# Christianity as sexist



## Minh (Oct 29, 2019)

I had a chat with my friend who is a "pragmatic Roman Catholic". By that, I mean he lives in conformity to this world while holding to RC beliefs outwardly. He asserted that Christianity as a whole is a sexist religion that exalts men and degrades women. His reasoning is: If the Christian faith respects women, then women should occupy the pulpit, should be at the same authority as men in the family, should have jobs and education that men have instead of being housewives as history have shown. I tried to retort him by argue that subordination does not necessary imply inferiority, but he wasn't convinced. I need convincing arguments to response to this charge.

Thought?


----------



## jw (Oct 29, 2019)

Have you tried the Bible, the only rule of faith and obedience? If he will not hear that, then he will not hear. He’s already biased with the word “sexist” anyway. Truth is, as a culture, we hate authority and structure, and prefer egalitarianism / anarchy. The Bible forbids women in the pulpit, as well as unqualified men. What more convincing can be made if one will not submit to that?

Reactions: Like 4 | Amen 2


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (Oct 29, 2019)

Christianity is opposed to gynocentrism. Women are not to rule in the church, nor (ordinarily) should they be rulers in the state. For the most part, scripture envisages women as wives, mothers, and homemakers. There are some exceptions of course, but exceptions do not prove a rule. And so the attempts of well-meaning but naive complementarians to argue that Jesus came to "empower wamen" are nonsense.

At this point, I would just plead guilty to the charge. The term "sexist" is a stick employed by Cultural Marxists to scare us from speaking the truth. My advice is to pick up the stick and beat them with it. Gynocentrism is killing us in the West and if I am going to be branded a "sexist" for opposing its evil then so be it.

Reactions: Like 1 | Amen 3


----------



## Minh (Oct 29, 2019)

Joshua said:


> Have you tried the Bible, the only rule of faith and obedience?


I did. "That's being narrow-minded" was his reply.


----------



## OPC'n (Oct 29, 2019)

Ask him if he grew up with parents, ever met a cop, ever heard of the government, ever had a job, etc. Many of their rules are useless and lead to no logical outcome. All of God's rules are fully useful and lead to a profitable life. Also, tell him that I said very nicely that we women don't need him to be our "champion" on the subject of sexism thank you very much.

Reactions: Like 1 | Funny 3


----------



## OPC'n (Oct 30, 2019)

And another thing, men didn’t come up with this rule the Godhead set this rule. Men have to abide by this rule just like women have to abide by this rule. So if men didn’t set this rule but instead the Godhead did who is neither male nor female, how can it be sexist? Also, ask him if he’s read the Bible. Being a man is harder than being a woman. The husband has to make the final decision in many things so if it goes wrong he feels the heavy weight of his decision. The pastor is the servant to the church (we should all be servants to each other), as Christ said the greatest one is the servant just as he was a servant. Also, even though I personally don’t like female bosses at my place of work, there’s nothing in the Bible that says they can’t be. Have him read the Psalms about the virtuous wife. That’s proof that the Bible allows women to work outside the home too. I don’t think he understands the Biblical roles of men and women probably because he doesn’t read the Bible

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Taylor (Oct 30, 2019)

If not allowing women to take the pulpit is his definition of sexist, then so be it, Christianity is sexist. Who cares what this pagan thinks?

Frankly, if I were you, I would attempt two or maybe three times to explain clearly what Scripture teaches. After that, if all he can offer back are sentences that begin with "But," I would shake the dust off my feet and move on. If he persists in his unbelief long enough, he should rest assured and content knowing that he himself will soon be given the opportunity to spend eternity with a whole bunch of people who will finally agree with him. In other words, there comes a time when you need to stop trying to defend Scripture's plain words to an unbeliever and instead begin telling them to repent or perish.

I'm sorry if that sounds harsh. I am just simply tired of the wicked having the audacity to tell God what he ought to do, how he ought to govern, and judge him by wicked worldly standards in doing so. It's sickening, and may God protect us all from the same fate.

Reactions: Like 6 | Amen 1


----------



## jwithnell (Oct 30, 2019)

Don't take the bait. Assert the authority of scripture in all areas of life and faith. Whether or not it appears sexist is immaterial.

Reactions: Like 3 | Amen 1 | Funny 1


----------



## ZackF (Oct 30, 2019)

Minh said:


> I had a chat with my friend who is a "pragmatic Roman Catholic". By that, I mean he lives in conformity to this world while holding to RC beliefs outwardly. He asserted that Christianity as a whole is a sexist religion that exalts men and degrades women. His reasoning is: If the Christian faith respects women, then women should occupy the pulpit, should be at the same authority as men in the family, should have jobs and education that men have instead of being housewives as history have shown. I tried to retort him by argue that subordination does not necessary imply inferiority, but he wasn't convinced. I need convincing arguments to response to this charge.
> 
> Thought?



I agree with Jean. I'd simply say, "if you'd like to have a conversation about the subject sometime I'd be glad to including what a pulpit is actually for let alone who should occupy one and by what authority." 

If someone's critique of Christianity is merely an anaerobic spouting of adjectives; sexist, racist, Islamophobic, capitalistic, transphobic, homophobic and so on then a polite exit is in order unless the person is interested in a serious private conversation.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## Elizabeth (Oct 31, 2019)

It's only _sexist_ if you measure the matter by worldly standards. Which we are not to do. Reject the definition. There is no 'sexism' in God's economy.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## chuckd (Oct 31, 2019)

Minh said:


> I tried to retort him by argue that subordination does not necessary imply inferiority, but he wasn't convinced.


Does he have a job with a supervisor? Or children?


----------



## moral necessity (Oct 31, 2019)

Minh said:


> I had a chat with my friend who is a "pragmatic Roman Catholic". By that, I mean he lives in conformity to this world while holding to RC beliefs outwardly. He asserted that Christianity as a whole is a sexist religion that exalts men and degrades women. His reasoning is: If the Christian faith respects women, then women should occupy the pulpit, should be at the same authority as men in the family, should have jobs and education that men have instead of being housewives as history have shown. I tried to retort him by argue that subordination does not necessary imply inferiority, but he wasn't convinced. I need convincing arguments to response to this charge.
> 
> Thought?


His argument is with God. God is the one who said it is to be this way, and he does not like it, or see the benefit of it. God is "narrow-minded" to him.

God made man and woman for their particular areas and roles. There is beauty and value in this. It is the lie of Satan to think it better some other way. It reveals our depravity to want to cast aside what God made us for, and desire what another creature has. And, it is short-sighted to not see the glory of God that only a woman can reflect here on earth through her particular role.

"But we were gentle among you, like a nursing mother taking care of her own children. So, being affectionally desirous of you, we were ready to share with you not only the gospel of God, but also our own selves, because you had become very dear to us..." The best example Paul could use for gospel affection was a woman. Even the heathen and non-religious women display these remainders of the image of God in them very well. And, there are many other qualities of God that women represent better. They are relational, emotional, nurturing, etc...Women are a unique creation of God with a unique purpose. Men would do well to honor it better, and women would do well to not cast it aside.

Blessings!

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Minh (Oct 31, 2019)

moral necessity said:


> His argument is with God. God is the one who said it is to be this way, and he does not like it, or see the benefit of it. God is "narrow-minded" to him.
> 
> God made man and woman for their particular areas and roles. There is beauty and value in this. It is the lie of Satan to think it better some other way. It reveals our depravity to want to cast aside what God made us for, and desire what another creature has. And, it is short-sighted to not see the glory of God that only a woman can reflect here on earth through her particular role.
> 
> ...



I agree! I wouldn’t minimize the role of women. After all, Mary was chosen by God to bear Christ. Monica was credited by God for her persistence in praying for her son Augustine who continually live in immorality and lewdness. While men are busy working on the pulpits, factory or on the frontlines, there were women who nurture their children well and pray for their husbands. Let us remember that God offer the authority over this Earth to both Adam and Eve (alas, they rejected it). I also think we should be sympathetic sometimes with women who are outraged by the abuses of them by men in history. Such practices, while are not biblical, can be misrepresented as Christian. We do our best to clarify the appropriateness of being a woman in the Christian life according to God while preaching the Gospel of Christ. It was a liberation for women to see the advent of Christianity in the Roman culture that regard women as subhumans. Blessing!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## De Jager (Oct 31, 2019)

The key to convincing him of his error is regeneration by the Holy Spirit. I would say this: I understand this is what you think...but please come to church with me anyways.

Bring him to the place where the word is preached.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (Oct 31, 2019)

Ask your friend what he thinks of the "sexism" of Islam?


----------



## nickipicki123 (Oct 31, 2019)

Reformed Covenanter said:


> Christianity is opposed to gynocentrism. Women are not to rule in the church, nor (ordinarily) should they be rulers in the state. For the most part, scripture envisages women as wives, mothers, and homemakers. There are some exceptions of course, but exceptions do not prove a rule. And so the attempts of well-meaning but naive complementarians to argue that Jesus came to "empower wamen" are nonsense.
> 
> At this point, I would just plead guilty to the charge. The term "sexist" is a stick employed by Cultural Marxists to scare us from speaking the truth. My advice is to pick up the stick and beat them with it. Gynocentrism is killing us in the West and if I am going to be branded a "sexist" for opposing its evil then so be it.


Do you think that the culture now is really gynocentric, or that women have just now been elevated to the same position as men? 

The Scripture also envisages men as husbands and fathers.... #justsayin'

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (Oct 31, 2019)

nickipicki123 said:


> Do you think that the culture now is really gynocentric, or that women have just now been elevated to the same position as men?



Yes, I do. Women are oppressing men in modern society. This point is not discussed very much, as the government would not want the tax livestock (men) to start testing the fence. 



nickipicki123 said:


> The Scripture also envisages men as husbands and fathers.... #justsayin'



Yes, but that also requires women to be wives and mothers - something that modern society discourages.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## nickipicki123 (Oct 31, 2019)

Reformed Covenanter said:


> Yes, I do. Women are oppressing men in modern society. This point is not discussed very much, as the government would not want the tax livestock (men) to start testing the fence.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, but that also requires women to be wives and mothers - something that modern society discourages.


In what ways do you think that women are oppressing men in modern society?

If a woman is ruling in government, is that an example of her oppressing a man? I'm just not sure what you mean.


----------



## Minh (Oct 31, 2019)

Reformed Covenanter said:


> Ask your friend what he thinks of the "sexism" of Islam?


You seem to get I discover here. I don't find much people publicly make a mockery of Islam or Buddhism or Communism or Atheism, but the Christian faith is, in most case, the target of derision. If any Evangelical want to be a part of this "diversity" scheme, then he can only do so at the expense of his loyalty to Christ.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (Oct 31, 2019)

nickipicki123 said:


> In what ways do you think that women are oppressing men in modern society?



Where does one start? If you listen to feminists such as Stella Creasy, they admit that their goal is not one of equality but of power. And what they want is to dominate and oppress men. If they were really in favour of equality, they would call for equal representation of men and women in something like the building trade but they do not. Why not? I thought that feminism was all about equality. No, what the so-called equality agenda is all about is giving women preferential treatment when it comes to certain high-paid and powerful jobs. I have repeatedly seen this in academia where there are numerous cases of women getting jobs/promotions instead of men who are better qualified. This trend is particularly damaging to certain types of men who have their careers ruined as a result. Their inability to get work also has a serious negative impact on their ability to marry and have children.

Let us take the issue of abortion as a particularly gross example of gynocentrism. The feminists endlessly harp on about how it is all about "my body, my choice." But hold on a minute, a man has put the baby inside the woman. It is his child as well, so, if we accept the rhetoric of choice, why does he not get a choice in the decision? In effect, the "my body, my choice" argument means that a woman has the power to choose whether or not to kill a man's child against his express wishes.



nickipicki123 said:


> If a woman is ruling in government, is that an example of her oppressing a man?



Perhaps not, but that still does not make it a good thing.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## nickipicki123 (Oct 31, 2019)

Reformed Covenanter said:


> Where does one start? If you listen to feminists such as Stella Creasy, they admit that their goal is not one of equality but of power. And what they wish to dominate and oppress men. If they were really in favour of equality, they would call for equal representation of men and women in something like the building trade but they do not. Why not? I thought that feminism was all about equality. No, what the so-called equality agenda is all about is giving women preferential treatment when it comes to certain high-paid and powerful jobs. I have repeatedly seen this in academia where there are numerous cases of women getting jobs/promotions instead of men who are better qualified. This trend is particularly damaging to certain types of men who have their careers ruined as a result. Their inability to get work also has a serious negative impact on their ability to marry and have children.
> 
> Let us take the issue of abortion as a particularly gross example of gynocentrism. The feminists endlessly harp on about how it is all about "my body, my choice." But hold on a minute, a man has put the baby inside the woman. It is his child as well, so, if we accept the rhetoric of choice, why does he not get a choice in the decision? In effect, the "my body, my choice" argument means that a woman has the power to choose whether or not to kill a man's child against his express wishes.
> 
> ...


ok thank you for your response. I see what you're saying.

Reactions: Like 1


----------

