Dang, I’ve been deconstructing for a while now, but geez that adultery being a crime against property, hit me hard between the eyes! I forget how many theological imprints are still in my head as default ideas!
I don’t think our modern understanding is the same as the ancient understanding of adultery. As a Christian, I never understood it in this way and I don’t think many people do.
@@AaronGeller Agreed! However, many Christians are practicing adultery regardless of how it is defined and many men (esp leaders in the church) are doing so without accountability blaming the wife for HIS activity, HIS choice.
@@anita10674 also makes sense when you consider that he (david) was never rebuked by God for having many wives and ONLY when he had sex with Bathsheba!
Helpful, thanks, Dan. Non-religious households talk it out, so there are clear roles. That works much better than shoehorning roles parading as "God's will."
I'm reminded of that meme where the Grecian Urn with two men on it is looking at a Egyptian Urn with two men on it and going "You're gay because you love men; I'm gay because I hate women. We're not the same."
What a refreshing, thoughtful mode of deconstructing the right wing, christofascist insidious messaging. I appreciate your taking on this much needed role. Best wishes.
I'm afraid we might be nearing a point where much of the Right is going to revisit that "obey your masters" verse and argue that it's not merely vestigial
That day is here and has been for a while. Look up "theologian" Rousas John Rushdooney. His position is that the Bible supports slavery, some people are born natural slaves, and that we should still be practicing slavery today in accordance with biblical principles. He is the most influential Christian teacher that no one ever heard of, and is pretty much the founder of today's Christian fundamentalism. If you have the interest, there is a youtube video of an interview that Bill Moyers did with Rushdooney and it's absolutely chilling.
@InescapableRealityOfficial The ancient way was a subjugation and dehumanization of women into nothing more than baby makers who were property. Women are their own people and can do whatever they want because they are people. Saying that we need certain gender roles because of some impending societal collapse is stupid and fallacious logic.
@@InescapableRealityOfficialThe ancient way was a subjugation and dehumanization of women into nothing more than baby makers who were property. Women are their own people and can do whatever they want because they are people. Saying that we need certain gender roles because of some impending societal collapse is stupid and fallacious logic
My wife almost broke my habd at a wedding when the minister got to the 'honor and obey' bit. Our minister also refused to have brides given away as they are not property.
I've only been to one wedding where the minister didn't say that to BOTH parties, and that was a (very scary to my eyes) traditional Catholic wedding. 99% of the time, BOTH people are asked to "honor and obey" as has been traditional for decades and decades. I'm not saying that isn't gross, too. I'm just saying that particular double-standard is a bad example to bring up, since it really isn't one anymore. I was definitely told to do so. My wife and I had identical vows, at least when it got to that part.
Who wants to bet that this content creator isn't married? 🤣 Btw, can you imagine the contemporary followers of Paul abstaining from sex because they thought that Jesus would return soon? I can imagine that, on their deathbed, they were pretty pissed with him, lol Also BTW, Dan's videos should be required watching for all Christians, especially those who consider themselves knowledgeable on the Bible. 😁
@@David-ld3ts Wow, that's...interesting. If she's happy to accept a subordinate role to her husband in the 21st century, then whatever works for them, as well as any other contemporary women living in a free democracy that thrives for equality for all. .
Out of respect for Dan and his request not to comment on the appearance of the creator featured I will refrain from describing the kind of vibes I'm getting off this dude. But on a completely unrelated subject: it's good to keep an eye on your friends' drinks when you're out.
Dan, don't know how you treat this so calmly, I find it aggravating to no end. Nothing like a sneering, cocky child cherry picking +1000 year old texts to show others how an ideal marriage should be. One needs the self-created assurance that they know the absolute truth of everything to incite the attitude to pull this off - one thing that religion seems to create in spades. Thanks for the video.
Something that escapes all counter-apologists is, why should anyone give a sh*t what Paul wrote? Was he god? Was he a disciple? Did he even meet Cheesus other than in that brief vision that only he saw? How is a former persecutor of christians considered an authority in christian dogma?
Paul was a believer, and a missionary with some level of institutional authority. His point of view about gentile converts carried the day even though Peter was initially reluctant. But it is not clear he was ever among the "Twelve Apostles," nor is it clear how much of what he wrote (or was later credited to him) reflects his personal opinions or was generally that of the church leadership. One can imagine the myopic view we would have if our understanding of 20th century Catholicism rested heavily on about a hundred pages of mixed public and private correspondence from a single Cardinal who attended Vatican II.
@@pythondrink You are wrong, it's not an ad hominem. Religions are not built by plain humans, but by self-proclaimed gods and perhaps their closest followers. Paul was neither.
@@gdevelek Paul was neither? The Christian faith is literally based almost entirely on Paul's letters. Wtf are you talking about? Also, my point stands. Ad hominem is an informal fallacy in which you try to undermine someone's credibility by attacking them personally rather than their claim or argument. That's literally what you did.
@@pythondrink (1) yes Paul basically founded christianity, what I'm saying since you still don't get it is that he had no authority to express christian dogma since he was neither a god figure nor a disciple, therefore christians had no reason to listen to him. (2) You are wrong, I did NOT "attack" Paul, I stated what he himself says in the bible, that he was a former persecutor of christians and that in his vision all Cheesus did was rebuke him for that. So he confirms that I wrote above, that he had NO AUTHORITY to formulate christian dogma. What he wrote in the bible is just his personal opinion, as valuable as any other christian's. Or as any other christian who has claimed visitation by Cheesus in the last 2000 years, I bet there are myriads of those. Got it????
I think it begs the question, what type of man is using the bible as a weapon to subjugate his wife and family? I find it hard to accept that a man who is doing well and right by his family, needs to abuse his family. I think its the man who lacks the skills (and refuses to acquire them) who demands that his family prop up false narratives so that he doesn't have to deal with the reality of his failures
I have heard men use Bible use Bible verses to show their wife they have to submit to the husband. But what if the husband is someone who makes bad decisions for his family?
Women need to mention that their husbands have to love them and die for them like Christ died for the church. Now, we don't want the little men to die but a little light torture might be necessary to prove their interest in this biblical marriage. Some whipping and beatings? Maybe a nail or two? Maybe a bit of waterboarding to simulate the feeling of dying? And naturally, I'd want this to happen at a proportional rate. Say every time, the guy invokes biblical marriage, he gets to enjoy his biblical marriage and then, the wife will "obey" and get him his sandwich. I would love to hear more women start demanding a biblical marriage and claiming their husbands aren't sacrificing themselves like Christ sacrificed for the Church. And no.. the job excuse isn't going to be an effective substitute. Jesus didn't do a 9 to 5 and make wooden tables. He died. It's called the Passion of the Christ. I'm not requesting that the husband have the full experience. I think a traditional wife who believes in a biblical marriage doesn't have a real biblical marriage until we see that husband suffering some pain.. okay.. a lot of pain. I want it to be so much pain that this guy will magically forget all those verses about women obeying husbands.
The solution for women is Don’t MARRY THESE KIND OF GUYS. I use Guys because IMO real men aren’t going to have those idiot misogynistic ideas. Stop having relations with these guys. If a woman wants that kind of a relationship…that is her choice but the rest of us need to stop walking into a lion den wearing a meat suit.
What biblical examples does a man has that he is making "bad decisions" If god can command genocide and rape and slavery, what framework leads a man to believe he is even making bad decisions I've never heard of an exception to "obey". I've only heard "obey him in ALL things"
@@anita10674 There isn't much of a biblical exception. The larger problem is the overemphasis on the wife's submission and not enough emphasis on what the husband must do. I was a Christian and I can't remember a single time that the pastor really emphasized the obligation of a husband to his wife. It was very much a WIVES OBEY YOUR HUSBANDS Guys.. you got to be nice to your wives TWO BECOME FLESH AND HUSBAND IS HEAD OF HOUSEHOLD This religion was weaponized against women and we women were dehumanized from day 1. That's why these verses still mean something while verses about slavery have become.. "that was the past" but look at this verse about brotherhood of believers and that's what god originally intended.. I just wish women would leave these abusive structures. It may give us some power but overall, that power is at the expense of the safety of all women.
Confident men can recognize the value of a partnership. If you're afraid you can't handle compromise in your relationship, grow up before you enter into one.
One of the biggest things you get from reading the Bible in the original languages is how *badly* humanity...from Moses to David to all the writers of the NT, blow God's intentions out of the water with their own crazy text stitches.
So normally I would go into more depth than Dan does on a topic than Dan does, but this particular individual warrants an "honorable" mention. Now the particular question christians are asking now-a-days is why people are leaving christianity. And for a while every faith was losing members except the evangelical faiths and now it appears that they are losing members also. And when we look at where evangelicals are going when they leave, we see a high representation among atheist and anti-religious activism, for which the speechless content provider should wonder why. Lets examine the why. There are text in the bible that are curated text, like the torah is a curation of its various sources, the deuteronomistic text is kind of a curation of material. There are the books of the prophets most of which we think were by a single sources. And there is wisdom literature, material that is more of a fable than expected historical understanding. In the NT there are epistles by authors, anonymous gospels that someone later named, and apocalyptic literature. And so when one is quoting from these text, as Dan pointed out there is no intrinsic authority, but there is authenticity. Within the Bible certain texts stand out as inauthentic. These are second Isaiah, Isaiah 40-66 Daniel (while certain stories in Daniel might qualify as wisdom literature they are cherry picked from the dan'el/dani'el genre). The pauline epistles. 2 Thesselonians, 1 and 2 Timothy, Colossians, Ephesians, and Titus The petrine epistles. All. So this author in singling out these text gravitated in his selection to the least authentic text over actual text that Paul wrote. So lets look at this statistically regarding the new testament. 8 unauthentic 19 authentic the author however chose: 4 unauthentic and 1 authentic. Significance is 0.053, So this is a pattern of many fundementalist in which they are borrowing from text that just the very nature they are written have dubious qualities, validated by scholarly analysis of those texts. Their sampling of these texts to support their points of view reeks of dishonesty which is why when so many evangelicals leaving the faith they see the religion as dishonest and those proselytizing the faith as dishonest, as this particular content provider is doing. So to this content provider I woukd say, if you want to know why so many evangelicals become athiestic look in the mirror.
Thats not even an ad hominem... and they aren't "wrong" they just don't prove a point. Like you can't win an argument by insulting your opponent, you have to actually make a case for why you're right.
@@drhexagonapus Thank you but I am aware. It was supposed to be a vaguely humorous comment about the young guy in the video, not about ad hominem comments.
Imagine being so massively entitled you end up like this christian male who thinks women must obey him and that he is entitled to leadership based on his genitals rather than on merit. Biblical Christian male leadership is 100% male quotas based. No skill, qualifications, experience, wisdom etc. A dude can be evil and/or terminally incompetent and still gets to be a leader and demand women obey him in their own homes.
I don't know what this guy is thinking, and I pity the woman he gets involved with. I have a few Bibles and if thrown at a person it could do some damage, I'm not advocating violence but if a person actually read what is in the book many Revere as holy and from God! Danke Dan, spot on too.
I watch this the second time - now not while I am doing the dishes. So I came across the first notion. Why should I comment on the appearance of the content creator when there is so much to comment about? Or not - after binge watching talk heathen, the atheist experience, gutsick Gibbon, Forrest Valkay... There really is not much to add after watching this thoroughly crafted video. Well done 🙂👍. Good video. Comment for the algorithm and also some emojis - they seem support the algorithm even further 😃🌍🌎🌏🌐🗺️
The video that Dan is responding to makes no sense to me. Why is this kid so happy telling women what to do? I am sure he is a nice kid but this is a really bizarre video.
Brainwashing. Either that, or he's excited to be part of the patriarchy. He will be incapable of having a healthy relationship with a woman who has any sort of independence or sense of self.
Brb gonna start saying that Paul says that you shouldn’t have kids because the end is soon whenever someone starts harassing me about having children. If they can cherry pick in their favor so can I lmaoo 😂😂😂
The notion of sub-ordination of women occurs many cultures --Roman, Islam, European legal codes pre-19th C. Why this repeated criticism of conservative christian, right-wing authoritarian identity politics for something that was and still is in some places widely believed. Dan seems to have lost his balance here. Disappointed at the introduction of contemporary divisive politics to the discussion of an ancient text.
*Biblical and Surrounding Culture* Isn’t “biblical” _always_ a subset of the contemporary culture at the time the verse was written? Thanks for another fine video like, though 👍
@maklelan I understand what you're saying about selectively assembling verses to support a misogynistic view, but I struggle with the notion that these are entirely imposed upon the bible from without. It would be really powerful if you put together a counterpoint video selecting other verses equally selectively to support an egalitarian or even a matriarchal position.
these conservatives men are so annoying. the bible also says " There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus" which can imply that we should all be treated equally. see. how easy it is to find stuff in the bible to justify political beliefs? though i admit i find my interpretation superior since it causes much less harm.
One would think so, but the line I hear from conservatives all the time is: "That's in regards to being saved and when we get to heaven. While on earth, God gave us rules an those rules says men are in charge." They don't care what happens to this earth, cause it's not "their earth".
the way i see it the bible is up for interpretation. so 🤷🏽♀ they somehow extrapolate the bible verse saying "god knew you before you were born" to be anti choice, so i can manipulate scripture for my agenda too. and again, it causes much less harm so it's better. they can't pick and choose if others can't pick and choose@@Mistikii
I know we're not supposed to get personal about the content creators, but this joyous grin with which this young man presents those passages in a kind of "Gotcha!"-way is really off-putting.
Paul: I know some of you can't hack the celibate life. So maybe some of you should get married. BUT.. no kids. God doesn't want a bunch of kids running around the gift shop.
One might also note in the Ephesians 5 passage how the subject title “Wives and Husbands” puts a break between verses 21 and 22. That is not original to the text and what it does is disrupt the flow of the passage. In verse 21, Paul calls for mutual submission: … submitting to _one another_ out of reverence for Christ. He’s talking to everybody about how to walk, how to love sacrificially as Christ loved (vs. 2), ending this portion to everyone with mutual submission (vs. 21). It’s in that context he turns to wives and says “submit to your husbands.” But then he tells husbands to “love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her … husbands should love their wives as their own bodies … as himself.” Though the same word “submission” is not used “loving someone as yourself” sounds an awful lot like egalitarianism. I realize they heard these words with a certain cultural view so it wouldn’t be the same understanding in 21st century Western culture and I don’t love the word “revere,” but this passage is often taught _WIVES SUBMIT_ and husbands love (but it’s optional & only based on how much your wife submits and reveres you) and that’s not right.
It’s a bummer too because Titus 2 is a DOUBLE chiasm that has way more to do with “right teaching” and “right living” and appealing to one bit without acknowledging the rest misses the point (notably, the “slaves, obey” portion mirrors Christ “taking a people of his own possession;” how that influences our interpretation of the acceptability of slavery I leave up to y’all)
Was the Apostle Paul really against divorce? Because in 1 Corinthian 7:10-11, it says, “And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband: 【But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried】, or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife.” So does that mean Apostle Paul thought that a woman could still be divorced from her husband but had to remain unmarried ever since?
I honestly don’t even think it’s his appearance that makes his face so punchable, more like his demeanor and smugness so it’s not technically commenting on his appearance 🤷🏻♀️
I love your videos and I have learned a lot from watching you. I see you talk about cherry picking and the immorality in the Bible and yet you’re still a Christian? Or Mormon? I’d like to see you do a video on how you can know all these things about the Bible and still remain a believer.
“Conservative Christian right wing authoritarian identity politics”- this should be on a tshirt but with some sort of context around it. Maybe something sarcastic so right wing people think it’s in their favor but all others clearly realize it isn’t 😂
There's a passage in the Bible that says a wife's body belongs to her husband. (1 Corinthians 7:4). A lot of men jump on that and a lot of women concur. Problem? The verse also says the husband's body belongs to the wife. Which would imply if a man was unfaithful the wife should have recourse to imposing some kind of consequence, yes? After all, men got a LOT of latitude on imposing consequences on an unfaithful wife. I'm guessing that verse never gets recited. At all. Also.... In Biblical times the term "virgin" simply referred to a woman's marital status - specifically a virgin was an unmarried woman. So when the New Testament says Mary, mother of Jesus, was a virgin, it was a simple reference to the fact she was not married. Period. The Catholic Church decided to change the definition of the word. And here we are.
So a man could take on any woman he wants If he's married, [citation, please,] can he give me an example of a Patriarch who took on a wife without the consent of his wife or a concubine without the consent of his wife?
Jacob takes both Leah and Rachel with neither woman having any agency in the transaction whatsoever. (Gen 29:15-30). That transaction was negotiated entirely between Jacob and Laban. Oh but he does get consent from those wives to marry some of their slave girls to make more kiddos. So that's nice.
Got it backwards. Only women could commit adultery and be punished for it, not men. They were allowed multiple wives, so any single woman they had sex with was considered a wife.
Dan, Obviously you are very intelligent and educated. That being said, you are a wolf in sheep’s clothing. The first time I listened to your channel I thought what a bright guy, who happens to have the best books. At same time I thought something seems off with this guy. The more you can twist scripture around to match your narrative the better you like it. That being said, I feel sorry for you. You need Jesus Christ in your heart, not just tid bits of information that you assemble to make Christianity into a bunch of spoiled brats. Of course there are some who use Christianity to make money. Shame on them. We will all stand alone before Jesus and answer for our life. Many will say I preached in your name, I did good deeds in your name for all these years. Jesus will answer, I do not know you. Your just reward awaits you. I’m no judge of others but I certainly wouldn’t want to stand in your spot on that day. To you Dan I say, it’s not too late to turn around.
Sounds like you are looking in a mirror and loading the faults you see on Dan. You're guilt of what you accuse others of, like this young man, you are twisting scripture to suit your agenda.
Lol he just explained it. You can have as many women as you want as long as there aren't married. Does why back in those biblical days you can marry so many women and sleep with them even though you have a wife.
Can you think of an instance where a guy got punished for it? Or it even being mentioned as wrong? Also, I'm pretty sure the text around the verse cited says it
Because men having concubines is normal in the Hebrew Bible, starting from Abraham down to Solomon there’s plenty of examples. No law against it nor any divine command against it. Concubines are not legal wives therefore sex with them is sex outside of marriage. Furthermore there’s stories like “Judah and Tamar” in genesis 38 where paying a prostitute for sex is a matter of course, nobody bats an eye, while a widow found to be pregnant (long after her husband died) is considered deserving of death. Also, I think that projecting the modern concept of marriage back onto the Hebrew Bible is anachronistic. Clearly the society depicted in those stories was rigidly patriarchal and deeply misogynistic. Women were just a step higher than slaves and cattle in the list of assets men owned. Marriage was a contract between two men: the father who gave his daughter away in exchange for money (or cattle) and a man who wanted a woman. The obligation the husband assumed was to house, feed and clothe his wife(wives): no obligation to fidelity.
I don't believe that Jesus is God, I believe he is the son of God as the bible says. But people keep on bringing up Hebrews 1 and I don't know a reliable explanation I could give them
You speak a lot about conservative Christian right wing authoritarian identity politics... I am curious if you see a repeat of the Deutsche Christen movement in Weimar Germany, and the way that the Cross was used to support the rise of the NAZI party.
Genesis 3:16 KJV - Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.
1. the verse you're bringing in is not relevant. I mean, this is for Christian's idea of a biblical marriage so let's stay in the NT. 2. it's apparently based on a mistranslation. her desire is not going to be the same as her husband. I mean, can I blame her when the husband is that dumb? Who wants to follow a moron's commands? (And notice that in the Garden of Eden, Eve was reasoned with like an intelligent being. Eve was the smart one in that story. She wanted knowledge. I applaud that character for desiring knowledge. It's much better to have knowledge and desire knowledge than being a dumb animal like Adam who can be so easily persuaded with "it tastes good". what a moron. that story does not make men look smart. I would describe Adam as obedient... like a well-trained dog but not a human being who is capable of reason.) 3. Let's focus on the following verses that have commands to the husband. I want this husband to sacrifice himself like christ did for the church. I will not accept the excuse of a 9/5 job or bringing home the bacon or mowing the lawn. Jesus suffered the Passion of the Christ and I demand that these silly male children suffer something similar. I mean, not a crucifixion though if he wants to, I have a nail gun and a compressor. It's relatively easy to use. I was thinking more on the line of tying him up and horsewhipping him till his back was bloody and raw. (It's not as bad as it seems. I just need to ensure that the injuries are sufficiently hard enough that it takes him 3 days to "rise" from the bed.)
Thank you for pointing out the bible is pure evil and misoginistic from the start and was written by men who were nothing more than useless sluts who had to forced women to do what they want by violence. The very verse you quoted is demonstrable evidence that the christian gods are man made as an all knowing god wouldn't allow men to rule over women or demand women obey men as an all knowing god would know men are inherently fickle, irrational, illogical and ruled by their emotions and hormones. History has demonstrated this beyond a shadow of a doubt.
@jenniferhunter4074 in the Philippines Christian men actually do that. Whips and barbed wire and nail guns and all. I don't agree with any of it, just a fun fact for you. Not so fun for the men who participate, but that's their own stupid fault.
Another thing, you blame the kid for espousing patriarchy and misogyny, but the kids enjoys that very thing. The kid is not lying, the bible IS misogynistic. So I don't get your objections to his content.
Youre being very generous to call this punk kid a "creator" when all he's doing is grinning smugly and pointing where he's going to add in random short verses that mean nothing.
If it’s in the Bible it’s in the Bible. It may be problematic (I hate that word), immoral, and incompatible with modern thinking (it is), but it’s still biblical.
I beg to differ, anyone that posts things like that deserve to be publicly ridiculed, embarrassed, and heckled. Sitting back and allowing these beliefs to spread freely by not confronting these people will only allow it to spread.
So, engage in a discussion about the beliefs and the abuse those beliefs have caused. Don't bully someone on their appearance simply because what they say is fucked up.
That smile becomes menacing when paired with directions for women on how to act.
It’s also obnoxious as hell just by itself
Especially when those directions are not in the best interest of women, and are there to just direct them to act as obedient little toys for men.
Dang, I’ve been deconstructing for a while now, but geez that adultery being a crime against property, hit me hard between the eyes! I forget how many theological imprints are still in my head as default ideas!
My god this is some Handmaids Tale crap. Dan you are amazing at calling this out.thank you
I quite frankly didn't know that adultery was defined this way...this definition most certainly explains all the wives that David and Solomon had.
I don’t think our modern understanding is the same as the ancient understanding of adultery. As a Christian, I never understood it in this way and I don’t think many people do.
@@AaronGeller Agreed! However, many Christians are practicing adultery regardless of how it is defined and many men (esp leaders in the church) are doing so without accountability blaming the wife for HIS activity, HIS choice.
@@anita10674 also makes sense when you consider that he (david) was never rebuked by God for having many wives and ONLY when he had sex with Bathsheba!
So... smug face plus pointy finger plus context free mini quote equals truth?
Wow, the things I learn on the internets.
Appreciate all you do, Dan.
Helpful, thanks, Dan. Non-religious households talk it out, so there are clear roles. That works much better than shoehorning roles parading as "God's will."
I am so grateful for your channel. Your way of calling out misogyny is impressive, concise, and often times amusing. Thank God for Dan McClellan.
I've never seen someone so afraid of fuller context that he quotes two words at a time instead of at least whole sentences
"I'll tell you what I am - I'm the damn paterfamilias!" ~ "O Brother, Where Art Thou?"
I'm reminded of that meme where the Grecian Urn with two men on it is looking at a Egyptian Urn with two men on it and going "You're gay because you love men; I'm gay because I hate women. We're not the same."
What a refreshing, thoughtful mode of deconstructing the right wing, christofascist insidious messaging. I appreciate your taking on this much needed role. Best wishes.
That guy seems kinda young to be giving marital advice of any sort.
Or biblical interpretation/theology about marriage.
Probably likes to pontificate on how to raise children as well haha
He just wants a submissive/non challenging/"in her place" sex partner for a wife.
I'm afraid we might be nearing a point where much of the Right is going to revisit that "obey your masters" verse and argue that it's not merely vestigial
I think we're already here, I think its hiding in plain sight.
That day is here and has been for a while. Look up "theologian" Rousas John Rushdooney. His position is that the Bible supports slavery, some people are born natural slaves, and that we should still be practicing slavery today in accordance with biblical principles. He is the most influential Christian teacher that no one ever heard of, and is pretty much the founder of today's Christian fundamentalism. If you have the interest, there is a youtube video of an interview that Bill Moyers did with Rushdooney and it's absolutely chilling.
They already are.
The patriarchal system the original trickle down👀
Dear women, run away from all that tripe that creator was peddling. Run. Away.
Why?
@@InescapableRealityOfficial Why wouldn't you?
@@lde-m8688 Because I think going away from these ancient ways has completely messed up male and female dynamics today.
@InescapableRealityOfficial The ancient way was a subjugation and dehumanization of women into nothing more than baby makers who were property. Women are their own people and can do whatever they want because they are people. Saying that we need certain gender roles because of some impending societal collapse is stupid and fallacious logic.
@@InescapableRealityOfficialThe ancient way was a subjugation and dehumanization of women into nothing more than baby makers who were property. Women are their own people and can do whatever they want because they are people. Saying that we need certain gender roles because of some impending societal collapse is stupid and fallacious logic
My wife almost broke my habd at a wedding when the minister got to the 'honor and obey' bit.
Our minister also refused to have brides given away as they are not property.
Not exactly consistent?
@@KaiHenningsen He said "a" wedding, not "our" wedding. So I assume it's not the same minister.
I've only been to one wedding where the minister didn't say that to BOTH parties, and that was a (very scary to my eyes) traditional Catholic wedding. 99% of the time, BOTH people are asked to "honor and obey" as has been traditional for decades and decades. I'm not saying that isn't gross, too. I'm just saying that particular double-standard is a bad example to bring up, since it really isn't one anymore. I was definitely told to do so. My wife and I had identical vows, at least when it got to that part.
Who wants to bet that this content creator isn't married? 🤣
Btw, can you imagine the contemporary followers of Paul abstaining from sex because they thought that Jesus would return soon? I can imagine that, on their deathbed, they were pretty pissed with him, lol
Also BTW, Dan's videos should be required watching for all Christians, especially those who consider themselves knowledgeable on the Bible. 😁
Married?! How much do you want to bet he has never been in a relationship with a woman?!
@@nates9029 🤣🤣🤣
@@nates9029he has a wife my guy
He has a wife, actually. And children as well.
@@David-ld3ts Wow, that's...interesting. If she's happy to accept a subordinate role to her husband in the 21st century, then whatever works for them, as well as any other contemporary women living in a free democracy that thrives for equality for all. .
Out of respect for Dan and his request not to comment on the appearance of the creator featured I will refrain from describing the kind of vibes I'm getting off this dude. But on a completely unrelated subject: it's good to keep an eye on your friends' drinks when you're out.
lmao🤣🤣
Dude gives “Brock Allen Turner” vibes
I watch your videos and learn every day. Thank you.
As a dirty, dirty gentile, I love every time I hear Dan use the words!
I wish Eric Idle had that line in Life of Brian. "oooh, you're a dirty, dirty gentile, ain't ya?"
Dan, don't know how you treat this so calmly, I find it aggravating to no end. Nothing like a sneering, cocky child cherry picking +1000 year old texts to show others how an ideal marriage should be. One needs the self-created assurance that they know the absolute truth of everything to incite the attitude to pull this off - one thing that religion seems to create in spades. Thanks for the video.
Honestly u are awesome 🎉
Something that escapes all counter-apologists is, why should anyone give a sh*t what Paul wrote? Was he god? Was he a disciple? Did he even meet Cheesus other than in that brief vision that only he saw? How is a former persecutor of christians considered an authority in christian dogma?
Your last objection is am ad hominem. You shouldn't be using that.
Paul was a believer, and a missionary with some level of institutional authority. His point of view about gentile converts carried the day even though Peter was initially reluctant. But it is not clear he was ever among the "Twelve Apostles," nor is it clear how much of what he wrote (or was later credited to him) reflects his personal opinions or was generally that of the church leadership.
One can imagine the myopic view we would have if our understanding of 20th century Catholicism rested heavily on about a hundred pages of mixed public and private correspondence from a single Cardinal who attended Vatican II.
@@pythondrink You are wrong, it's not an ad hominem. Religions are not built by plain humans, but by self-proclaimed gods and perhaps their closest followers. Paul was neither.
@@gdevelek Paul was neither? The Christian faith is literally based almost entirely on Paul's letters. Wtf are you talking about? Also, my point stands. Ad hominem is an informal fallacy in which you try to undermine someone's credibility by attacking them personally rather than their claim or argument. That's literally what you did.
@@pythondrink (1) yes Paul basically founded christianity, what I'm saying since you still don't get it is that he had no authority to express christian dogma since he was neither a god figure nor a disciple, therefore christians had no reason to listen to him. (2) You are wrong, I did NOT "attack" Paul, I stated what he himself says in the bible, that he was a former persecutor of christians and that in his vision all Cheesus did was rebuke him for that. So he confirms that I wrote above, that he had NO AUTHORITY to formulate christian dogma. What he wrote in the bible is just his personal opinion, as valuable as any other christian's. Or as any other christian who has claimed visitation by Cheesus in the last 2000 years, I bet there are myriads of those. Got it????
I really enjoy Christian cringe, but this kid made me cringe so hard I almost pressed into a singularity.
Thanks for your videos
I think it begs the question, what type of man is using the bible as a weapon to subjugate his wife and family?
I find it hard to accept that a man who is doing well and right by his family, needs to abuse his family. I think its the man who lacks the skills (and refuses to acquire them) who demands that his family prop up false narratives so that he doesn't have to deal with the reality of his failures
I have heard men use Bible use Bible verses to show their wife they have to submit to the husband. But what if the husband is someone who makes bad decisions for his family?
Women need to mention that their husbands have to love them and die for them like Christ died for the church. Now, we don't want the little men to die but a little light torture might be necessary to prove their interest in this biblical marriage. Some whipping and beatings? Maybe a nail or two? Maybe a bit of waterboarding to simulate the feeling of dying? And naturally, I'd want this to happen at a proportional rate. Say every time, the guy invokes biblical marriage, he gets to enjoy his biblical marriage and then, the wife will "obey" and get him his sandwich.
I would love to hear more women start demanding a biblical marriage and claiming their husbands aren't sacrificing themselves like Christ sacrificed for the Church. And no.. the job excuse isn't going to be an effective substitute. Jesus didn't do a 9 to 5 and make wooden tables. He died. It's called the Passion of the Christ. I'm not requesting that the husband have the full experience. I think a traditional wife who believes in a biblical marriage doesn't have a real biblical marriage until we see that husband suffering some pain.. okay.. a lot of pain. I want it to be so much pain that this guy will magically forget all those verses about women obeying husbands.
The solution for women is Don’t MARRY THESE KIND OF GUYS. I use Guys because IMO real men aren’t going to have those idiot misogynistic ideas. Stop having relations with these guys. If a woman wants that kind of a relationship…that is her choice but the rest of us need to stop walking into a lion den wearing a meat suit.
Then the whole family is screwed
What biblical examples does a man has that he is making "bad decisions"
If god can command genocide and rape and slavery, what framework leads a man to believe he is even making bad decisions
I've never heard of an exception to "obey". I've only heard "obey him in ALL things"
@@anita10674 There isn't much of a biblical exception.
The larger problem is the overemphasis on the wife's submission and not enough emphasis on what the husband must do. I was a Christian and I can't remember a single time that the pastor really emphasized the obligation of a husband to his wife. It was very much a
WIVES OBEY YOUR HUSBANDS
Guys.. you got to be nice to your wives
TWO BECOME FLESH AND HUSBAND IS HEAD OF HOUSEHOLD
This religion was weaponized against women and we women were dehumanized from day 1. That's why these verses still mean something while verses about slavery have become.. "that was the past" but look at this verse about brotherhood of believers and that's what god originally intended..
I just wish women would leave these abusive structures. It may give us some power but overall, that power is at the expense of the safety of all women.
Speaking of Proverbs and child abuse, two words: Michael Pearl.
Confident men can recognize the value of a partnership. If you're afraid you can't handle compromise in your relationship, grow up before you enter into one.
Thank you! I think this video is brilliant!
This guy is very, very happy to be pointing out such misogynistic verses. Painful to watch.
I appreciate that Dan tells us not to harass these creators, because I really REALLY want to!
1:01 Sad that the "hopefully" is needed.
Another excellent deconstruction of right-wing authoritarian rhetoric! Thanks for keeping them honest!
One of the biggest things you get from reading the Bible in the original languages is how *badly* humanity...from Moses to David to all the writers of the NT, blow God's intentions out of the water with their own crazy text stitches.
So normally I would go into more depth than Dan does on a topic than Dan does, but this particular individual warrants an "honorable" mention.
Now the particular question christians are asking now-a-days is why people are leaving christianity. And for a while every faith was losing members except the evangelical faiths and now it appears that they are losing members also. And when we look at where evangelicals are going when they leave, we see a high representation among atheist and anti-religious activism, for which the speechless content provider should wonder why. Lets examine the why.
There are text in the bible that are curated text, like the torah is a curation of its various sources, the deuteronomistic text is kind of a curation of material. There are the books of the prophets most of which we think were by a single sources. And there is wisdom literature, material that is more of a fable than expected historical understanding.
In the NT there are epistles by authors, anonymous gospels that someone later named, and apocalyptic literature.
And so when one is quoting from these text, as Dan pointed out there is no intrinsic authority, but there is authenticity.
Within the Bible certain texts stand out as inauthentic. These are
second Isaiah, Isaiah 40-66
Daniel (while certain stories in Daniel might qualify as wisdom literature they are cherry picked from the dan'el/dani'el genre).
The pauline epistles. 2 Thesselonians, 1 and 2 Timothy, Colossians, Ephesians, and Titus
The petrine epistles. All.
So this author in singling out these text gravitated in his selection to the least authentic text over actual text that Paul wrote.
So lets look at this statistically regarding the new testament.
8 unauthentic 19 authentic
the author however chose:
4 unauthentic and 1 authentic.
Significance is 0.053,
So this is a pattern of many fundementalist in which they are borrowing from text that just the very nature they are written have dubious qualities, validated by scholarly analysis of those texts.
Their sampling of these texts to support their points of view reeks of dishonesty which is why when so many evangelicals leaving the faith they see the religion as dishonest and those proselytizing the faith as dishonest, as this particular content provider is doing.
So to this content provider I woukd say, if you want to know why so many evangelicals become athiestic look in the mirror.
OK, I know ad hominem comments are wrong but I see this child smiling and thinking he is being clever and I wonder if his mother knows where he is.
Thats not even an ad hominem... and they aren't "wrong" they just don't prove a point. Like you can't win an argument by insulting your opponent, you have to actually make a case for why you're right.
@@drhexagonapus Thank you but I am aware.
It was supposed to be a vaguely humorous comment about the young guy in the video, not about ad hominem comments.
Imagine being so massively entitled you end up like this christian male who thinks women must obey him and that he is entitled to leadership based on his genitals rather than on merit.
Biblical Christian male leadership is 100% male quotas based. No skill, qualifications, experience, wisdom etc. A dude can be evil and/or terminally incompetent and still gets to be a leader and demand women obey him in their own homes.
I don't know what this guy is thinking, and I pity the woman he gets involved with. I have a few Bibles and if thrown at a person it could do some damage, I'm not advocating violence but if a person actually read what is in the book many Revere as holy and from God! Danke Dan, spot on too.
I watch this the second time - now not while I am doing the dishes. So I came across the first notion. Why should I comment on the appearance of the content creator when there is so much to comment about? Or not - after binge watching talk heathen, the atheist experience, gutsick Gibbon, Forrest Valkay... There really is not much to add after watching this thoroughly crafted video.
Well done 🙂👍. Good video. Comment for the algorithm and also some emojis - they seem support the algorithm even further 😃🌍🌎🌏🌐🗺️
The video that Dan is responding to makes no sense to me. Why is this kid so happy telling women what to do? I am sure he is a nice kid but this is a really bizarre video.
Brainwashing.
Either that, or he's excited to be part of the patriarchy. He will be incapable of having a healthy relationship with a woman who has any sort of independence or sense of self.
Adults are rewarding him for this. They probably see him as an ambassador to the young. He's seeking adult approval in his community.
Brb gonna start saying that Paul says that you shouldn’t have kids because the end is soon whenever someone starts harassing me about having children. If they can cherry pick in their favor so can I lmaoo 😂😂😂
Conservative christian right-wing authoritarian identity politics 😇
The notion of sub-ordination of women occurs many cultures --Roman, Islam, European legal codes pre-19th C. Why this repeated criticism of conservative christian, right-wing authoritarian identity politics for something that was and still is in some places widely believed. Dan seems to have lost his balance here. Disappointed at the introduction of contemporary divisive politics to the discussion of an ancient text.
Theme of the video
The Dirty Dirty Gentiles. Is that a ska band?
It helps when the misogynists present their views in such an utterly cringe and unlikeable way
Muh soggy knee
…”hopefully”-lmao 😂
*Biblical and Surrounding Culture*
Isn’t “biblical” _always_ a subset of the contemporary culture at the time the verse was written?
Thanks for another fine video like, though 👍
Shame. Good looking young man , but who would want him?
@maklelan I understand what you're saying about selectively assembling verses to support a misogynistic view, but I struggle with the notion that these are entirely imposed upon the bible from without. It would be really powerful if you put together a counterpoint video selecting other verses equally selectively to support an egalitarian or even a matriarchal position.
1:29 We need a good acronym for this biz CCRAIP & thats
So close to CRAP
these conservatives men are so annoying. the bible also says " There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus" which can imply that we should all be treated equally. see. how easy it is to find stuff in the bible to justify political beliefs? though i admit i find my interpretation superior since it causes much less harm.
One would think so, but the line I hear from conservatives all the time is:
"That's in regards to being saved and when we get to heaven. While on earth, God gave us rules an those rules says men are in charge."
They don't care what happens to this earth, cause it's not "their earth".
the way i see it the bible is up for interpretation. so 🤷🏽♀ they somehow extrapolate the bible verse saying "god knew you before you were born" to be anti choice, so i can manipulate scripture for my agenda too. and again, it causes much less harm so it's better. they can't pick and choose if others can't pick and choose@@Mistikii
@ts4743 I agree wholeheartedly. The less harm, the better. The dogma of the Christian right is a tough thing to overcome.
i get what you're saying. i just try to play the same games they do @@Mistikii
No I does not. It has nothing to do with treating others, just that everyone can be Xtian now. Paul still has specific for women and sla..ve..s
Welcome to Gilead.
"Righteous parents are supposed to be beating their children with rods." That is the most uncharitable reading of Proverbs I have ever heard.
Proverb 13:24 is quite clear, though…
No interpretation is necessary.
Would you say this is descriptive vs not prescriptive?
I know we're not supposed to get personal about the content creators, but this joyous grin with which this young man presents those passages in a kind of "Gotcha!"-way is really off-putting.
Paul: I know some of you can't hack the celibate life. So maybe some of you should get married. BUT.. no kids. God doesn't want a bunch of kids running around the gift shop.
One might also note in the Ephesians 5 passage how the subject title “Wives and Husbands” puts a break between verses 21 and 22. That is not original to the text and what it does is disrupt the flow of the passage.
In verse 21, Paul calls for mutual submission: … submitting to _one another_ out of reverence for Christ.
He’s talking to everybody about how to walk, how to love sacrificially as Christ loved (vs. 2), ending this portion to everyone with mutual submission (vs. 21).
It’s in that context he turns to wives and says “submit to your husbands.” But then he tells husbands to “love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her … husbands should love their wives as their own bodies … as himself.”
Though the same word “submission” is not used “loving someone as yourself” sounds an awful lot like egalitarianism. I realize they heard these words with a certain cultural view so it wouldn’t be the same understanding in 21st century Western culture and I don’t love the word “revere,” but this passage is often taught _WIVES SUBMIT_ and husbands love (but it’s optional & only based on how much your wife submits and reveres you) and that’s not right.
It’s a bummer too because Titus 2 is a DOUBLE chiasm that has way more to do with “right teaching” and “right living” and appealing to one bit without acknowledging the rest misses the point (notably, the “slaves, obey” portion mirrors Christ “taking a people of his own possession;” how that influences our interpretation of the acceptability of slavery I leave up to y’all)
How does a real person live so deep in the uncanny valley?
Is there a separate word for respect in Greek?
What are the roles of the wife according to the Bible?
Was the Apostle Paul really against divorce? Because in 1 Corinthian 7:10-11, it says, “And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband: 【But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried】, or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife.”
So does that mean Apostle Paul thought that a woman could still be divorced from her husband but had to remain unmarried ever since?
Yes. A selective reading of passages, but given the putrid misogyny of the Bible one does not have to work very hard to make these selections.
This creator makes my skin crawl. I hate that I would have agreed with him in the past
I would never comment on one of Dan's videos about someone having an incredibly punchable face
I honestly don’t even think it’s his appearance that makes his face so punchable, more like his demeanor and smugness so it’s not technically commenting on his appearance 🤷🏻♀️
I love your videos and I have learned a lot from watching you. I see you talk about cherry picking and the immorality in the Bible and yet you’re still a Christian? Or Mormon? I’d like to see you do a video on how you can know all these things about the Bible and still remain a believer.
Probably won’t happen because this channel isn’t about his beliefs, it’s about education.
He did a podcast with Mormon stories
“Conservative Christian right wing authoritarian identity politics”- this should be on a tshirt but with some sort of context around it. Maybe something sarcastic so right wing people think it’s in their favor but all others clearly realize it isn’t 😂
There's a passage in the Bible that says a wife's body belongs to her husband. (1 Corinthians 7:4). A lot of men jump on that and a lot of women concur. Problem? The verse also says the husband's body belongs to the wife. Which would imply if a man was unfaithful the wife should have recourse to imposing some kind of consequence, yes? After all, men got a LOT of latitude on imposing consequences on an unfaithful wife. I'm guessing that verse never gets recited. At all. Also....
In Biblical times the term "virgin" simply referred to a woman's marital status - specifically a virgin was an unmarried woman. So when the New Testament says Mary, mother of Jesus, was a virgin, it was a simple reference to the fact she was not married. Period. The Catholic Church decided to change the definition of the word. And here we are.
So a man could take on any woman he wants If he's married, [citation, please,] can he give me an example of a Patriarch who took on a wife without the consent of his wife or a concubine without the consent of his wife?
Jacob takes both Leah and Rachel with neither woman having any agency in the transaction whatsoever. (Gen 29:15-30). That transaction was negotiated entirely between Jacob and Laban. Oh but he does get consent from those wives to marry some of their slave girls to make more kiddos. So that's nice.
xander etc: Have you understood the responses you received here?
Dan I've been married for 39 years and I'm not gonna lie. Seen not heard is making so much sense to me
Why did Jesus say, “any man who divorces his wife, causes her to commit adultery,” if only men can commit adultery?
Got it backwards. Only women could commit adultery and be punished for it, not men. They were allowed multiple wives, so any single woman they had sex with was considered a wife.
@@davidm5707 oh wow! That sounds terrible for the women! Thank you for the explanation!
Dan, Obviously you are very intelligent and educated. That being said, you are a wolf in sheep’s clothing. The first time I listened to your channel I thought what a bright guy, who happens to have the best books. At same time I thought something seems off with this guy. The more you can twist scripture around to match your narrative the better you like it. That being said, I feel sorry for you. You need Jesus Christ in your heart, not just tid bits of information that you assemble to make Christianity into a bunch of spoiled brats. Of course there are some who use Christianity to make money. Shame on them. We will all stand alone before Jesus and answer for our life. Many will say I preached in your name, I did good deeds in your name for all these years. Jesus will answer, I do not know you. Your just reward awaits you. I’m no judge of others but I certainly wouldn’t want to stand in your spot on that day. To you Dan I say, it’s not too late to turn around.
Sounds like you are looking in a mirror and loading the faults you see on Dan. You're guilt of what you accuse others of, like this young man, you are twisting scripture to suit your agenda.
Dan, I have a question. How do we know it was okay for married men to have sex outside of marriage in the context of the hebrew bible?
Lol he just explained it. You can have as many women as you want as long as there aren't married. Does why back in those biblical days you can marry so many women and sleep with them even though you have a wife.
@@animegtrailer5208he’s asking how do we know that
Can you think of an instance where a guy got punished for it? Or it even being mentioned as wrong? Also, I'm pretty sure the text around the verse cited says it
Because men having concubines is normal in the Hebrew Bible, starting from Abraham down to Solomon there’s plenty of examples. No law against it nor any divine command against it. Concubines are not legal wives therefore sex with them is sex outside of marriage. Furthermore there’s stories like “Judah and Tamar” in genesis 38 where paying a prostitute for sex is a matter of course, nobody bats an eye, while a widow found to be pregnant (long after her husband died) is considered deserving of death.
Also, I think that projecting the modern concept of marriage back onto the Hebrew Bible is anachronistic. Clearly the society depicted in those stories was rigidly patriarchal and deeply misogynistic. Women were just a step higher than slaves and cattle in the list of assets men owned. Marriage was a contract between two men: the father who gave his daughter away in exchange for money (or cattle) and a man who wanted a woman. The obligation the husband assumed was to house, feed and clothe his wife(wives): no obligation to fidelity.
@@pansepot1490Thanks that helps.
"Dismantled by Dan" should be the name of this type of content! That creator just got sent packing! Thanks for calling out this sort of bs, Dan!
Read the wikipedia article on "niddah", if you think the abrahamic religions are nice to women.
A christian chad cherry picking snippets from teh bajbel that places him in the jacuzzi and the rest in the sweatshop? 😲 Nooo! This can't be real.
So bible is just a Greco Roman thingy that can be thrown away ? Lmao
I don't believe that Jesus is God, I believe he is the son of God as the bible says. But people keep on bringing up Hebrews 1 and I don't know a reliable explanation I could give them
You speak a lot about conservative Christian right wing authoritarian identity politics... I am curious if you see a repeat of the Deutsche Christen movement in Weimar Germany, and the way that the Cross was used to support the rise of the NAZI party.
Who the eff raised this kid??
so, are left wing identity politics, somewhat better?
Doesn’t Paul say in Ephesians (?) that husbands are to love their wives as Christ loves His Church?
Genesis 3:16 KJV - Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.
Your point?
Picking a different thing that says the same thing doesn't make it not gross
1. the verse you're bringing in is not relevant. I mean, this is for Christian's idea of a biblical marriage so let's stay in the NT.
2. it's apparently based on a mistranslation. her desire is not going to be the same as her husband. I mean, can I blame her when the husband is that dumb? Who wants to follow a moron's commands? (And notice that in the Garden of Eden, Eve was reasoned with like an intelligent being. Eve was the smart one in that story. She wanted knowledge. I applaud that character for desiring knowledge. It's much better to have knowledge and desire knowledge than being a dumb animal like Adam who can be so easily persuaded with "it tastes good". what a moron. that story does not make men look smart. I would describe Adam as obedient... like a well-trained dog but not a human being who is capable of reason.)
3. Let's focus on the following verses that have commands to the husband. I want this husband to sacrifice himself like christ did for the church. I will not accept the excuse of a 9/5 job or bringing home the bacon or mowing the lawn. Jesus suffered the Passion of the Christ and I demand that these silly male children suffer something similar. I mean, not a crucifixion though if he wants to, I have a nail gun and a compressor. It's relatively easy to use. I was thinking more on the line of tying him up and horsewhipping him till his back was bloody and raw. (It's not as bad as it seems. I just need to ensure that the injuries are sufficiently hard enough that it takes him 3 days to "rise" from the bed.)
Thank you for pointing out the bible is pure evil and misoginistic from the start and was written by men who were nothing more than useless sluts who had to forced women to do what they want by violence.
The very verse you quoted is demonstrable evidence that the christian gods are man made as an all knowing god wouldn't allow men to rule over women or demand women obey men as an all knowing god would know men are inherently fickle, irrational, illogical and ruled by their emotions and hormones. History has demonstrated this beyond a shadow of a doubt.
@jenniferhunter4074 in the Philippines Christian men actually do that. Whips and barbed wire and nail guns and all. I don't agree with any of it, just a fun fact for you. Not so fun for the men who participate, but that's their own stupid fault.
Another thing, you blame the kid for espousing patriarchy and misogyny, but the kids enjoys that very thing. The kid is not lying, the bible IS misogynistic. So I don't get your objections to his content.
Take verses out of there cultural context has been going on for far too long.
Youre being very generous to call this punk kid a "creator" when all he's doing is grinning smugly and pointing where he's going to add in random short verses that mean nothing.
If it’s in the Bible it’s in the Bible. It may be problematic (I hate that word), immoral, and incompatible with modern thinking (it is), but it’s still biblical.
What if im right wing authoritarian and pro women pro feminism?
That's not possible, so there's that.
Then you're a chimera 😅
@@Nick-o-time Its literally possible though just very few people want to do that
@@mcdonaldsorwhatevers An authoritarian figure on a hierarchical structure, is in direct oposition to equality and a horizontal structure.
I beg to differ, anyone that posts things like that deserve to be publicly ridiculed, embarrassed, and heckled. Sitting back and allowing these beliefs to spread freely by not confronting these people will only allow it to spread.
So, engage in a discussion about the beliefs and the abuse those beliefs have caused. Don't bully someone on their appearance simply because what they say is fucked up.