Favorite Quotations

Skybringr

BANNED
Because the Bible was written during and about a patriarchal society dominated by men. Please don't tell me it was utopia.

It was a society ordained by God.

Ask the Pope why he doesn't infallibly declare, or those before him, that women should have any place in leadership :think:

Or
Just acknowledge the looming elephant.
 

Angel4Truth

New member
I've firgured all that out, and so has Christendom- why DO YOU THINK only men are allowed preachers

WHAT DO YOU THINK THE REASON IS ?

Because men like you try to take advantage of women- because men see women as weak and take advantage and says such would happen right in genesis. Men seek to rule women, instead of seeking God.
 

annabenedetti

Well-known member
The Church is anti-feminism.

Women cannot carry out bishopric power.
Place the worldview to practicality: they don't have power in the household either. Else there's a contradiction in logic.

The truth is just the truth. A Catholic cannot side with feminists.

^^That's what's really at the heart of it all.

I suppose what you want right now is someone with whom you can fight.

Again:
"Of course you don’t want me to be stupid, bless you! you only want to make sure you’re intelligent. You don’t want me to commit suicide; you only want me to be gratefully aware of my dependency. You don’t want me to despise myself; you only want the flattering deference to you that you consider a spontaneous tribute to your natural qualities. You don’t want me to lose my soul; you only want what everybody wants, things to go your way; you want a devoted helpmeet, a self-sacrificing mother, a hot chick, a darling daughter, women to look at, women to laugh at, women to come for comfort, women to wash your floors and buy your groceries and cook your food and keep your children out of your hair, to work when you need the money and stay home when you don’t, women to be enemies when you want a good fight, women who are sexy when you want a good lay, women who don’t complain, women who don’t nag or push, women who don’t hate you really, women who know their job and above all—women who lose."
 

Skybringr

BANNED
Who better to fight then whom is fighting you?

Feminism is the Whore of Babylon, perhaps I wasn't clear in my theological ramblings :think:



Think about it :thumb:
 

Skybringr

BANNED
You sound like some kind of, fanatic! Are you anti-female?

I put all the pieces together.

There is no difference between liberal and feminist thought. They are in fact the same demon; extraordinarily and inevitably synonymous.

The leading nations of the world labor under such, they all adorn red and white, and while it may be the same coloration of Rome, it is in fact Romance. The dirge of men and women, the elementary strives of classical society becoming Hellish;

The purity of roses and doves, red and white, which women are adorned with- the leading nations forming a government, funding Israel which will breed the Anti-Christ. Purple, the royalty of gay pride- constructed by feminist philosophy.

Call me a fanatic all you want, but prove me wrong :thumb:
One is much harder then the other_
 

Selaphiel

New member
I put all the pieces together.

There is no difference between liberal and feminist thought. They are in fact the same demon; extraordinarily and inevitably synonymous.

The leading nations of the world labor under such, they all adorn red and white, and while it may be the same coloration of Rome, it is in fact Romance. The dirge of men and women, the elementary strives of classical society becoming Hellish;

The purity of roses and doves, red and white, which women are adorned with- the leading nations forming a government, funding Israel which will breed the Anti-Christ. Purple, the royalty of gay pride- constructed by feminist philosophy.

Call me a fanatic all you want, but prove me wrong :thumb:
One is much harder then the other_

It is not very hard at all. People who use hatred as their hermeneutic to understand Revelation is a dime a dozen. You simply do not understand the symbolism of the book. The whore of Babylon is not feminism, it is not a modern phenomena at all, it is a symbol of ancient Rome.

She is sitting on seven mountains (Revelation 17:9). The symbolism is unmistakable. Rome was known as the city on the seven mountains or seven hills. So let us use some reason here, who is it likely that concerned first century Christians more, a powerful persecuting empire or a women liberation movement taking place 1800 years later? Think the answer to that is quite obvious, especially once one understands that Jewish apocalyptic literature is not about some distant future, it is rather about a particular perspective on contemporary events. Here is a Roman coin from 70AD by the way:



That is Rome depicted as a woman sitting on seven mountains.

Her purple robe is simply a symbol of her being rich and powerful. She is feeding off her subjects, the lands and kingdoms that were under the control of Rome. It is an attack of the "Pax Romana", a mockery of it, John is rather portraying Rome as a whore who is only using those empires for her own economic benefits.

So sorry, Revelation has nothing to do with feminism. It is a critique of imperial power and persecution.

Of course, it has this in common with contemporary Jewish apocalyptic literature, who also uses Babylon as a codename for Rome.
 

Skybringr

BANNED
It is not very hard at all. People who use hatred as their hermeneutic to understand Revelation is a dime a dozen. You simply do not understand the symbolism of the book. The whore of Babylon is not feminism, it is not a modern phenomena at all, it is a symbol of ancient Rome.

She is sitting on seven mountains (Revelation 17:9). The symbolism is unmistakable. Rome was known as the city on the seven mountains or seven hills. So let us use some reason here, who is it likely that concerned first century Christians more, a powerful persecuting empire or a women liberation movement taking place 1800 years later? Think the answer to that is quite obvious, especially once one understands that Jewish apocalyptic literature is not about some distant future, it is rather about a particular perspective on contemporary events. Here is a Roman coin from 70AD by the way:



That is Rome depicted as a woman sitting on seven mountains.

Her purple robe is simply a symbol of her being rich and powerful. She is feeding off her subjects, the lands and kingdoms that were under the control of Rome. It is an attack of the "Pax Romana", a mockery of it, John is rather portraying Rome as a whore who is only using those empires for her own economic benefits.

So sorry, Revelation has nothing to do with feminism. It is a critique of imperial power and persecution.

Of course, it has this in common with contemporary Jewish apocalyptic literature, who also uses Babylon as a codename for Rome.

Ancient Rome was the first feminist state, complete with homosexuality, liberal notions, and so forth.

The citizens didn't even work. It was a paradise of vanity; a breeding ground precisely for emancipation.
As soon as Christianity came, in the 4th century, all that came to an utter collapse.

Now that Christianity is doused in today's society, feminist philosophy emerges once again.



I've done my homework on the whole thing. Liberal and feminist philosophy are synonymous, and is something of those illuminated by Lucifer.
Nothing is going to convince me that I'm wrong and only your denial is going to keep you from the truth. Just as Eve deceived Adam by the Serpent, so to does he do it again, And again- it's his grand work on man's weakness.

It's not hatred, it's just the truth, and it's assured by the Devil to not prevail because he has you and many others like you obsessed and nailed to your feminism. The truth is hatred to you.
 
Last edited:

annabenedetti

Well-known member
It is not very hard at all. People who use hatred as their hermeneutic to understand Revelation is a dime a dozen. You simply do not understand the symbolism of the book. The whore of Babylon is not feminism, it is not a modern phenomena at all, it is a symbol of ancient Rome.

She is sitting on seven mountains (Revelation 17:9). The symbolism is unmistakable. Rome was known as the city on the seven mountains or seven hills. So let us use some reason here, who is it likely that concerned first century Christians more, a powerful persecuting empire or a women liberation movement taking place 1800 years later? Think the answer to that is quite obvious, especially once one understands that Jewish apocalyptic literature is not about some distant future, it is rather about a particular perspective on contemporary events. Here is a Roman coin from 70AD by the way:



That is Rome depicted as a woman sitting on seven mountains.

Her purple robe is simply a symbol of her being rich and powerful. She is feeding off her subjects, the lands and kingdoms that were under the control of Rome. It is an attack of the "Pax Romana", a mockery of it, John is rather portraying Rome as a whore who is only using those empires for her own economic benefits.

So sorry, Revelation has nothing to do with feminism. It is a critique of imperial power and persecution.

Of course, it has this in common with contemporary Jewish apocalyptic literature, who also uses Babylon as a codename for Rome.

Thank you Selaphiel. Excellently done.
 

annabenedetti

Well-known member
I've done my homework on the whole thing. Liberal and feminist philosophy are synonymous, and is something of those illuminated by Lucifer.
Nothing is going to convince me that I'm wrong and only your denial is going to keep you from the truth. Just as Eve deceived Adam by the Serpent, so to does he do it again, And again- it's his grand work on man's weakness.

It's not hatred, it's just the truth, and it's assured by the Devil to not prevail because he has you and many others like you obsessed and nailed to your feminism. The truth is hatred to you.


Previously posted in this thread:

A man with a conviction is a hard man to change. Tell him you disagree and he turns away. Show him facts or figures and he questions your sources. Appeal to logic and he fails to see your point. We have all experienced the futility of trying to change a strong conviction, especially if the convinced person has some investment in his belief. We are familiar with the variety of ingenious defenses with which people protect their convictions, managing to keep them unscathed through the most devastating attacks.

But man's resourcefulness goes beyond simply protecting a belief. Suppose an individual believes something with his whole heart; suppose further that he has a commitment to this belief, that he has taken irrevocable actions because of it; finally, suppose that he is presented with evidence, unequivocal and undeniable evidence, that his belief is wrong: what will happen? The individual will frequently emerge, not only unshaken, but even more convinced of the truth of his beliefs than ever before. Indeed, he may even show a new fervor about convincing and converting other people to his view.

Leon Festinger
 

Selaphiel

New member
Ancient Rome was the first feminist state, complete with feminism, liberal notions, and so forth.

The Roman empire a feminist state? :chuckle: I suggest taking another look at the history books. The Roman empire is a textbook example of a patriarchal society. Large families oriented around a pater familias, and it was a patron-client society. Caesar Augustus Octavian is famous for his fondness of Aristotelian biology, placing man above woman and forbidding women to make herself equal to a man.

The citizens didn't even work. It was a paradise of vanity; a breeding ground precisely for emancipation.

They didn't work? How do you suppose that the city of Rome operated? You think its citizens did their shopping at the supermarket that just had fresh food and prefabricated clothes from abroad? The aristrocrats did not work much, but Rome did not entirely consist of aristocrats. The majority of people were workers.

As soon as Christianity came, in the 4th century, all that came to an utter collapse.

Except that Rome never was a feminist liberal state as you claim, that is pure fantasy. It is exactly the opposite of the moral climate of Rome around the time of Christ, as I hinted by referring to Emperor Augustus.

I've done my homework on the whole thing. Liberal and feminist philosophy are synonymous, and is something of those illuminated by Lucifer.

You evidently have not done any homework at all.

Nothing is going to convince me that I'm wrong

That is the one part of your post that I believe is accurate.

and only your denial is going to keep you from the truth. Just as Eve deceived Adam by the Serpent, so to does he do it again, And again- it's his grand work on man's weakness.

You must have some serious deep-seated issues with women. There are few things that are more feeble than a man who places the blame for his own shortcomings and moral failures on women.
 

Skybringr

BANNED
The Roman empire a feminist state? :chuckle: I suggest taking another look at the history books. The Roman empire is a textbook example of a patriarchal society. Large families oriented around a pater familias, and it was a patron-client society. Caesar Augustus Octavian is famous for his fondness of Aristotelian biology, placing man above woman and forbidding women to make herself equal to a man.

It's not that simple.
Rome resembled a complete emancipation alongside it's patriarchy. Prostitution, homosexuality, and the introduction of civil romance were met with men and women who hardly even had to work for a living.
It was a golden age for everyone, and with it came a neglect of the strict patriarchy you claim was there. It was more in philosophy and law then anything else.

They didn't work? How do you suppose that the city of Rome operated? You think its citizens did their shopping at the supermarket that just had fresh food and prefabricated clothes from abroad? The aristrocrats did not work much, but Rome did not entirely consist of aristocrats. The majority of people were workers.

The lower class worked, the middle class worked less, and the high class worked nil.
In other societies, regardless of class, one works.
Not Rome.

They had free running water and conquered lands to exploit.

You must have some serious deep-seated issues with women. There are few things that are more feeble than a man who places the blame for his own shortcomings and moral failures on women.

What's feeble is the pathetic obsession men have in leaving women blameless and untouched.

According to you, I suppose, real men didn't exist until Modern Liberalism™. Everyone before then thought as I thought.
That's ultimately the conclusion to your standing.
 

Buzzword

New member
"Snipers aren't deadly because they carry the biggest guns; they're deadly because they've learned how to weaponize math."
-Cracked.com

"Here is one of the fruits of unhappiness: that it forces us to think of life as something to go through. And out the other end. If only we could steadfastly do that while we are happy, I suppose we should need no misfortunes. It is hard on God really. To how few of us He dare send happiness because he knows we will forget him if he gave us any sort of nice things for the moment...."
—C. S. Lewis, "Yours, Jack"

"What we hear from the early centuries of the church is only from the church fathers, because the church mothers had to keep their mouths shut."
-Tony Campolo

"The question, O me! so sad, recurring—What good amid these, O me, O life?
Answer:
That you are here—that life exists and identity,
That the powerful play goes on, and you may contribute a verse."
-Walt Whitman

"I heard a joke once: Man goes to doctor. Says he's depressed. Says life is harsh and cruel. Says he feels all alone in a threatening world. Doctor says, 'Treatment is simple. The great clown Pagliacci is in town tonight. Go see him. That should pick you up.' Man bursts into tears. Says, 'But doctor... I am Pagliacci.' Good joke. Everybody laugh. Roll on snare drum. Curtains. "
-Alan Moore, Watchmen
 

Skybringr

BANNED
The grip of feminism:

It will make a Protestant Christian deny an Anti-Christ Papacy and hold to preterism.

They modify their standing to accommodate women.
Just like Adam. Is it really worth the fruit? :chuckle:
 
Top