and Abraham and we know there were about two thousand years from Abraham to Christ, and, of course, two thousand more years gets us to the present. That’s about 6,000 years for all of mankind’s history (so even the conservative date of 16,000 years is way off!).
Genesis chapter 6 records the wickedness of man and God’s judgment with a global flood. This reduced the entire human population to just eight people aboard the Ark. These eight were told to spread out and fill the earth, but their descendants wanted to stay together and build a tower. In judgment for their rebellion, God confused their language, splitting them up around the world. This means that no one could have reached modern-day North America until after the tower of Babel event. In other words, no one was in the Americas prior to about 4,200 years ago. At that time, the peoples were dispersed and began travelling and eventually settling all around the globe
The government has zero jurisdiction over the local church. In any way. It neither defines it nor regulates it. That is solely the jurisdiction of Christ Jesus.
My name is Denise. I grew up in the Charismatic movement, but God delivered me out of it, and I thank Him for that. My heart is to show other believers the error of various movements(WOF, NAR, Seeker Friendly, Reformed theology/New Calvinism).I want to help them find truth through Scripture. I love the Word of God and hold it dear to my heart. It is the standard by which I filter everything, including doctrine & politics, including my own thoughts and actions. Ps 138:2 There is One God, and within the One God there are three distinct, co-equal and co-eternal persons: The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit(1Peter 1:2; Matt. 28:19; Matt. 3:16-17; John 14:16-17). Literal 6 day Creation is Truth.Scripture is infallible, inerrant, & God-breathed (2Tim. 3:16, Heb.4:12, Ps. 19 & 119). Salvation is by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone for the glory of God alone apart from any works (baptism, prayers, walking an aisle, etc.) so that no one can boast (Eph. 2:8-10). God is totally Sovereign in ALL things (Ps 33). I do mean ALL. Man is responsible for his sin. God is responsible for saving the elect through HIS means.
Bruce Gerencser, 67, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 46 years. He and his wife have six grown children and thirteen grandchildren. Bruce pastored Evangelical churches for twenty-five years in Ohio, Texas, and Michigan. Bruce left the ministry in 2005, and in 2008 he left Christianity. Bruce is now a humanist and an atheist.
“I form light and create darkness; I make well-being and create calamity; I am the LORD, who does all these things” (Isaiah 45:7). Certainly God is in total control of everything in this universe and He has allowed this coronavirus situation for His purposes.
I do believe it’s a warning to a nation that puts to death nearly 1 million children a year, has told God He’s not welcome in schools, rejects nativity scenes and crosses in public places and has allowed the religion of atheism to be imposed.
It’s a warning to a nation with a lot of churches but majority of which are lukewarm and compromise God’s Word in Genesis with man’s pagan religion of evolution and millions of years.
It’s a warning to a nation that is at war against the family and promotes sexual perversion through Drag Queens, LGBTQ movement, etc.
It’s a warning to a nation that is at war against children as they permeate their minds with wickedness through education and media.
It’s a warning to nation that views the elderly and infirmed as needing to be eliminated.
It’s a warning to a culture where politicians and others say we need to pray about this coronavirus situation but are not repentant about blatant sin that permeates the nation.
Be warned America and all Western nations–be warned world.
I find it interesting that Ham didn’t use the KJV for his quote of Isaiah 45:7:
I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things.
Hmm . . . God created evil. I can see why Ham would prefer the word calamity to evil. Regardless, Isaiah 45:7 clearly teaches that God is sovereign and in control of everything. That would include, by the way. the very things Ham is complaining about. You can’t have it both ways. Either God is in control, or we are. Based on the available evidence, it is humans who are in control. So to Ham’s warnings, I say, “who cares?” Ham sounds like a droning ceiling fan on a hot, lazy August day. Of course, if God really is in control, I only say and do what God wants me to. 🙂
Bruce Gerencser, 67, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 46 years. He and his wife have six grown children and thirteen grandchildren. Bruce pastored Evangelical churches for twenty-five years in Ohio, Texas, and Michigan. Bruce left the ministry in 2005, and in 2008 he left Christianity. Bruce is now a humanist and an atheist.
