Transcript: Episode 0023

“On Women: Feminism”

This transcript:
  1. Was machine generated.
  2. Has not been checked for errors.
  3. May not be entirely accurate.
WEBVTT

00:00:00 – 00:00:09:	Also, thank you for watching!

00:00:09 – 00:00:15:	So, let's get prepared for our break!

00:00:15 – 00:00:24:	Everybody knows what we do!

00:00:24 – 00:00:39:	Welcome to the Stone Choir podcast.

00:00:39 – 00:00:41:	I am Corey J. Mahler.

00:00:41 – 00:00:42:	And I'm Woe.

00:00:42 – 00:00:47:	Today's episode of Stone Choir is part two of our series on feminism.

00:00:47 – 00:00:52:	Last week, we spent about 100 minutes talking about the scriptural basis for what God says

00:00:52 – 00:00:56:	the purpose of a woman is in the world in creation.

00:00:56 – 00:00:59:	We established, as God established, we didn't do it.

00:00:59 – 00:01:02:	A couple of podcasters aren't writing any of these rules.

00:01:02 – 00:01:06:	God said that woman was made as a helper fit for man.

00:01:06 – 00:01:12:	And we established through the scriptural basis how that is consistent from before

00:01:12 – 00:01:15:	the fall through all of Scripture, Old and New Testament.

00:01:15 – 00:01:20:	So today, we're going to be talking about what has happened in the last few centuries

00:01:20 – 00:01:24:	in Christendom as we first begin to depart from that.

00:01:24 – 00:01:28:	Up front, I want to mention that we are not really going to be talking about any other

00:01:28 – 00:01:34:	societies outside of Christian societies, because A, that's not really our problem.

00:01:34 – 00:01:39:	And B, if as you're listening along, you think of counter-examples of, oh, well, this other

00:01:39 – 00:01:44:	pagan society had feminism long before Christendom did, yeah, exactly.

00:01:44 – 00:01:45:	Those are pagans.

00:01:45 – 00:01:46:	They're all burning in hell.

00:01:46 – 00:01:47:	They were feminists long before us.

00:01:47 – 00:01:50:	So thank you for making our point like that.

00:01:50 – 00:01:54:	We could do a 90-second episode here that just said, you know what?

00:01:54 – 00:01:57:	Feminism correlates to damned society.

00:01:57 – 00:01:58:	That's not really a good podcast.

00:01:58 – 00:02:03:	So we're going to go over in detail what's played out really since the Enlightenment.

00:02:03 – 00:02:11:	So off to the races, we're going to be talking about feminism as it really began as genesis

00:02:11 – 00:02:13:	in the Enlightenment, in the West.

00:02:14 – 00:02:20:	As we mentioned last week, really the reason for that is that every Christian society has

00:02:20 – 00:02:23:	understood what we said last week.

00:02:23 – 00:02:30:	Christian societies have always been based on God's rules and norm for human civilization.

00:02:30 – 00:02:35:	When nations were Christianized, whatever pattern they had for male-female relations

00:02:35 – 00:02:42:	before Christianity arrived, they all naturally adopted the head chat principle.

00:02:42 – 00:02:47:	They adopted the premise that the man is the head of the household, that a woman is

00:02:47 – 00:02:52:	a helper fit for man, whether she is a daughter in the case of children.

00:02:52 – 00:02:56:	And then when she's married off, when she becomes one flesh with her husband, he becomes

00:02:56 – 00:02:57:	her head.

00:02:57 – 00:02:59:	This was codified in European law.

00:02:59 – 00:03:01:	It was the norm in society.

00:03:01 – 00:03:03:	So it wasn't really much of an issue.

00:03:03 – 00:03:09:	These weren't points of specific contention really until the Enlightenment.

00:03:09 – 00:03:11:	It's probably in almost every episode.

00:03:11 – 00:03:13:	The Enlightenment seems to come up.

00:03:13 – 00:03:15:	We'll do an episode here probably pretty soon talking about it.

00:03:15 – 00:03:19:	I think for us to do that proper treatment is going to take a little more research than

00:03:19 – 00:03:23:	some of these so we haven't tackled it yet, just for that reason it's going to take some

00:03:23 – 00:03:26:	more work on our upfront.

00:03:26 – 00:03:35:	The Enlightenment was a period of time, really in the 1700s in Europe, when the notions of

00:03:35 – 00:03:42:	Christendom were set aside for the sake of science and reason.

00:03:42 – 00:03:45:	Let me just read you briefly something that is from Wikipedia.

00:03:45 – 00:03:49:	I mentioned last week, I highly recommend using Wikipedia for looking at these subjects.

00:03:49 – 00:03:54:	When you're looking at feminism or women's liberation or the Enlightenment, anyone who's

00:03:54 – 00:03:57:	writing for Wikipedia is a huge fan.

00:03:57 – 00:04:02:	So when we are criticizing and attacking some of these things, these are good sources because

00:04:03 – 00:04:07:	you can find and replace in any article they're good for bad and you'll basically have the

00:04:07 – 00:04:10:	correct Christian opinion on the things.

00:04:10 – 00:04:13:	But because they're bragging about what they've accomplished, they're very thorough.

00:04:13 – 00:04:17:	In fact, they're thorough to the point that they will try to pull in things that have

00:04:17 – 00:04:22:	nothing to do with their agenda to try to say, oh yeah, this was this thing as well.

00:04:22 – 00:04:28:	So they can just basically co-opt all of Christian history into their own worldview.

00:04:28 – 00:04:33:	This is part of what Wikipedia says about the Enlightenment.

00:04:33 – 00:04:37:	Philosophers and scientists of the period widely circulated their ideas through meetings

00:04:37 – 00:04:43:	at scientific academies, masonic lodges, literary salons, coffee houses, and in printed

00:04:43 – 00:04:45:	books, journals, and pamphlets.

00:04:45 – 00:04:49:	The ideas of the Enlightenment undermined the authority of the monarchy and the church

00:04:49 – 00:04:54:	and paved the way for political revolutions in the 18th and 19th centuries.

00:04:54 – 00:05:01:	A variety of 19th century movements including liberalism, communism, and neoclassicism trace

00:05:01 – 00:05:04:	their intellectual heritage to the Enlightenment.

00:05:04 – 00:05:09:	The central doctrines of the Enlightenment were individual liberty and religious tolerance,

00:05:09 – 00:05:15:	in opposition to an absolute monarchy and the fixed dogmas of the church.

00:05:15 – 00:05:19:	So basically a one sentence summary of that is something that you will find popping up

00:05:19 – 00:05:23:	on really any of these basic articles talking about it, and it's something that I think

00:05:24 – 00:05:28:	I remember almost verbatim from social studies in grade school.

00:05:28 – 00:05:34:	The Enlightenment was the triumph of science and reason over faith in superstition.

00:05:34 – 00:05:38:	I want that to be a central tenet that you keep in mind as you're listening to all this,

00:05:38 – 00:05:46:	because one, the Enlightenment is entirely a European thing, occurred in Europe in Christendom.

00:05:46 – 00:05:47:	We're not talking about anywhere else.

00:05:47 – 00:05:53:	This was entirely within the sphere of the Christian dominion.

00:05:53 – 00:05:57:	That's important because the second part of that, it's the triumph of science and reason

00:05:57 – 00:05:59:	over faith and superstition.

00:05:59 – 00:06:01:	Those mean the same thing when they say them.

00:06:01 – 00:06:06:	Faith can only mean the Christian faith, and superstition just means principally the superstitions

00:06:06 – 00:06:08:	of the Christian faith.

00:06:08 – 00:06:14:	So the Enlightenment all by itself, everything about it was principally man in his reason

00:06:14 – 00:06:20:	overthrowing God in scripture that's been revealed to us, overthrowing monarchy, overthrowing

00:06:20 – 00:06:22:	the church.

00:06:22 – 00:06:27:	Those three things are always part and parcel of any discussion of Enlightenment, thinking

00:06:27 – 00:06:29:	and its influence.

00:06:29 – 00:06:32:	That's important because that's why we did the episode on genealogy of ideas.

00:06:32 – 00:06:35:	We're going to talk about it repeatedly in this episode.

00:06:35 – 00:06:41:	This is the genealogy of the ideas that many of you hold to be sacred, the idea that women

00:06:41 – 00:06:45:	are equal to men, the idea that the franchise should be universal.

00:06:45 – 00:06:49:	All of these things are new in Christendom as of the 17 and 1800s.

00:06:49 – 00:06:53:	They weren't held previously, and today they're sacrosanct.

00:06:53 – 00:06:57:	So we're contrasting Christianity with the Enlightenment because they're two competing

00:06:57 – 00:06:58:	religions.

00:06:58 – 00:07:02:	And I think that's important to carry throughout this entire conversation.

00:07:02 – 00:07:09:	And to emphasize the point of the genealogy of ideas, we were discussing before we started

00:07:09 – 00:07:16:	recording a central symbol in Christianity in scripture that we really ignore is the

00:07:16 – 00:07:23:	idea of a tree and its fruit, and a tree is known by its fruit.

00:07:23 – 00:07:27:	A good tree does not produce poisonous fruit.

00:07:27 – 00:07:29:	Poisonous fruit does not come from a good tree.

00:07:29 – 00:07:33:	A poisonous tree does not produce good fruit.

00:07:33 – 00:07:36:	And Christians have just stopped paying attention to that.

00:07:36 – 00:07:40:	We read it, we go, yes, okay, and move on.

00:07:40 – 00:07:44:	We don't pay attention to what scripture is actually saying there.

00:07:44 – 00:07:48:	If you look at the fruit of something, and the fruit is wicked, the fruit is evil, the

00:07:48 – 00:07:55:	fruit is poisonous, that is telling you the thing itself is wicked, evil, and poisonous.

00:07:55 – 00:08:00:	And jumping ahead a little bit really, but not in fullness, we'll go through this chronologically

00:08:00 – 00:08:01:	roughly.

00:08:01 – 00:08:05:	We're living in the results of what we're talking about here with first and second

00:08:05 – 00:08:11:	wave feminism, with the roots in the Enlightenment, proto-feminism so-called.

00:08:11 – 00:08:15:	We are living the fruit of that today, and we can see the wickedness in our societies.

00:08:15 – 00:08:20:	We see it in abortion, we see it in so-called sexual liberation, we see it in the growing

00:08:20 – 00:08:26:	support for prostitution, pornography, the list is endless.

00:08:26 – 00:08:30:	All of those things are the fruit of these ideas.

00:08:30 – 00:08:35:	And so as Christians, we have to look at this and say, it's a poisonous tree.

00:08:35 – 00:08:38:	We cannot consume the fruit from this tree.

00:08:38 – 00:08:44:	We cannot believe the things that are said by those who hold to this ideology, this competing

00:08:44 – 00:08:46:	religion.

00:08:46 – 00:08:53:	And so it's not a matter of saying, well, I reject transgenderism, but I'm okay with

00:08:53 – 00:08:56:	all of the things that came before it leading up to it.

00:08:56 – 00:09:00:	No, because that is the inevitable result of all of the things leading up to it that

00:09:00 – 00:09:03:	we're going to discuss in this episode.

00:09:03 – 00:09:08:	And so as Christians, we have to go all the way back to the source.

00:09:08 – 00:09:12:	We have to go back to the source of these ideas.

00:09:12 – 00:09:14:	What is the tree?

00:09:14 – 00:09:15:	Which tree bore this fruit?

00:09:15 – 00:09:16:	Does this come from Scripture?

00:09:16 – 00:09:17:	Does this come from God?

00:09:17 – 00:09:21:	Does this come from natural revelation?

00:09:21 – 00:09:26:	Because of course, God is the author of two books, Scripture and Nature, the natural world

00:09:26 – 00:09:27:	creation.

00:09:27 – 00:09:32:	And we've pointed out before that when God himself appears and speaks in the book of

00:09:32 – 00:09:36:	Job, he doesn't appeal to his word.

00:09:36 – 00:09:41:	He doesn't after a fashion, because of course he spoke creation into existence, but he appeals

00:09:41 – 00:09:43:	to creation.

00:09:43 – 00:09:51:	He appeals to that as illustrating his glory, his might, his majesty.

00:09:51 – 00:09:54:	And so yes, we can look to the natural world for truth.

00:09:54 – 00:09:55:	There is truth there.

00:09:55 – 00:10:00:	Yes, it's fallen and corrupt, but there's still truth there because it is God's creature,

00:10:00 – 00:10:01:	it's God's creation.

00:10:01 – 00:10:05:	It is good because it comes from the ultimate good.

00:10:05 – 00:10:07:	And so we have to look at that source.

00:10:07 – 00:10:11:	Does it come from something that is from God, or is it a corruption?

00:10:11 – 00:10:15:	Because of course Satan can't create anything new, but is it a corruption of God's good

00:10:15 – 00:10:19:	order and therefore a wicked tree bearing wicked fruit?

00:10:19 – 00:10:24:	And in the case of feminism, it does not matter which wave.

00:10:24 – 00:10:26:	That is the fundamental baseline here.

00:10:26 – 00:10:30:	It doesn't matter if it's first wave, second wave, third wave, or so-called fourth wave

00:10:30 – 00:10:34:	that is starting in the last decade or so.

00:10:34 – 00:10:36:	They are all wicked because they are all rebellion.

00:10:36 – 00:10:38:	They are all against God.

00:10:38 – 00:10:41:	They do not come from a good tree.

00:10:41 – 00:10:44:	They are wicked fruit from a wicked tree.

00:10:44 – 00:10:49:	And a fundamental truth that I want everyone to bear in mind when it comes to feminism

00:10:49 – 00:10:53:	was already mentioned in Woe's opening.

00:10:53 – 00:10:58:	Woman was made to be a helper for man.

00:10:58 – 00:11:04:	Anything that is against that core nature of woman is evil.

00:11:04 – 00:11:11:	And so feminism fundamentally seeks to make woman not a helper, but an equal and a competitor.

00:11:11 – 00:11:17:	At the very least, the latter waves want to make woman above man, and really the first

00:11:17 – 00:11:18:	one did as well.

00:11:18 – 00:11:25:	But anything that makes woman a competitor instead of a helper is not from God, because

00:11:25 – 00:11:28:	God made her to be a helper.

00:11:28 – 00:11:34:	And so we can see this wickedness, this wicked strain running through many different things

00:11:34 – 00:11:38:	and all of the waves of feminism.

00:11:38 – 00:11:44:	If something is contrary to what God has ordained to the nature of the thing as God intended

00:11:44 – 00:11:49:	it, as God made it, then that is wicked and Christians cannot support it.

00:11:49 – 00:11:54:	And so again, it does not matter which wave of feminism, and you will see even pastors

00:11:55 – 00:11:59:	making this argument, they'll say, well, third and fourth wave feminism are wicked, but first

00:11:59 – 00:12:05:	and second wave were fine, or maybe they'll say only first wave, that's not how it works.

00:12:05 – 00:12:09:	A little bit of poison is not good.

00:12:09 – 00:12:12:	A lot of poison is worse, of course, but you don't eat the poisonous fruit, you don't

00:12:12 – 00:12:15:	eat one bite, you don't eat the entire fruit.

00:12:15 – 00:12:18:	You avoid it, you avoid the poisonous tree.

00:12:18 – 00:12:24:	And as I mentioned, we were discussing a few things before we started recording.

00:12:24 – 00:12:28:	If you let Satan play in your yard, you're going to wake up the next day with him in

00:12:28 – 00:12:30:	bed with you.

00:12:30 – 00:12:31:	That's how these things always go.

00:12:31 – 00:12:33:	They always get worse.

00:12:33 – 00:12:39:	And so you can't dip your foot in this pool and say, well, the first wave, no.

00:12:39 – 00:12:40:	It is all wicked.

00:12:40 – 00:12:43:	It should all be avoided by Christians, and that's why we're going through the history

00:12:43 – 00:12:49:	of this, pointing out all of the signs that this is wicked fruit, that this is not from

00:12:49 – 00:12:52:	God, that this is from Satan.

00:12:52 – 00:12:59:	So I think a good place to begin the story of Western feminism is, as was mentioned in

00:12:59 – 00:13:04:	the Wikipedia article about the Enlightenment, in the salons of France in the 17th and 18th

00:13:04 – 00:13:10:	century, and the coffee houses of England in the colonies around the same time.

00:13:10 – 00:13:17:	The salons in France were really one of the first times that women became a type of participant

00:13:17 – 00:13:23:	in public life in matters of discourse and debate and discussion.

00:13:23 – 00:13:27:	And the salon was sort of the very smallest version, and then the coffee houses were even

00:13:27 – 00:13:29:	more egalitarian than that.

00:13:29 – 00:13:34:	Basically what happened in the salons, the women acted as sort of governesses or moderators.

00:13:34 – 00:13:38:	They're basically their kind of a stone police, just to make sure that the discussion was

00:13:38 – 00:13:39:	polite.

00:13:39 – 00:13:40:	Everyone followed the rules.

00:13:40 – 00:13:43:	It was basically the men who were doing the discussion.

00:13:43 – 00:13:48:	But the women were present there in the room, they had maybe a little bit to say, it was

00:13:48 – 00:13:51:	the very smallest bite of the apple.

00:13:51 – 00:13:53:	And so by itself, you look at that and think, well, there's absolutely nothing wrong with

00:13:53 – 00:13:54:	them.

00:13:54 – 00:13:58:	I honestly don't know if I could disagree.

00:13:58 – 00:14:03:	In isolation, I don't know if I would shout that down without knowing anything that happened

00:14:03 – 00:14:05:	in subsequent centuries and say, no, stop.

00:14:05 – 00:14:06:	Get the women out of the room.

00:14:06 – 00:14:07:	We can't do this.

00:14:07 – 00:14:11:	It doesn't look like there's a problem there.

00:14:11 – 00:14:15:	I think that what's illustrative is that it never really happened before.

00:14:15 – 00:14:20:	It wasn't something that had occurred in Christian societies.

00:14:20 – 00:14:24:	You would have private discussions in homes, and these were sort of bigger than that.

00:14:24 – 00:14:30:	The salon was fundamentally in a home, but it was really sort of a public gathering of

00:14:30 – 00:14:34:	friends that became more and more important to how society ran.

00:14:34 – 00:14:40:	And then as that model was adopted kind of by the English on both sides of the Atlantic,

00:14:40 – 00:14:43:	it became much more egalitarian.

00:14:43 – 00:14:48:	As I said, there were men's only debating societies, and coffee houses were only men were permitted

00:14:48 – 00:14:49:	to speak.

00:14:49 – 00:14:53:	There were some where there was completely mixed company, and the women were equal participants.

00:14:53 – 00:14:57:	And then at some point, it kind of actually became fractious, and the men got tired of

00:14:57 – 00:14:58:	the women talking.

00:14:58 – 00:15:02:	And so women created their own coffee houses and their own societies to discuss these things

00:15:02 – 00:15:06:	among themselves about matters related to the public sphere.

00:15:06 – 00:15:11:	I think that's the important distinction here is that they weren't talking about the

00:15:11 – 00:15:13:	duties of a helper to a husband.

00:15:13 – 00:15:18:	They were talking about, in the case of the salons literally, a lot of it was books, it

00:15:18 – 00:15:19:	was poetry.

00:15:19 – 00:15:25:	It was strictly non-political, and then it began to evolve into being more political.

00:15:25 – 00:15:31:	And in the US and in England, it was much more strongly linked to things that had traditionally

00:15:31 – 00:15:34:	only been in the sphere of the man.

00:15:34 – 00:15:40:	This sphere is a term that you'll find popping up to this day among feminists as something

00:15:40 – 00:15:45:	that they find despicable, because the claim that's been inserted back into history, and

00:15:45 – 00:15:49:	we'll get to some of the various points where it's made, feminists will claim that it was

00:15:49 – 00:15:54:	men that created these artificial spheres, where the woman is basically chained in the

00:15:54 – 00:15:55:	home.

00:15:55 – 00:15:59:	All she can do is cook and clean and make babies, and she can't talk to anyone, and that's

00:15:59 – 00:16:00:	her sphere.

00:16:01 – 00:16:06:	It's more like being cauterized or like being a pearl that's sealed up and kept separate

00:16:06 – 00:16:07:	from everything else.

00:16:07 – 00:16:12:	It's seen as a matter of subjugation, and so these departures from the spheres as they

00:16:12 – 00:16:18:	began to occur in these public places, again, on their face, I think even as a Christian,

00:16:18 – 00:16:24:	you wouldn't necessarily think, even as I'm sure many people think of us as hyperactive,

00:16:24 – 00:16:28:	hypersensitive Christians, I don't think I would necessarily look at that and think,

00:16:28 – 00:16:30:	oh man, this is really bad news.

00:16:30 – 00:16:35:	I think in retrospect, it becomes much clearer what was beginning in those places, because

00:16:35 – 00:16:40:	again, it wasn't that a woman talking is inherently sinful.

00:16:40 – 00:16:44:	We're not talking about church, where God forbids women to speak.

00:16:44 – 00:16:46:	If she has a question, she can go home and ask her husband.

00:16:46 – 00:16:52:	We're talking about civil society, so God didn't explicitly say, don't do this.

00:16:52 – 00:16:56:	It just typically wasn't done in Christian society, and I think in retrospect, we can

00:16:56 – 00:16:59:	maybe question why that is.

00:16:59 – 00:17:01:	I don't know why this sent fences here, I'm just going to tear it down.

00:17:01 – 00:17:03:	That's basically what happened.

00:17:03 – 00:17:09:	We demolished Chesterton's fence, and then we got the results, but as we looked downstream

00:17:09 – 00:17:16:	from those first events, we can see that as women began to engage in civic life and public

00:17:16 – 00:17:18:	life, they didn't have opinions.

00:17:18 – 00:17:19:	They had ideas.

00:17:19 – 00:17:23:	They had things that they wanted to get done, and increasingly, it became visible to them

00:17:23 – 00:17:25:	that they disagreed with their husbands.

00:17:25 – 00:17:31:	I think that's when we really got off to the races on the feminist thrust that has led

00:17:31 – 00:17:34:	us to the point that we're at today.

00:17:34 – 00:17:40:	You made an important point there, that if something has never been done before in Christendom,

00:17:40 – 00:17:47:	and suddenly someone brings in this novel idea, we don't necessarily have to reject

00:17:47 – 00:17:51:	it out of hand, but we do have to be skeptical.

00:17:51 – 00:17:57:	Why is this thing that none of our Christian ancestors has ever done, that has never been

00:17:57 – 00:18:02:	part of Christendom, that has never been accepted in Christian society?

00:18:02 – 00:18:06:	Why is it all of a sudden a thing?

00:18:06 – 00:18:09:	Why is this now being pushed?

00:18:09 – 00:18:14:	And of course, in this case, with the advantage of the vantage point of centuries of development,

00:18:14 – 00:18:16:	well we know why.

00:18:16 – 00:18:23:	But if you have that initial skepticism of things like this, you may avoid the problem

00:18:23 – 00:18:25:	down the line.

00:18:25 – 00:18:31:	Because Satan's plans span decades, centuries, generations.

00:18:31 – 00:18:37:	And so something that he has planned for your great-great-great grandchildren?

00:18:37 – 00:18:40:	Well the beginning of that may not look bad to you.

00:18:40 – 00:18:45:	Well women are just joining us in the coffee house to discuss politics.

00:18:45 – 00:18:51:	Now of course, to a Christian that actually probably should look bad, because of the subject

00:18:51 – 00:18:53:	being discussed.

00:18:53 – 00:19:00:	Because fundamentally Christianity and nature as well teaches that the woman's space is

00:19:00 – 00:19:02:	in the home.

00:19:02 – 00:19:03:	That is her world.

00:19:03 – 00:19:06:	Her world is the private world.

00:19:06 – 00:19:11:	It is the maintenance of the home, the teaching of children, the rearing of children, etc.

00:19:11 – 00:19:12:	Those things.

00:19:12 – 00:19:15:	That is the woman's sphere.

00:19:15 – 00:19:17:	The man's sphere is the public sphere.

00:19:17 – 00:19:23:	Not all men of course, because if you are a woodworker and you spend all of your time

00:19:23 – 00:19:28:	in your shop and you don't involve yourself in politics whatsoever, as a man that is typically

00:19:28 – 00:19:34:	fine, yes there are times where you may have to have some voice and things speak up.

00:19:34 – 00:19:38:	But for men there are as well different spheres.

00:19:38 – 00:19:44:	But the public sphere itself is solely the sphere for men.

00:19:44 – 00:19:50:	It is something in which only men should be engaged.

00:19:50 – 00:19:53:	Politics is a man's pursuit.

00:19:53 – 00:19:59:	And so we see even here in proto-feminism and then leading into first wave, it naturally

00:19:59 – 00:20:06:	leads into first wave, because in proto-feminism you have this push for women to discuss things

00:20:06 – 00:20:11:	like politics and economics and political philosophy.

00:20:11 – 00:20:17:	I wouldn't go so far as to say that all discussion of philosophy and things like that are wrong

00:20:17 – 00:20:18:	for women.

00:20:18 – 00:20:19:	That's not true.

00:20:19 – 00:20:24:	We don't hold that position, because of course some parts of the Christian faith are philosophy.

00:20:24 – 00:20:29:	They touch on philosophy as it used to be taught and held in our universities when they

00:20:29 – 00:20:30:	were still Christian.

00:20:30 – 00:20:34:	Theology is the queen of the liberal arts.

00:20:34 – 00:20:37:	It is the highest form of philosophy.

00:20:37 – 00:20:43:	And so these are still issues that women can of course discuss with their husbands at home

00:20:43 – 00:20:46:	as they are supposed to.

00:20:46 – 00:20:48:	That is the right ordering of things.

00:20:48 – 00:20:53:	Because the woman has a head and she should discuss these things with her head.

00:20:53 – 00:20:59:	But you see the lead-in from discussing the issues in the salon and the coffee house right

00:20:59 – 00:21:02:	into first wave feminism.

00:21:02 – 00:21:08:	The first wave feminism is of course the agitation for so-called political rights.

00:21:08 – 00:21:13:	And of course those political rights themselves were the fruit of the Enlightenment.

00:21:13 – 00:21:24:	One of the first major concomitant within downstream from the Enlightenment was the American Revolution.

00:21:24 – 00:21:28:	We all know probably virtually everyone has memorized the opening lines to the Declaration

00:21:28 – 00:21:34:	of Independence, which is one of the most obscene lies ever told in the English language.

00:21:34 – 00:21:40:	We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal, that they are endowed

00:21:40 – 00:21:45:	by their creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty,

00:21:45 – 00:21:48:	and the pursuit of happiness.

00:21:48 – 00:21:53:	Those words are a spell that has been cast on the heart and mind of every American who's

00:21:53 – 00:21:57:	been born since or who was alive at that time.

00:21:57 – 00:21:59:	Because instantly that became true.

00:21:59 – 00:22:04:	It describes itself as we hold these truths to be self-evident.

00:22:04 – 00:22:07:	In other words, it's unthinkable not to think the thing that we just said.

00:22:07 – 00:22:10:	And then here's a list of them, life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness.

00:22:10 – 00:22:18:	Now the reason that that was the kickoff for feminism in this country is that there was

00:22:18 – 00:22:23:	the inherent irony in what happened in the War for Independence, which was a revolution.

00:22:23 – 00:22:26:	The War for Independence is how we couch it here.

00:22:26 – 00:22:30:	It was a revolt against the rightful king of this colony.

00:22:30 – 00:22:33:	And we'll get into some of the other revolutions that followed.

00:22:33 – 00:22:37:	I think that there's some structural difference between a colony thousands of miles away,

00:22:37 – 00:22:46:	rebelling against its motherland, and a country trying to overthrow its own king on its own soil.

00:22:46 – 00:22:49:	But fundamentally, as a matter of morality, it's difficult to justify

00:22:50 – 00:22:55:	what is functionally regicide, which was what was going on.

00:22:55 – 00:22:59:	They were overthrowing the king, anointing themselves as their new lords and masters.

00:23:00 – 00:23:03:	The irony of what happened immediately thereafter is that

00:23:04 – 00:23:11:	we had, predominantly English, it was basically all Northern European people in this country,

00:23:11 – 00:23:17:	plus some Africans who had been imported against their will as slaves into the South.

00:23:17 – 00:23:24:	When we said all men are created equal, and then we had the three-fifths compromise,

00:23:24 – 00:23:30:	which said, oh, well, not you. Africans were not permitted to vote. They were not full citizens.

00:23:30 – 00:23:36:	They were counted as partial men for the purpose of apportionment of representation,

00:23:36 – 00:23:41:	because the South wanted that. That was a political compromise in favor of the South to say, yeah,

00:23:41 – 00:23:45:	you have these Africans, so we'll count them as three-fifths for the purpose of giving you

00:23:45 – 00:23:50:	representation in Congress. After the war between the states, and leading up to the war

00:23:50 – 00:23:57:	between the states, we also have the genesis of feminism, because in the aftermath of the American

00:23:57 – 00:24:02:	Revolution, and in the aftermath of that spell of the declaration of independence being cast,

00:24:03 – 00:24:06:	everyone starts believing it, saying all men are created equal.

00:24:07 – 00:24:12:	Some are saying, well, what about these Africans? Are they men? Aren't they created equal? And if so,

00:24:12 – 00:24:17:	why are they slaves? And then you have the women saying, well, when it says all men,

00:24:17 – 00:24:22:	does it mean all mankind? Because we're part of mankind. Why are we equal? Why don't we have

00:24:22 – 00:24:27:	representation too? And that's why the salons in the coffee house is mattered, because as women

00:24:27 – 00:24:33:	became participants in public life, and in these political matters, they suddenly realized that

00:24:33 – 00:24:41:	maybe they didn't agree with their husbands, and they wanted to be heard too. And so the genesis

00:24:41 – 00:24:48:	of feminism in this country was fundamentally one of the simultaneous rise of a desire for abolition

00:24:48 – 00:24:55:	of slavery and liberation of women. Those two throughout all American history have always

00:24:55 – 00:24:59:	gone hand in hand. In first, second, and third wave feminism, they all happen at the same time.

00:24:59 – 00:25:05:	And the feminists themselves say this. They will say that the two are inexorably linked,

00:25:05 – 00:25:09:	and they're called waves, but really they're just generations. You have a fit and a start,

00:25:09 – 00:25:14:	and you have the spurt of energy, and they move the ball down the field. And then it sort of died

00:25:14 – 00:25:20:	out for a generation or so. And then a subsequent generation came along and revolted again.

00:25:21 – 00:25:26:	And so in first wave feminism, one of the first voices that I turned up that I found kind of

00:25:26 – 00:25:32:	interesting was a man named John Neal, NEAL. He has quite the Weakie-Pete article himself. He was

00:25:32 – 00:25:38:	a very impressive man on paper. I find his face to be pretty punchable, and I disagree with virtually

00:25:38 – 00:25:45:	everything he said or did, but he can't fault the guy for being lazy. He was incredibly prolific in

00:25:45 – 00:25:50:	his life. And one of the things that he devoted most of the 19th century to doing was fighting for

00:25:50 – 00:25:56:	the, quote, intellectual equality between men and women. He fought coverture. He demanded suffrage,

00:25:56 – 00:26:02:	equal pay, better education, and working conditions for women. Now, working conditions for women is

00:26:02 – 00:26:08:	hilarious because how would women have bad working conditions if they're in the home? You see,

00:26:08 – 00:26:14:	already feminism, as it begins to encroach, is creating the very problems that it's then trying to

00:26:14 – 00:26:20:	solve. You know, we talked today about, we know about sweatshops and about horrible working conditions

00:26:20 – 00:26:24:	in the industrial revolution. That's principally what he was fighting. What was that? That was

00:26:24 – 00:26:29:	women working outside the home in horrible conditions. You know, they were, it was awful.

00:26:30 – 00:26:33:	They were working incredibly long hours in dangerous, miserable conditions.

00:26:34 – 00:26:39:	His solution was, well, we need to get them better working conditions. I think the Christian

00:26:39 – 00:26:43:	solution would be to say they shouldn't have left their home in the first place. And so,

00:26:43 – 00:26:48:	even at the very beginning, before any of this has really taken off, we already see the machine of

00:26:48 – 00:26:54:	feminism as creating one problem and then using itself as the solution to its own problems.

00:26:54 – 00:26:57:	And that's a pattern that gets repeated throughout the history of this thing.

00:26:58 – 00:27:02:	And that is one of the strings of irony that runs through all of this, of course,

00:27:03 – 00:27:10:	is that feminism has never once made women better off. It has always made life worse for women.

00:27:11 – 00:27:18:	And some women today are starting to realize that recognizing that they would actually rather be

00:27:18 – 00:27:24:	at home with their children caring for the home instead of working for some corporation that

00:27:24 – 00:27:32:	cares not at all about them, paying them some miniscule wage, and will terminate them for

00:27:32 – 00:27:39:	whatever reason it feels like. Feminism is not a good deal for women. It's not a good deal for men

00:27:39 – 00:27:47:	either, because it turns the helper God created for man into a competitor and creates animosity

00:27:47 – 00:27:52:	between men and women instead of what men and women are supposed to feel for one another,

00:27:52 – 00:27:59:	which is mutual respect and love for one another, supposed to have marriages format of that.

00:27:59 – 00:28:03:	There's a reason we see the marriage rate collapsing. And it is in large part due to

00:28:03 – 00:28:09:	feminism, which creates that animosity on the part of women toward men. And then men react to

00:28:09 – 00:28:16:	that animosity by not wanting to deal with women. It breaks down the family, it breaks down everything

00:28:16 – 00:28:23:	fundamentally. But here at the beginning, even initially, we see that one of the goals is to

00:28:23 – 00:28:29:	get women into the workforce, because of course, this is just serving another of the idols of the

00:28:29 – 00:28:34:	Enlightenment and capitalism, the things that flow from it. And that, of course, is mammon.

00:28:34 – 00:28:41:	Because if you have basically double the workforce, yes, you are going to increase

00:28:41 – 00:28:47:	overall productivity. But everyone is going to live a worse life, except of course those

00:28:47 – 00:28:54:	at the top who are benefiting from the increase in productivity. Because as anyone who has studied

00:28:54 – 00:29:01:	any economics knows, well, what happens when you increase massively the supply? Well,

00:29:02 – 00:29:09:	the price of the thing is going to drop. And so what happens when you take the workforce

00:29:09 – 00:29:15:	and double it? Well, now you have significantly lower wages, which has been one of the

00:29:15 – 00:29:22:	long term consequences of feminism is lower wages for workers. And so now instead of being able to

00:29:22 – 00:29:30:	survive off of one income for a family of however many children you happen to have, well, now you

00:29:30 – 00:29:36:	have to have both parents working, the man and the woman both have to work in order to meet

00:29:36 – 00:29:45:	just the basic needs of the family because of feminism. Feminism demanded that women be allowed

00:29:45 – 00:29:50:	into the workplace and they made it absolutely necessary for women to be in the workplace

00:29:50 – 00:29:57:	in order to survive in the world feminism created. So as mentioned, it created a problem

00:29:57 – 00:30:02:	and then offered a supposed solution. Of course, it isn't any solution at all because

00:30:02 – 00:30:09:	now there is no buffer. There's no, you know, if the husband is injured, the wife can't go out and

00:30:09 – 00:30:14:	work a little bit, which used to be the case that often happened. Now we could discuss whether or

00:30:14 – 00:30:18:	not society should have some sort of safety net to deal with that instead of forcing women to go

00:30:18 – 00:30:24:	out of the home and work. But that's a separate issue. The issue here is that feminism destroyed

00:30:24 – 00:30:31:	that buffer and made it so that most people now live inches from abject poverty. That is a long

00:30:31 – 00:30:38:	term consequence of feminism to go back again to the idea of bad fruit. We see here the evil,

00:30:38 – 00:30:44:	wicked, poisonous fruit of feminism in society. It's not a good tree because a good tree does

00:30:44 – 00:30:52:	not bear bad fruit. As we mentioned last week, one of the legal principles that was overthrown

00:30:52 – 00:30:57:	over a century or so of feminism was that of coverture. I want to read now what the English

00:30:57 – 00:31:02:	women's property rights were. This is the English common law description. It was basically what was

00:31:02 – 00:31:08:	in effect on this side of the Atlantic as well. English common law defined the role of the wife

00:31:08 – 00:31:14:	as a femme covert, emphasizing her subordination to her husband and putting her under the, quote,

00:31:14 – 00:31:20:	protection and influence of her husband, her baron, or her lord. Upon marriage, the husband

00:31:20 – 00:31:26:	and wife became one person under the law as the property of the wife was surrendered to her husband

00:31:26 – 00:31:31:	and her status as a separate legal personality with the ability to own property and sue and

00:31:31 – 00:31:37:	be sued solely in her own name ceased to exist. Any personal property acquired by the wife during

00:31:37 – 00:31:43:	the marriage unless specified that it was for her own separate use went automatically to her husband.

00:31:43 – 00:31:48:	If a woman writer had a copyright before marriage, the copyright would pass to the husband afterwards,

00:31:48 – 00:31:53:	for instance. Further, a married woman was unable to draft a will or dispose of any property

00:31:53 – 00:31:59:	without her husband's consent. Now today, that sounds kind of terrible. It sounds

00:32:00 – 00:32:07:	it sounds diminutive. It sounds oppressive. But when viewed in the context of two becoming one

00:32:07 – 00:32:14:	flesh and the man being the head of the woman, that's basically a legal recognition of the order

00:32:14 – 00:32:21:	that God ordained. And I think that that's important because, again, as we're looking at these issues,

00:32:21 – 00:32:26:	we're a quarter way through the 21st century now. We're looking back through centuries of

00:32:26 – 00:32:32:	post-enlightenment thought. And so when we read and hear these things, they sound awful. They sound

00:32:32 – 00:32:41:	just alien and obscene and hateful. If you look at them from that day, what were they trying to do?

00:32:41 – 00:32:47:	They were trying to solve the problem of headship. How does the law, how does the left hand of Christ's

00:32:47 – 00:32:54:	kingdom deal with the created order that God has ordained? This was the solution under English

00:32:54 – 00:33:00:	Common Law to deal with that. I think it's kind of hard to find fall with it theologically. There

00:33:00 – 00:33:06:	were obviously some practical problems that sometimes cropped up. And one of the recurring

00:33:06 – 00:33:12:	themes that we'll find in this episode is that when you have things like abusive slave masters

00:33:12 – 00:33:20:	or abusive husbands, the solution of the revolutionary is to overthrow the institution

00:33:20 – 00:33:26:	that they see as embodying the abuse. Whereas the Christian approach, as we described in last

00:33:26 – 00:33:31:	week's episode about Scripture on Feminism and the week previous on slavery in Scripture,

00:33:32 – 00:33:37:	the Christian solution, the scriptural solution from God is not revolution. It's not overthrowing

00:33:38 – 00:33:43:	that headship. It is making the head accountable to God, in some cases through the state,

00:33:44 – 00:33:50:	for being faithful, for being obedient to God. Because masters also have a master in heaven.

00:33:50 – 00:33:57:	So if a master is cruelly and unjustly beating his slaves, the solution from a Christian perspective

00:33:57 – 00:34:03:	is not abolish slavery. The state should intervene so that that man stops abusing his property.

00:34:03 – 00:34:08:	Because although the slaves are property, they're also human beings. And they also may have

00:34:08 – 00:34:12:	protection under the law. That's entirely appropriate as a Christian for the Christian

00:34:12 – 00:34:19:	prince to intervene in the case of a faithless master or a faithless husband. So see, feminism

00:34:19 – 00:34:26:	sees through the Marxist lens of power dynamics, we have oppressor and oppressee, and we need to

00:34:26 – 00:34:31:	overthrow the class of the oppressor. The scriptural approach, as we've talked about in the last

00:34:31 – 00:34:35:	couple of weeks, is simply if someone is being cruel, if someone is doing something ungodly,

00:34:35 – 00:34:41:	he should stop doing it. If he's a Christian, and whether or not he's a Christian, the godly prince

00:34:41 – 00:34:46:	has a right and a duty to intervene to prevent that evil from happening. Because evil, sin,

00:34:47 – 00:34:52:	should be illegal. That's one of the problems we're having today as we're beginning to discuss

00:34:52 – 00:35:00:	Christian nationalism in a wider sphere is where do you draw the line between that which is sinful

00:35:00 – 00:35:05:	and that which is illegal? And maybe there are some cases where things that are sin should

00:35:05 – 00:35:11:	not be against the law under the civil law. However, they're not two separate questions.

00:35:11 – 00:35:16:	There's a reason that for thousands of years, the civil law was lined up pretty much directly with

00:35:17 – 00:35:24:	what God has said the law should be. And that wasn't just, that's not theonomy. That's not

00:35:25 – 00:35:32:	God being the direct overseer of a country. That's simply Christians in their spheres,

00:35:32 – 00:35:38:	in their vocations, obeying God. And if God says, do something, we should do it. And if you're a

00:35:38 – 00:35:43:	godly prince, you should do it. If you're a godly master or godly husband, you should do it. And

00:35:43 – 00:35:49:	if you don't, someone should intervene to prevent that. Except in the case of a godly prince, there's

00:35:49 – 00:35:54:	no one over a king except God. So that means he has the greatest answer for if he sins against

00:35:54 – 00:35:59:	his people. But ultimately, they are his people. And I mentioned the quote there,

00:35:59 – 00:36:05:	protection and influence of her husband, her baron, or her lord. I think that's important

00:36:05 – 00:36:12:	because it recognized that a woman always had a head. It's something that we lost in the revolutionary

00:36:12 – 00:36:18:	fervor of the Enlightenment in the Americas is that we cease to have barons and lords. I'm not

00:36:18 – 00:36:22:	necessarily bringing back that sort of class system, but I think it's important to recognize

00:36:22 – 00:36:31:	that when we declared no gods, no masters in 1775 and 76, when we said we will not have a king,

00:36:31 – 00:36:38:	we will not have anyone over us, it fundamentally changed the hierarchy that God had established.

00:36:38 – 00:36:44:	Because suddenly, when we became the Democratic Republic, we were choosing our own masters,

00:36:44 – 00:36:48:	our own rulers, and saying, well, you can't really rule. You have very limited things where you can

00:36:48 – 00:36:53:	do, and we're going to decide what you can do to us or not. And there can be discussion around

00:36:53 – 00:36:58:	where the lines are there, but I think it's important that when you eliminate the notion of

00:36:58 – 00:37:04:	subject, it really erases a lot of these distinctions. Because again, in England, the woman was a

00:37:04 – 00:37:09:	subject of their king, and she became a subject of her husband. But even without a husband,

00:37:09 – 00:37:15:	she was still subject to the king. And so when we hear subjugation, we think, oh no, it's evil.

00:37:15 – 00:37:21:	No, there's someone over you. There's always someone over you. As we said last week, all of these

00:37:21 – 00:37:27:	things, fight for feminism, the fight against slavery, is always fundamentally about knocking

00:37:27 – 00:37:34:	out that middle portion between the man and God. Because we are not ruled directly by God. We are

00:37:34 – 00:37:39:	ruled through intermediaries, through fathers, through husbands, through godly princes. That

00:37:39 – 00:37:45:	order is God's order. And so what these things do on their faces, not to say we won't overthrow God,

00:37:45 – 00:37:48:	although in private, they will say that. But in public, what they say is,

00:37:48 – 00:37:52:	we just want to knock out this middle support. I don't need to have a man over me. I don't need

00:37:52 – 00:37:57:	to have a master. I don't need to have a husband. I can do it myself. And what that does is it

00:37:57 – 00:38:02:	eliminates God from the chain, and you do become your own God and your own master. And again,

00:38:02 – 00:38:07:	we're living in the aftermath of those results. Some of them do go so far as to say they want

00:38:07 – 00:38:14:	to overthrow God, even in public. But I think you touched on an important truth there.

00:38:15 – 00:38:21:	There's a Christian solution, and there's an atheist or satanic solution to basically everything.

00:38:21 – 00:38:28:	And they follow a pattern. The Christian solution is, to put it in two words,

00:38:28 – 00:38:36:	reform and regulation. The atheist or satanic, the Marxist solution, these are all equivalent

00:38:36 – 00:38:43:	terms, is basically abolition. And it's always abolition, the solution to a handful of slave

00:38:43 – 00:38:49:	masters abusing their slaves, or we have to abolish slavery. The Christian solution is to say, no,

00:38:50 – 00:38:55:	we enact laws to regulate this, to reform the practices, to bring it in line with what Scripture

00:38:55 – 00:39:03:	says. And that runs throughout everything, we could apply that to the economy and society as well.

00:39:04 – 00:39:11:	Because you have, what's the most radical solution as it were to issues presented by

00:39:11 – 00:39:16:	problems in the economy? Well, that would be the hardcore Marxist or anarchist position,

00:39:16 – 00:39:22:	which is basically just abolish everything, get rid of it as much as you can, reduce property

00:39:22 – 00:39:28:	rights, eliminate property rights, etc. We all know what they actually advocate, regardless of

00:39:28 – 00:39:34:	how it may work in reality, as we've seen, for instance, with the USSR. But that's not the

00:39:34 – 00:39:38:	Christian solution. The Christian solution, when you see these problems in the economy,

00:39:38 – 00:39:46:	is say, we need reform, it needs to be regulated to control these sinful results of fallen human

00:39:46 – 00:39:53:	nature. You don't abolish the system, because imperfect fallen humans cannot use it perfectly.

00:39:53 – 00:39:57:	Of course, that's the case, we are all fallen, we're all sinful, we make mistakes, we sin,

00:39:58 – 00:40:01:	things are not going to go exactly according to plan.

00:40:02 – 00:40:07:	That's one of the reasons we have this sort of hierarchy. Yes, the hierarchy is innate,

00:40:07 – 00:40:11:	it is part of God's good ordering of creation, it would have existed without the fall,

00:40:11 – 00:40:16:	but now subsequent to the fall, one of the duties of those higher up in the hierarchy

00:40:16 – 00:40:23:	is to ensure that things below Him run properly, to curb the wicked, basically to use God's law

00:40:24 – 00:40:28:	in the three ways it is supposed to be used, although quite a bit of it is punishment when

00:40:28 – 00:40:34:	it comes to those ranked higher in the hierarchy in order to curb wickedness in society. But we

00:40:34 – 00:40:43:	also have that in society itself, in the social setting. The atheist solution to finding any

00:40:43 – 00:40:48:	sort of problem, and yes, of course, it is pretext in many cases, but finding any sort of problem

00:40:48 – 00:40:54:	in the inner relationship of men and women, or parents and children even, which is what

00:40:54 – 00:40:59:	we're getting into these days, is to get rid of those relationships, is to abolish them,

00:40:59 – 00:41:05:	is to radically reorient, reconfigure society so that you don't have this hierarchy, you don't

00:41:05 – 00:41:10:	have these relationships, you get rid of the power dynamics, and yes, even though Marxists

00:41:10 – 00:41:16:	are obsessed with the idea of power dynamics, power dynamics is a real thing. If you go stand

00:41:16 – 00:41:23:	before a prince, he has power over you. That is just the reality of it. And that holds today,

00:41:23 – 00:41:28:	if you are in court, the judge has power over you. And it doesn't actually matter if you're the one

00:41:28 – 00:41:32:	on trial or not. Yes, if you're on trial, he has more power over you. But if I appear in court as

00:41:32 – 00:41:36:	an attorney, that judge has power over me, he can hold me in contempt, he can throw me in jail.

00:41:37 – 00:41:42:	The power dynamics are real, those still exist, you cannot get rid of those. But the atheist

00:41:42 – 00:41:47:	solution is to attempt to get rid of those. The Christian solution is to reform them,

00:41:47 – 00:41:53:	to regulate them, to bring them in line with what God set up, how God ordered things,

00:41:53 – 00:41:59:	and what Scripture says. And yes, I'm sure some have heard in the background of this,

00:41:59 – 00:42:06:	the Echo of Seppur-Refumanda, and yes, that's a problem, we should not always be trying to reform,

00:42:07 – 00:42:12:	because if you bring something in line with Scripture and in line with God's law,

00:42:13 – 00:42:19:	you don't need to keep reforming it. That is not actually the cry of the Christian,

00:42:19 – 00:42:26:	is not Semper-Refumanda, that's not. That is the cry of the rebel, the cry of the radical.

00:42:26 – 00:42:33:	Because as you have undoubtedly been able to see, thus far and continuing as we continue this episode,

00:42:33 – 00:42:41:	with feminism, it is a ratchet. It is a constant attempt to continue rebelling against

00:42:41 – 00:42:46:	whatever little bit of God's order they find, whatever they find it, through constant revolution.

00:42:46 – 00:42:52:	And there's a distinction there. Revolutions are almost always wicked things that are meant to

00:42:52 – 00:42:59:	overthrow rightful order. Rebellions are not always so, because sometimes a rebellion can be

00:42:59 – 00:43:04:	against tyrannical authority that has become oppressive and contrary to God. And that's an

00:43:04 – 00:43:09:	episode we will eventually do. I don't know when, so I won't make any promises on that.

00:43:10 – 00:43:13:	But there's a distinction there that is important to maintain,

00:43:14 – 00:43:18:	revolution versus rebellion. And we're talking about really revolution here.

00:43:19 – 00:43:25:	Yes, it's rebellion in the sense of it is rebellion against God, which of course is always wicked.

00:43:25 – 00:43:31:	But there is in the political and social sphere a concept of rebellion that is not always wicked.

00:43:31 – 00:43:37:	And we'll be getting into more of the revolutions here as we move into the next bit of this,

00:43:37 – 00:43:45:	because we see the revolutions in Europe that follow on really from what happened in the U.S.

00:43:45 – 00:43:50:	in some ways, because you have the U.S. Revolution, you have the French Revolution, you have what many

00:43:50 – 00:43:54:	don't know, because it is no longer really taught in history class. You had revolutions

00:43:54 – 00:44:00:	throughout most of Western Europe and also in some parts of Eastern Europe in the 1800s.

00:44:01 – 00:44:05:	Some starting a little earlier like the French Revolution and obviously the American Revolution,

00:44:05 – 00:44:11:	but this was a wave of revolution that spread throughout Christendom. And the goal was the

00:44:11 – 00:44:19:	same throughout. No gods, no masters. It was a desire to destroy the right ordering of the

00:44:19 – 00:44:25:	left hand kingdom, of the kingdom of the left hand of Christ, and to destroy that hierarchy

00:44:25 – 00:44:31:	that God had instituted as part of His creation, as part of His good. And so that's what we get

00:44:31 – 00:44:37:	into now, because we see the consequences of that today, but this is where it started.

00:44:38 – 00:44:44:	And as I mentioned up front, that's literally one of the explicit descriptions of the Enlightenment,

00:44:44 – 00:44:48:	overthrowing monarchy, overthrowing the church. What do we find, both of those happening?

00:44:49 – 00:44:54:	And so after the American Revolution, after the drafting of the Declaration of Independence and

00:44:54 – 00:45:02:	the colonies becoming their own country, immediately Quaker agitators and some others began fighting

00:45:02 – 00:45:08:	for freedom for the slaves in the south. They wanted the abolition of slavery. They said,

00:45:08 – 00:45:13:	well, all men are created equal. We have these men who are not being treated as equal. We need

00:45:13 – 00:45:18:	to fix that. The Quakers wouldn't resort to violence, but many others resorted to violence.

00:45:18 – 00:45:23:	And so there was a lot of discussion in the first half of the 19th century and the 1800s

00:45:23 – 00:45:30:	in the United States about this. And this was where feminism coalesced in the U.S.

00:45:30 – 00:45:36:	And one of the seminal moments in feminism in the United States was the Seneca Falls Convention

00:45:36 – 00:45:42:	of 1848. This was the first women's rights convention. Now, the reason this is key is that

00:45:43 – 00:45:49:	they had a women's rights convention in parallel with the work that had been done

00:45:49 – 00:45:56:	by the abolitionists in the decades prior. And see, as I mentioned, these things are part and

00:45:56 – 00:46:02:	parcel. They're inextricable. The abolition of slavery and the so-called liberation of women

00:46:02 – 00:46:06:	have always been inextricably linked. You'll find out in the mouth of every feminist today,

00:46:06 – 00:46:11:	you'll see in all of the conversations about it, always link them because it's true.

00:46:12 – 00:46:16:	The reason that there was a Seneca Falls Convention in 1848, there was a women's

00:46:16 – 00:46:21:	rights convention, is they began to realize that maybe the fight for the abolition of slavery

00:46:21 – 00:46:29:	wasn't going to do women any good if they were not treated as their own specific constituency.

00:46:30 – 00:46:35:	And see, this flows from the salons and from the coffee houses as a participation began,

00:46:35 – 00:46:40:	as the agitation picked up from those conversations. Pretty soon, you have massive

00:46:40 – 00:46:49:	conventions where this issue of women's liberation is seminal. And 1848 is a crucial year. As Corey

00:46:49 – 00:46:56:	just mentioned, look up on Wikipedia, revolutions of 1848. There's an entire Wikipedia article

00:46:56 – 00:47:02:	just about all the revolutions that occurred in this year. In 1848, hell literally broke loose.

00:47:03 – 00:47:10:	It had been happening before, but the mask really came off in 1848. So the enlightenment

00:47:10 – 00:47:19:	lit the fuse, and here's where we see the first detonation. We see simultaneous to work for abolition.

00:47:19 – 00:47:26:	We see now explicit work for the liberation of women, for women's suffrage, for women's rights,

00:47:26 – 00:47:32:	for equal rights, for the abolition of coverture, of basically total equality. And then ultimately

00:47:32 – 00:47:38:	today, we have the usurpation of man entirely. The modern feminist goal is to have babies without

00:47:38 – 00:47:45:	men at all. And they're producing embryo where they've taken DNA from two eggs or from two

00:47:45 – 00:47:53:	female donors. So that's the transhumanist neck, the end of the beginning that we see in these

00:47:53 – 00:48:01:	smaller moves. And the Seneca Falls Convention was fuelled again by Quakers. And a woman who was

00:48:02 – 00:48:08:	seminal in all this, Elizabeth Cady Stanton. She was really one of the most important feminists

00:48:08 – 00:48:13:	in history. Susan B. Anthony kind of gets more pressed, but I think in reading about this and

00:48:13 – 00:48:21:	looking at the impact, I think Stan was probably more important. She gave rise to organizing this

00:48:21 – 00:48:28:	thing and to making a front burner issue in society. But what she said, even in the 1840s,

00:48:28 – 00:48:32:	as she was describing this, is really revealing. And it gets back to the point that we were talking

00:48:32 – 00:48:37:	about at the beginning about this being about scripture. When we're talking about feminism,

00:48:37 – 00:48:43:	we're not just talking about beating up on girls and saying, we want misogyny, we want subjugation.

00:48:43 – 00:48:49:	That's not the point. This is a theological problem. Listen to what is said about Elizabeth

00:48:49 – 00:48:55:	Cady Stanton. She said she had been terrified as a child by a minister's talk of damnation,

00:48:55 – 00:48:59:	but after overcoming those fears with the help of her father and brother-in-law,

00:48:59 – 00:49:03:	had rejected that type of religion entirely, meaning Christianity. So even as a child,

00:49:05 – 00:49:11:	in her young life, she rejected Christianity. As an adult, her religious views continued to evolve.

00:49:11 – 00:49:16:	While living in Boston in the 1840s, she was attracted to the preaching of Theodore Parker,

00:49:16 – 00:49:22:	who like her cousin, Garrett Smith, was a member of the Secret Six, a group of men who financed

00:49:22 – 00:49:28:	John Brown's raid on Harper's Ferry in an effort to spark an armed slave rebellion.

00:49:29 – 00:49:33:	So that was her cousin. That was her spiritual leader, their literal terrorists and anarchists,

00:49:34 – 00:49:42:	undertaking demonic activity to foment violent rebellion. This is her genesis as she's becoming

00:49:42 – 00:49:48:	an archfeminist. It continues, Parker was a transcendentalist and a prominent unitarian

00:49:48 – 00:49:53:	minister, which means completely not Christian, not remotely. What did he teach? He taught that the

00:49:53 – 00:50:00:	Bible need not be taken literally, that God need not be envisioned as a male, and the individual men

00:50:00 – 00:50:04:	and women had the ability to determine religious truth for themselves. So you can see why Stan

00:50:04 – 00:50:09:	would really like that, because that's everything she was looking for. She wanted no gods, no masters.

00:50:09 – 00:50:16:	She didn't want a god who was a man. She wanted to be her own god, and Parker gave it to her.

00:50:17 – 00:50:23:	Subsequent to that, in the Declaration of Sentiments written for the 1848 Seneca Falls Convention,

00:50:23 – 00:50:28:	Stanton listed a series of grievances against men who, among other things, excluded women from

00:50:28 – 00:50:34:	the ministry and other leading roles in religion. In one of those grievances, Stanton said that

00:50:34 – 00:50:41:	man, quote, has usurped the prerogative of Jehovah himself, claiming it as his right to assign for her

00:50:41 – 00:50:47:	a sphere of action when that belongs to her conscience and her god. This was the only grievance

00:50:47 – 00:50:53:	that was not a matter of fact, such as exclusion of women from colleges, from the right to vote, etc.,

00:50:53 – 00:50:59:	but one of belief, when the challenges a fundamental basis of authority and autonomy.

00:51:00 – 00:51:06:	So this is crucial. This proto-feminist, this harbinger of everything that has happened in

00:51:06 – 00:51:12:	the last two centuries and the advancement of so-called women's rights, why did she do it?

00:51:12 – 00:51:17:	She did it because she lied about women being made as a helper for men. She said, no, a woman

00:51:17 – 00:51:22:	will define her own role, and that's between her and her god, who clearly was not the god of the

00:51:22 – 00:51:30:	Bible. And she specifically attacked Christianity. She attacked Christian doctrine. She was for

00:51:30 – 00:51:35:	women's ordination, which was, again, a function and part of being shrouded by Quakers who were a

00:51:35 – 00:51:41:	demonic cult. It's tragic that we didn't stamp them out. When the first Quakers began coming to

00:51:41 – 00:51:47:	this country, to the Massachusetts Bay Colony, they started getting executed, and I think King

00:51:47 – 00:51:52:	Philip II actually put a stop to it, which is unfortunate, because if the Quakers had been

00:51:52 – 00:51:59:	ended by conversion or by godly justice, we wouldn't have these problems today. But instead,

00:51:59 – 00:52:04:	they were tolerated, because that was one of the values, even of those colonies. While they were

00:52:04 – 00:52:10:	Christian in principle, tolerance was already an enlightenment value that was being pushed into

00:52:10 – 00:52:15:	the hearts and minds of men to say, oh, I can judge your doctrine. That's between you and your god.

00:52:15 – 00:52:22:	Well, two centuries later, Stanton has her god telling her what to do, and we see the results.

00:52:23 – 00:52:29:	One of the major works produced by Stanton and a committee of other authors, which says something

00:52:29 – 00:52:35:	about committees perhaps, but was the Woman's Bible, which basically they went through and just

00:52:35 – 00:52:43:	rewrote the Bible in order to agree with feminist ideology. That was published in two volumes,

00:52:43 – 00:52:50:	and it is a wicked book. It is an inversion of what scripture teaches. It is an inversion

00:52:50 – 00:52:58:	of what God says is true. And that's just exactly what you expect from feminism, because feminism

00:52:58 – 00:53:04:	is an inversion of what God says is true, of what scripture actually teaches. As we went over in the

00:53:04 – 00:53:11:	first half of this two-part episode series, scripture is very clear. Again, woman was made

00:53:11 – 00:53:21:	as a helper for man. Any attempt to make woman a competitor and equal to man is rebellion against

00:53:21 – 00:53:30:	God, is wickedness, it is sin. And so we see that here in the beginning of the feminist movement

00:53:30 – 00:53:36:	in the US and elsewhere. As was mentioned, this is also involved in some of the revolutions that

00:53:36 – 00:53:43:	are going on at essentially the same time in Europe. Many of those who failed in the revolutions,

00:53:43 – 00:53:47:	because not all of those revolutions really got anywhere in Europe, some of them were crushed,

00:53:47 – 00:53:55:	although at great expense, in both terms of treasure and blood. Many of them came to the US

00:53:55 – 00:54:00:	and bolstered the feminist ranks here. And so that is part of the reason that we have such a

00:54:00 – 00:54:07:	concentration in the US. And of course, a lot of this took off after World War One. Some of this

00:54:07 – 00:54:14:	took off during the revolutions that took place in the 1700s, intensified in the 1800s, intensified

00:54:14 – 00:54:23:	again in the 1900s, for various reasons, we'll get into that in a moment. But it is worth highlighting

00:54:23 – 00:54:32:	again just how much interrelationship and how complex the web is when it comes to abolition

00:54:32 – 00:54:38:	and feminism and all of the issues that then float after that. They are part and parcel,

00:54:38 – 00:54:44:	they are the same thing, because they are both rebellion against God's good order.

00:54:45 – 00:54:52:	Scripture does not teach, as we went over in the episode on slavery, that slavery is sinful.

00:54:54 – 00:54:58:	You can exercise it in a sinful manner, you can exercise it in a perfectly Christian manner.

00:55:00 – 00:55:08:	The desire to abolish slavery is morally equivalent to feminism, because both

00:55:08 – 00:55:13:	are a rejection of the order that God has instituted in creation. They are ultimately

00:55:13 – 00:55:20:	a rejection of God. And so that is why you see so many of those who worked in or were associated

00:55:20 – 00:55:26:	with abolitionism transitioning right into feminism, and then the women's suffrage movement,

00:55:27 – 00:55:32:	and so-called women's rights, and then expanding the franchise ever more and more,

00:55:33 – 00:55:40:	because it never stops. As we have said many times, there is no floor. Sin can always get worse,

00:55:40 – 00:55:44:	it always snowballs, the slope is always slippery.

00:55:45 – 00:55:50:	One of the things that happened in the immediate aftermath of the Civil War,

00:55:51 – 00:55:55:	when the 13th, 14th, and then 15th Amendments were passed,

00:55:56 – 00:56:01:	Stanton and others were ticked, because they had hoped that the 15th Amendment,

00:56:01 – 00:56:07:	which basically granted citizenship and effectively voting rights to freed slaves,

00:56:08 – 00:56:15:	didn't include women. See, this was their plan all along. The feminism was trying to draft behind

00:56:15 – 00:56:21:	abolition, but it was all the same fight. And there's some choice quotes from Stanton when she

00:56:21 – 00:56:27:	realized that black men were going to get the vote and she wasn't. She went mask off and she's like,

00:56:27 – 00:56:31:	I'm not going to quote what she said here, but modern ears would be offended by the words that

00:56:31 – 00:56:37:	she used, because she wasn't doing it for them, she was doing it for herself. And so

00:56:37 – 00:56:41:	when African Americans were freed and given the franchise and she wasn't,

00:56:41 – 00:56:46:	she didn't see that as a victory for liberty. She was ticked off because she was still second class.

00:56:46 – 00:56:54:	And so in 1868, Stanton and Susan B. Anthony founded a paper that was short-lived called

00:56:54 – 00:57:00:	Surprise Surprise, The Revolution, where they began pushing for, well, if we didn't get it in

00:57:00 – 00:57:05:	the 15th Amendment, we got to fight and fight and fight until we achieve equality for women,

00:57:05 – 00:57:09:	which finally came in the 19th Amendment, a decade or so after her death.

00:57:10 – 00:57:16:	I think it's worth noting that when Stanton published the Women's Bible, that was in 1895.

00:57:16 – 00:57:22:	It was nearly 50 years after the Seneca Falls Convention. Now, although at the Seneca Falls

00:57:22 – 00:57:28:	Convention, she had already exposed that she was not a Christian, that she was hostile to God.

00:57:28 – 00:57:34:	It was only in the latter years of her life when she felt she had nothing to lose, that she really

00:57:34 – 00:57:39:	went fully mask off under the degree to which she specifically hated Christianity. And it caused

00:57:39 – 00:57:46:	a huge rift in the feminist movement of that day because she was actually denounced by her own

00:57:46 – 00:57:52:	organization and her close lifelong friend Susan B. Anthony fought against the organization for

00:57:52 – 00:57:57:	the sake of her honor. But ultimately, they didn't narrowly pass a condemnation of what she said.

00:57:59 – 00:58:03:	What she and the other editors in the Women's Bible did was to methodically work their way

00:58:03 – 00:58:07:	through it, quoting selected passages and commenting on them, office sarcastically.

00:58:09 – 00:58:14:	One of the things that she had told an acquaintance in response to her views,

00:58:14 – 00:58:21:	well, if we who do see the absurdities of this old superstitions never unveil them to others,

00:58:21 – 00:58:26:	how is the world to make any progress in the theologies? I am in the sunset of life,

00:58:26 – 00:58:30:	and I feel to me my special mission to tell people what they are not prepared to hear.

00:58:30 – 00:58:36:	So she knew that she had nothing to lose. She knew that her enemy was God in Christianity,

00:58:36 – 00:58:42:	and she revised this wicked Bible for the sake of trying to tear gun down God and the God of

00:58:42 – 00:58:48:	Christianity. And she explains why in the book itself, I do not believe that any man ever saw

00:58:48 – 00:58:53:	or talked to God. I do not believe that God inspired the mosaic code or told the historians

00:58:53 – 00:58:58:	what they say he did about woman for all the religions on the faiths of earth degrade her.

00:58:58 – 00:59:04:	And so long as woman accepts the position that they assign her, her emancipation is impossible.

00:59:05 – 00:59:10:	That's it in a nutshell. She's absolutely right. As long as you accept Christianity,

00:59:10 – 00:59:14:	the emancipation of women is impossible. She knew what battle she was fighting,

00:59:14 – 00:59:18:	and she knew what master she was serving. So what her words are absolutely true here.

00:59:18 – 00:59:24:	What they are not is Christian. They're absolutely contrary to Christian doctrine and Scripture.

00:59:24 – 00:59:29:	So what does that have to do with us today? Well, this is the genesis of voting rights for women.

00:59:29 – 00:59:35:	This is it. This is the woman that gave you, as a woman, the so-called right to vote. You

00:59:35 – 00:59:41:	now have the franchise, both in public life universally and in our churches now, since really

00:59:41 – 00:59:49:	the 60s. Virtually every church now permits women to vote on matters in the church. All of that is

00:59:49 – 00:59:55:	the genesis born of a woman who hated God and devoted her life to overthrowing his order.

59:55 – 01:00:00
You want to talk about the genealogy of ideas? You want to talk about the fruit of trees?

01:00:00 – 01:00:07:	This is the tree. Stanton is the tree. And all the things that we have today that we take as

01:00:07 – 01:00:12:	personal rights, as things that are sacrosanct, those are the fruits. Those are the fruits of

01:00:12 – 01:00:20:	a demonic tree. Stanton is burning in hell. And her life's work lives on today by people who think

01:00:20 – 01:00:25:	that when they hear these things, when they hear what she did, they think that she did it in service

01:00:25 – 01:00:31:	to God. And I pray for those people that they don't mean service to their God, because if they go

01:00:31 – 01:00:36:	down that path and are fully committed to it, what they are saying is that their God is not the

01:00:36 – 01:00:44:	triune God, because her God was Satan. She devoted her life to a satanic pursuit of overthrowing

01:00:44 – 01:00:51:	all hierarchy and direct opposition to God. So why are we talking about feminism? This is why

01:00:51 – 01:00:59:	feminism was born of satanic worship. It was born as a doctrine of demons. It's inextricable,

01:00:59 – 01:01:02:	and this is the only first way of feminism. We're not even talking about later generations yet.

01:01:02 – 01:01:06:	We're not going to spend a whole lot of time on those, because it's more recent history that you

01:01:06 – 01:01:12:	know better, but it kept getting worse because of where it started. There's not one single moment

01:01:12 – 01:01:21:	of any of this with her Unitarian Universalist pastor and her anarchist demon cousin trying to

01:01:21 – 01:01:26:	foment violent rebellion and murder. These are the trees from which the fruits of these beliefs

01:01:26 – 01:01:31:	came. They did not come from Scripture. That's why we devoted the first episode about feminism,

01:01:31 – 01:01:36:	specifically to Scripture, to demonstrate here's what God says. It's literally the opposite of

01:01:36 – 01:01:42:	everything that these people are doing. So today, when we hear feminism in any of its forms upheld

01:01:42 – 01:01:47:	to something godly, that's something that's found in Scripture by men today, they're lying.

01:01:47 – 01:01:52:	They're absolutely lying. Demons found this in hell, and they brought it to man, and man brought

01:01:52 – 01:01:57:	it to church, and church is now shoving it down the throats of Christians, who if they swallow it

01:01:57 – 01:02:01:	will ultimately cease to be Christian. These are the stakes for these conversations.

01:02:02 – 01:02:10:	We see this sort of argument going back to the more blunt rejection of Christianity,

01:02:10 – 01:02:15:	of Scripture, versus the supposedly moderate forces that didn't want to reject those things

01:02:16 – 01:02:23:	yet, which of course that is the key. But we see a form of this all the time, and it's basically a

01:02:23 – 01:02:28:	rough form of the Mott and Bailey argument. For those who aren't familiar, the Mott and Bailey

01:02:28 – 01:02:34:	Castle is a type of European fortification where you have what is called a Mott. It is a keep on

01:02:34 – 01:02:39:	a hill, a raised area, and then you have a walled area below that that is the Bailey. The Bailey

01:02:39 – 01:02:45:	is where you have your little town. So if you are attacked, you retreat to the Mott because it is

01:02:45 – 01:02:52:	more defensible. And the reason that that's used is because that's exactly how the argument goes.

01:02:52 – 01:02:58:	The Mott and Bailey fallacy is this. You make a wild claim, or an indefensible claim, that's the

01:02:58 – 01:03:05:	Bailey. And then when someone points out that you made a wild and indefensible claim, you retreat

01:03:05 – 01:03:11:	to a moderate, reasonable defensible version of that claim, doesn't even have to be that directly

01:03:11 – 01:03:16:	related just as long as you can kind of make the argument that may be related, you retreat to the

01:03:16 – 01:03:22:	Mott. And then as soon as the threat passes because, well, you've defended yourself in the Mott,

01:03:22 – 01:03:26:	you return to the Bailey and make the same argument. And we see a form of that

01:03:27 – 01:03:32:	with many Christians today, including many pastors, where they'll say, well, obviously,

01:03:33 – 01:03:38:	we can't worship demons. Well, that's the Mott. That's the absolutely defensible position. No

01:03:38 – 01:03:45:	one is going to say, well, no, no, you can't worship demons. But then they go down to the Bailey

01:03:45 – 01:03:49:	after the threat has passed and say, but of course, we can have women voting in our congregations,

01:03:50 – 01:03:55:	and we can have women exercising political rights outside the home, and we can have

01:03:56 – 01:04:07:	ABC through Z. That's not how it works, because Satan is the camel that sticks its nose under your

01:04:07 – 01:04:14:	tent flap. If you don't stop it, then you wake up with the entire camel in the tent with you.

01:04:15 – 01:04:22:	And that is where we are today. So we get attacked by pastors and others when we point out

01:04:22 – 01:04:28:	these stark black and white lines in Scripture, where it says, no, you may not do this,

01:04:29 – 01:04:37:	because the entirety of our cultural inertia is against these arguments, because we have,

01:04:37 – 01:04:42:	for centuries, not been listening to the Word of God, not been listening to Scripture. We have

01:04:42 – 01:04:47:	been listening to Satan filtered through these various agents, some of whom we've named.

01:04:48 – 01:04:56:	And so they'll say this seemingly reasonable position, and then as soon as they're subjected

01:04:56 – 01:05:01:	to Scripture, they retreat to the Mott and make an argument that is in line with Scripture.

01:05:02 – 01:05:07:	And they'll say, well, we believe the gospel. No one is attacking the gospel. That's not the

01:05:07 – 01:05:13:	point. That's not what we're focusing on with this podcast. And so some of the critiques will be,

01:05:13 – 01:05:19:	where's the gospel and what you're saying? We affirm the gospel. The issue is, as a Christian,

01:05:20 – 01:05:26:	once you are a Christian, then what do you do? It's not a matter of just saying,

01:05:26 – 01:05:31:	I believe in Jesus, I'm over the line, I'm safe. No, because there is more to the Christian life.

01:05:31 – 01:05:37:	James is a book written to Christians. There are supposed to be works that flow from being a

01:05:37 – 01:05:42:	Christian. And part of that is listening to the Word of God, because Christians have the

01:05:42 – 01:05:47:	indwelling of the Holy Spirit. And when they read the Word of God, when they hear the Word of God,

01:05:47 – 01:05:51:	they understand it. That's not saying you'll understand everything. There are parts that are

01:05:51 – 01:05:57:	difficult to work through. And God gives differing abilities to different people. But the core

01:05:58 – 01:06:04:	truths of the Christian faith, you will understand when you hear them. You will understand truth

01:06:04 – 01:06:10:	when it is spoken to you from the Word of God, if you are a Christian. And that is the point.

01:06:11 – 01:06:15:	These are things that are in Scripture. And we as Christians have to obey them. We have

01:06:15 – 01:06:20:	to listen to them, because they are the voice of God speaking to us, telling us how we should

01:06:20 – 01:06:27:	conduct ourselves. And so when God says that a woman is a helper, if society says that woman

01:06:27 – 01:06:32:	can be a competitor, you have to choose as a Christian. Are you going to listen to God,

01:06:32 – 01:06:39:	or are you going to listen to society? When Scripture says that woman has a head, and that

01:06:39 – 01:06:47:	head is man, and society says no women can vote, including in your churches, are you going to

01:06:47 – 01:06:53:	listen to society, or are you going to listen to God? As a Christian, you have to choose. And as a

01:06:53 – 01:06:57:	Christian, there's only one option, because if you choose the other one, you cease to be Christian.

01:06:59 – 01:07:05:	And so that is what we see today in so many interactions with Christians, is that they will

01:07:05 – 01:07:13:	make a completely reasonable argument, the mott, something that is just a core truth and Christianity

01:07:13 – 01:07:17:	with which no Christian can disagree. And then they'll say, well, because of that,

01:07:17 – 01:07:21:	and they go right to the Bailey to something that is completely indefensible and insane.

01:07:22 – 01:07:26:	And so it's, well, you believe the gospel, right? Well, that means you have to get rid

01:07:26 – 01:07:32:	of your slaves. Well, you believe the gospel, right? That means you have to let your daughters

01:07:32 – 01:07:37:	go to university and do all the things we know that young women do at university.

01:07:38 – 01:07:45:	The Bailey doesn't follow from the mott. Do not fall for it when you see that argument made,

01:07:45 – 01:07:51:	when you see that form of argument advanced. You can affirm what is said as the mott,

01:07:51 – 01:07:58:	as the keep, the core truth, but do not let it distract you and do not let it mislead you

01:07:58 – 01:08:03:	when the wild claim is made after it that does not follow that is not Christian.

01:08:04 – 01:08:07:	And that's what we see happening here with the issue of feminism.

01:08:09 – 01:08:13:	Except, of course, there is a slightly tweaked version of this, which is what we see with

01:08:13 – 01:08:18:	Stanton and others, where they just go ahead and make the wildest claim right up front. Yeah,

01:08:18 – 01:08:24:	I don't believe in God, and scripture is wicked, and you shouldn't obey it. And instead, no gods,

01:08:24 – 01:08:32:	no masters. Usually, you will have a moderating force within any of these revolutionary groups

01:08:33 – 01:08:40:	that will try to get the bulk of people, the reasonable, the, well, somewhat reasonable people

01:08:40 – 01:08:44:	to come along with them by saying, Oh, don't don't pay attention to that person in the corner.

01:08:44 – 01:08:50:	She's crazy. The problem is the person in the corner screaming in these revolutionary groups

01:08:50 – 01:08:55:	is usually the person who's leading it realistically, because that's the person who is speaking with the

01:08:55 – 01:09:01:	unfiltered mouth of Satan, the person who is speaking Satan's voice. And Satan is the one

01:09:01 – 01:09:09:	leading the revolutionary group. And so you go from the supposedly reasonable people who say,

01:09:09 – 01:09:15:	no, we don't want to abolish Christendom and order and hierarchy in the family. We just want to make

01:09:15 – 01:09:21:	these tweaks to them. Well, if those tweaks are contrary to scripture, you eventually wind up

01:09:21 – 01:09:26:	with the screaming person in the corner, the actual possessed person in some cases,

01:09:27 – 01:09:32:	because that's the goal. That's where Satan is taking you. Even if you don't see where you're

01:09:32 – 01:09:39:	going, if you look around and the way is broad and easy, you are probably not on the straight and

01:09:39 – 01:09:48:	narrow. The incredible result of first wave feminism as it came to a close, shortly after World War

01:09:48 – 01:09:57:	One, was that in the span of about five years between the 1917, 1918 and 1922 or 23, virtually

01:09:57 – 01:10:03:	every country on both sides of the Atlantic almost simultaneously adopted universal women's

01:10:03 – 01:10:07:	suffrage. Now, that's astonishing to think about. When you think about the disparity in

01:10:08 – 01:10:17:	history and culture, in political governance, almost all at once in the immediate aftermath of

01:10:17 – 01:10:23:	World War One, you have the culmination of one of the principal goals of the Enlightenment.

01:10:23 – 01:10:30:	No gods, no masters, instead democracy. Not only democracy where it's one vote per household,

01:10:30 – 01:10:38:	but where women can also vote. This is crucial in American history because there are a great many

01:10:38 – 01:10:46:	things that in the United States politically, policy-wise, they fundamentally pivot as soon as

01:10:46 – 01:10:53:	the 19th Amendment is passed. As I said last week, if at the time of the ratification of the 19th

01:10:53 – 01:10:59:	Amendment, women had had the vote, it would not have passed. Women were not in favor of it. It was

01:10:59 – 01:11:05:	not the majority opinion of women to be subjected to the political sphere because most of them were

01:11:05 – 01:11:10:	Christian women. They knew better. They knew that it wasn't their place. They knew it was a burden.

01:11:10 – 01:11:14:	When we say not their place, we don't mean, oh, you go over there, you don't know what you're

01:11:14 – 01:11:21:	talking about, just be quiet and knit. We mean that these things are ugly. They're painful. They're

01:11:21 – 01:11:27:	fights. They're actual fights that sometimes involve political violence. That is not the

01:11:27 – 01:11:34:	place for a woman. Shouting matches in public are not a place for a woman. In politics, sometimes

01:11:34 – 01:11:39:	those things happen anyway. That is the reason that women generally wanted no pardon. They

01:11:39 – 01:11:43:	didn't want to know. They didn't want to be burdened with it. They didn't want to have to deal with

01:11:43 – 01:11:49:	it. They knew that it stunk. They didn't want any pardon in it. It was foisted on them. Then,

01:11:49 – 01:11:53:	at that point, it becomes a numbers game because, well, your neighbor down the street, you don't

01:11:53 – 01:11:58:	really like her views on things. Even though you don't really want to vote, you better go do it

01:11:58 – 01:12:05:	because otherwise you've got to counter her vote. Getting back to the coverture thing towards the

01:12:05 – 01:12:13:	beginning, one of the essential things that's lost today when we think about the woman and her

01:12:13 – 01:12:20:	husband becoming legally one is that the voice of the household was the husband's voice. He was

01:12:20 – 01:12:27:	the head. He had the mouth. Insofar as voting is good at all, the husband voted on behalf of his

01:12:27 – 01:12:33:	household. Why would anyone in his household disagree with him if he is a good and faithful

01:12:33 – 01:12:38:	husband and father? There should be no circumstance under which those under his care and protection

01:12:38 – 01:12:43:	would vote differently than him if they could vote. But once the franchise was given,

01:12:43 – 01:12:49:	it became a numbers game. It also became an opportunity for opposition to occur between

01:12:49 – 01:12:56:	man and wife. Today, it's pretty normal in a lot of marriages for husbands and wives to know who

01:12:56 – 01:13:00:	the other one voted for, but not to talk about it because you know in many cases, you're actually

01:13:00 – 01:13:04:	canceling each other's votes out. Now, in a good marriage, that's not the case, but in a lot of

01:13:04 – 01:13:09:	marriages, that is the case. You know better than to ask her who she voted for because you know

01:13:10 – 01:13:16:	she canceled your vote out. What's the win there? What is the point of that? There's an undermining

01:13:16 – 01:13:22:	of your headship. There is a nullification of your vote. The whole thing is just preposterous.

01:13:22 – 01:13:28:	At some point, it just becomes theater, but it's not mindless, meaningless theater. It's

01:13:28 – 01:13:35:	theatrical performance at the polling booth, but the voting engenders is fundamentally one of

01:13:35 – 01:13:42:	rebellion and independence, which is not permissible for anyone. To be frank, I don't think men should

01:13:42 – 01:13:46:	be allowed to vote, and if any men should vote, I don't think I should be allowed to vote. I don't

01:13:46 – 01:13:52:	have children. I don't think men without a household should have the franchise. I'd be fine with that.

01:13:53 – 01:13:58:	Am I worth listening to? Well, I think so, and some people do, but if you don't listen to me,

01:13:58 – 01:14:03:	that's fine. I don't think that my voting needs to be, I don't think it's sacrosanct. I don't think

01:14:03 – 01:14:09:	it fundamentally changes anything about my participation in society. When we talk about

01:14:09 – 01:14:14:	saying that women shouldn't vote, Cory and I are not trying to exclude women. We both think that

01:14:14 – 01:14:19:	there should be monarchy, that there should be a godly king, and there should be hierarchy and

01:14:19 – 01:14:25:	order. There are intermediary steps to get there, but voting is not something that we find to be

01:14:25 – 01:14:33:	sacrosanct. It's certainly something that's alien to the Christian faith. Even when they chose

01:14:33 – 01:14:40:	the replacement for Judas, they cast lots. They trusted the Holy Spirit to guide the casting

01:14:40 – 01:14:46:	of dice, basically, and that was how they decided. They let God decide. They trusted that the outcome

01:14:46 – 01:14:52:	of that sign would be God's will, and it was. I think that that would be a better

01:14:52 – 01:14:56:	form of church governance than what we have today. I would much rather see congregations,

01:14:56 – 01:15:00:	if there's something to vote on, that isn't a matter of doctrine, which obviously shouldn't

01:15:00 – 01:15:06:	be voted on anyway. I would rather see voting by lot, if there's to be voting at all. I'm not

01:15:06 – 01:15:11:	saying that absolutely has to be done, but again, we're just trying to point out that these modern,

01:15:11 – 01:15:18:	particularly American notions of what is, we now view as religious. The Declaration of

01:15:18 – 01:15:23:	Independence gets quoted by pastors as though it's doctrinal. It's happened in the Missouri Synod

01:15:23 – 01:15:27:	from the very top, where the Declaration of Independence is used to make theological points.

01:15:28 – 01:15:33:	When Harrison did that, he was making a theological point. It was a false prophet. He was making a

01:15:33 – 01:15:38:	point on behalf of a theology that comes from hell. The Declaration of Independence, there's

01:15:38 – 01:15:44:	some good things, and I've quoted it here before. There's some things about enduring a long train

01:15:44 – 01:15:49:	of usurpations, even though they have been an ultimate goal, because it's better to suffer

01:15:50 – 01:15:56:	while there's a chance that forbearance may be rewarded than to have a rebellion, because even

01:15:56 – 01:16:01:	when it's a golly rebellion, it's still going to be awful. Christian men never want to see rebellion.

01:16:01 – 01:16:07:	That's not what we see in abolition. It's not what we see in feminism. They constantly want to see

01:16:07 – 01:16:16:	rebellion against all order. First Wave Feminism terminates with everyone getting the vote, and

01:16:16 – 01:16:21:	the 20th century, all of its politics were defined by that moment, because with the ratification of

01:16:21 – 01:16:27:	the 19th, where women got the vote, and in every other society, it fundamentally changed the nature

01:16:27 – 01:16:35:	of politics, because suddenly the woman's gift to be a manager of her household, where peace and

01:16:35 – 01:16:41:	accord are paramount, was superimposed on a world where that's not how it works. In the world,

01:16:41 – 01:16:48:	there's scarcity. In the world, there's violence, and there are threats. The man's job in a household

01:16:48 – 01:16:55:	is to keep those threats outside the house to keep them at bay. Politics is fundamentally adversarial,

01:16:56 – 01:17:01:	sometimes between nations themselves, sometimes internally, but there are often fights.

01:17:01 – 01:17:06:	Women are not equipped for those fights. The 20th century history of politics is defined by

01:17:07 – 01:17:12:	women reshaping politics in the image of how they want to see the household run.

01:17:13 – 01:17:17:	Many of the problems that we have today are because women are conflict-averse. Today,

01:17:17 – 01:17:23:	we have men who are almost universally conflict-averse. I have tried to have discussions, honest

01:17:23 – 01:17:29:	discussions with men face to face, where they flatly refuse to speak to me, because the alternative

01:17:29 – 01:17:34:	is to disagree. I'm not talking about picking a fight. I'm not saying I want to have an argument.

01:17:34 – 01:17:38:	I just want to discuss a matter where there's a disagreement between two men,

01:17:38 – 01:17:44:	and the other man is terrified to actually disagree with me. Such men are eunuchs. There's

01:17:44 – 01:17:50:	another word for it. That is a castrated man that cannot stand in front of someone and defend his

01:17:50 – 01:17:55:	position. Again, we're not talking about being confrontational. We're not talking about a knock

01:17:55 – 01:18:00:	down drag-out argument. The idea that two people could disagree about something and then discuss

01:18:00 – 01:18:06:	it civilly is something that women don't want. They would rather have peace, even if it means

01:18:07 – 01:18:11:	chopping off legs and just making everyone the same height and silencing anything that's going

01:18:11 – 01:18:19:	to cause discord. In the home, some of that can work in some cases. Societally, civilizationally,

01:18:19 – 01:18:26:	at large, it is guaranteed to cause evil outcomes. Giving women the vote wasn't simply a matter of

01:18:26 – 01:18:31:	doubling the number of voters. You needed more ballots. It fundamentally changed forever the

01:18:31 – 01:18:36:	nature of the appeals made by politicians and the nature of what was being voted on and what

01:18:36 – 01:18:42:	the ultimate outcomes would be. We see that today in American politics, where you look at

01:18:42 – 01:18:47:	if only men voted versus only women voted, you have diametrically opposed outcomes in the

01:18:47 – 01:18:55:	presidential elections. That is a profound statement. It's a theological statement. There's

01:18:55 – 01:19:02:	no way in which a society can work where men and women are so diametrically opposed. The only

01:19:02 – 01:19:07:	solution for that, the only godly solution, is for women to return to their proper sphere in the home.

01:19:09 – 01:19:13:	Repeatedly, as I quoted some of these things, the claim is made by the feminists that men

01:19:13 – 01:19:19:	created these spheres. We did an entire episode. We did 105 minutes about how God ordained these

01:19:19 – 01:19:26:	spheres for us. The woman's household and the man's household are internal and external. He rules,

01:19:26 – 01:19:31:	but she governs within it. He deals with the outside matters and the inside when he needs to,

01:19:31 – 01:19:36:	and the rest of the time, that's her domain, not to his exclusion, but as his helper.

01:19:36 – 01:19:42:	Everything that's happened in the feminist world is an inversion and a subversion of that,

01:19:42 – 01:19:46:	to the point that now men are afraid to do their jobs, and women don't even know what

01:19:46 – 01:19:50:	their jobs are. They're just going to do everything, and no one will stop them. When a man does stand

01:19:50 – 01:19:55:	up and say, actually, scripture says we should do the opposite, maybe we should take that seriously,

01:19:55 – 01:20:00:	those men are punished in the most harsh means imaginable, because such a man is a threat

01:20:00 – 01:20:07:	to the prince of this world. Following on from first wave feminism is, of course,

01:20:07 – 01:20:13:	second wave feminism, which is really the genesis of a lot of the evils we see today.

01:20:14 – 01:20:20:	Yes, you need that superstructure into which to slot these things, because a lot of these

01:20:20 – 01:20:30:	things were pushed through political means, but the proximate genesis, the start of these evils

01:20:30 – 01:20:37:	that are now bearing their ultimate fruit today in what is called fourth wave feminism,

01:20:37 – 01:20:44:	start in the 60s and the 80s with second wave feminism. Whereas first wave feminism focused

01:20:44 – 01:20:50:	largely on so-called political issues, although, yes, it followed on from the

01:20:50 – 01:20:57:	political slash social issue of abolitionism, second wave feminism really focuses on the

01:20:57 – 01:21:06:	social issues. And that becomes family dynamics, the relationship of man and woman, the domesticity

01:21:06 – 01:21:11:	of woman, reproduction rights so-called, woman's participation in the workforce,

01:21:12 – 01:21:18:	and the structuring of the family and, of course, because this is always one of Satan's goals with

01:21:18 – 01:21:25:	feminism in whatever form and wherever it crops up, human sexuality becomes one of the major issues,

01:21:25 – 01:21:28:	and that, of course, is what leads to birth control and abortion.

01:21:29 – 01:21:36:	And this dichotomy is important because the second wave feminism, the subsequent generations,

01:21:36 – 01:21:41:	basically what happened, you had first wave feminism sort of firing up in the 1840s or

01:21:41 – 01:21:48:	50s and carrying on through the ratification of the 19th Amendment. By the 20s, there wasn't

01:21:48 – 01:21:53:	really anything left for them to do. And so there was this weird lull between the generations where

01:21:53 – 01:21:59:	they had one political power. They had one, basically the man's power outside of the home

01:21:59 – 01:22:05:	to vote. And that was their initial goal to get them as first order participants in political

01:22:05 – 01:22:12:	society. Then there was a lull of 30 years or so where there wasn't much more for them to do.

01:22:12 – 01:22:18:	And it was very interesting because today, one of the punchlines for second and third wave feminism

01:22:18 – 01:22:26:	is the June Cleaver 1950s homemaker. You'll hear the 50s come up over and over again from modern

01:22:26 – 01:22:35:	feminists as the pinnacle of patriarchal repression. What's fascinating about that, I, for researching

01:22:35 – 01:22:42:	for this episode, I listened to several hours of feminists on YouTube. You can pray for my

01:22:42 – 01:22:49:	soul for having to endure that. But I found it to be fascinating because they're very open about

01:22:49 – 01:22:55:	what they did. And one of the things, but one of the things they lie about, it just as Stanton and

01:22:55 – 01:23:02:	the others lied about man creating the sphere of the home and the household for women. Today,

01:23:02 – 01:23:07:	the feminist lie is that man really repeated the same thing, created that sphere of the household

01:23:07 – 01:23:13:	for women. And the 50s was when that was invented. That's really fundamentally what they,

01:23:14 – 01:23:18:	I think some of them believe it. I think they think the history didn't exist before that

01:23:18 – 01:23:23:	because what happened in the 50s is the same thing that happened in the 40s and the 30s and 20s.

01:23:23 – 01:23:29:	And it always happened in Christian societies. Women were homemakers. In the 50s, they were

01:23:30 – 01:23:39:	beginning to be exposed more to public media, to TV. The TV was just sort of nascent at that

01:23:39 – 01:23:45:	point. But radio and many magazines specifically focusing on women for the sake of propagandizing

01:23:45 – 01:23:54:	them. And so there became a home ingenuity of dress and of the use of makeup and hair. And

01:23:54 – 01:24:00:	that's the version of the 50s woman that is really despised by the feminist today. It's also

01:24:00 – 01:24:10:	what's held up today on the right hand political sphere as sort of trad. It's a straw man almost

01:24:10 – 01:24:16:	as being held up by both sides where on the right, you'll have them saying the 50s woman in the

01:24:16 – 01:24:21:	traditional dress that's knee length and she has her hair done up and she has a drink ready for her

01:24:21 – 01:24:26:	husband when he comes home. The right says that's trad. That's exactly what should have always been.

01:24:26 – 01:24:30:	And the left says that's horrible. That's patriarchy. That's the worst possible form

01:24:30 – 01:24:37:	of human society. Both of them are missing the point that that wasn't unusual except for the mass

01:24:37 – 01:24:43:	media influence on how they all sort of behaved in similar ways. And of course, that was also a

01:24:43 – 01:24:48:	function of wealth because there were very poor people in those days who had none of that because

01:24:48 – 01:24:56:	they were poor. My mom's family in Appalachia had none of that. They literally lived on dirt

01:24:56 – 01:25:02:	floors. They did not have the cocktail waiting for my drunken grandfather when he came home with

01:25:02 – 01:25:10:	a belt. However, as something that's being held up as an example of either love or hate,

01:25:10 – 01:25:16:	it's really an anachronistic view of what happened because that was just the first time the mass

01:25:16 – 01:25:22:	media was encompassing that life for us all to see today. So we have lots of pictures and drawings

01:25:22 – 01:25:27:	and ads showing that and they're visually appealing and so everyone wants to latch on to it. But

01:25:28 – 01:25:36:	the reason that the second wave of feminism got riled up was that they started realizing that

01:25:38 – 01:25:45:	the revolution wasn't over. And as it wound up in the 60s, again with revolutions worldwide,

01:25:45 – 01:25:52:	you have communist revolutions sweeping the European continent just as you had revolutions in

01:25:52 – 01:26:02:	1848 and 1913, 1415 with World War I, we again have this paroxysm of revolution, violent revolution

01:26:02 – 01:26:07:	in other places. And there was violence here as well. The 60s were marked by radical violence.

01:26:07 – 01:26:13:	It's beyond even what we've seen in recent history today. That's going to change, but it's the same

01:26:13 – 01:26:18:	spirit. It's a revolution that comes back again and again. The second wave of feminism said,

01:26:18 – 01:26:23:	well, we got the vote, but as Cory as you just said, what about the household? What about June

01:26:23 – 01:26:29:	Cleaver? We need to liberate her. It's not enough that June can vote. She needs to put down the cocktail

01:26:29 – 01:26:34:	glass for her husband. She needs to let down her hair and burn her bra and take off that dress and

01:26:34 – 01:26:40:	put on some pants and leave the house and go do what she wants to do. So the spheres are important

01:26:40 – 01:26:47:	in their dialectic because that's what they need to destroy. First, the man's sphere outside the

01:26:47 – 01:26:52:	home, and then the woman's sphere inside the home, both being destroyed and inverted simultaneously

01:26:52 – 01:26:59:	such that nothing can remain. You can never have the June Cleaver version of the woman again.

01:27:01 – 01:27:04:	It's something that the right holds up as a model and the left holds up as

01:27:05 – 01:27:11:	basically the woman version of Hitler. Nothing could possibly be worse than that sort of woman

01:27:11 – 01:27:15:	who actually cares about looking good for her husband. So it's a punchline because I don't

01:27:15 – 01:27:21:	want you to return to that, but it's not just a return to that. It's a return to the faithfulness

01:27:21 – 01:27:24:	that those women were still trying to maintain because even though there had been a lot of

01:27:24 – 01:27:30:	worldliness in the intervening decades after women's suffrage, they were still by and large

01:27:30 – 01:27:37:	not working outside the home. They were still fundamentally domestic, and the second wave

01:27:37 – 01:27:41:	was designed to overthrow domesticity because that is how you get women out of the home,

01:27:41 – 01:27:47:	and it's how you burn bras and burn veils and put them on the birth control pill. And as you said,

01:27:47 – 01:27:52:	Cory, then you get the sexual revolution because when she leaves a supervision of her household,

01:27:52 – 01:27:58:	whether it's her father or her husband, suddenly there's no one supervising her. And if she can't

01:27:58 – 01:28:06:	get pregnant, she can do whatever she wants. She can be sexually liberated, which was one of the

01:28:06 – 01:28:11:	ultimate goals of all of this, eliminating dependence financially and eliminating dependence in terms

01:28:11 – 01:28:17:	of headship and then eliminating any sort of headship at all, eliminating the idea that a woman

01:28:17 – 01:28:22:	would be told by a man what to do or what not to do to the point that today when we say that

01:28:23 – 01:28:28:	maybe it's actually scriptural that a man would tell a woman what to do or what not to do if he's

01:28:28 – 01:28:32:	her head, not saying that I can go around telling women what to do if I don't know them, if she's

01:28:32 – 01:28:37:	not my relative, it's not my business. It is, however, the state's business, which is my Christian

01:28:37 – 01:28:43:	nationalism is important. See, these hierarchies still need to exist, and feminism is ensured that

01:28:43 – 01:28:49:	we chip away one layer after another until nothing can exist between unfettered man and all of his

01:28:49 – 01:28:55:	wildest desires. That's what Satan promised in the garden, and it's what we're getting today.

01:28:55 – 01:29:00:	The reason that the consequences are horrible is that those are the fruits of the most poisonous tree.

01:29:02 – 01:29:09:	We really see a cycle of revolutions, of uprisings throughout history as Satan attempts to overthrow

01:29:10 – 01:29:16:	one sort of hierarchy in order after another. He doesn't always succeed. Sometimes he is repulsed

01:29:16 – 01:29:23:	and pushed back. The revolutions of 1848, as mentioned, were not overall successful. Germany

01:29:23 – 01:29:32:	is a good example of this. And even for those who maybe knew about the revolution of 1848,

01:29:32 – 01:29:37:	called the March Revolution, typically in German, as you'll know why in a minute here,

01:29:39 – 01:29:42:	even those who know about that typically don't know about the revolution that followed

01:29:44 – 01:29:50:	World War One. The revolution of 1848, 1849 was put down. And actually, if you know one of

01:29:50 – 01:29:56:	Bismarck's most famous quotes, it references that his, rather through iron and blood quote,

01:29:56 – 01:30:03:	references the March Revolution. But following on the March Revolution and some of those who,

01:30:03 – 01:30:10:	some who lost, some who won, left Germany in the ensuing chaos and came to the U.S.,

01:30:10 – 01:30:17:	called the 48ers. But the revolution that followed on World War One was the November

01:30:17 – 01:30:25:	Revolution. And that was between 1918 and 1919. And that was the revolution that overthrew,

01:30:26 – 01:30:31:	basically destroyed the German Empire, destroyed the traditional form of government in Germany,

01:30:31 – 01:30:38:	and led to the Weimar Republic. And of course, it was the weakness of the Weimar Republic that led

01:30:38 – 01:30:46:	to chaos. And in part, World War Two, yes, that's more complicated subject for another time, another

01:30:46 – 01:30:54:	place. But Satan managed with the Revolution of 1918, what he did not manage to do with the

01:30:54 – 01:31:04:	Revolution of 1848. He brought chaos and a dissolution of proper order and hierarchy

01:31:04 – 01:31:09:	to the heart of Europe. And it spread from there. Yes, there were other revolutions,

01:31:09 – 01:31:14:	same time in other parts. Obviously, the Russian Revolution is pertinent here.

01:31:16 – 01:31:25:	But you see following on from feminism and what happened with in the U.S. abolitionism and also

01:31:25 – 01:31:31:	feminism. But what happened with the feminists, leading into additional revolution and the

01:31:31 – 01:31:37:	destruction of more and more, because Satan is never happy. Satan is never sated. Satan is never

01:31:37 – 01:31:45:	pleased. He will always try to destroy any vestige of good, anything that is left that doesn't conform

01:31:45 – 01:31:55:	to his image, which is just corruption and opposition to God. And we're not really going to

01:31:55 – 01:32:01:	deal with third and fourth wave feminism, particularly in a lengthy way, because we're

01:32:01 – 01:32:08:	currently living the fourth wave, we all know what happens with fourth wave feminism. But it is worth

01:32:08 – 01:32:17:	mentioning. It is worth highlighting a core difference, as it were, between what is now

01:32:17 – 01:32:23:	called fourth wave and the previous waves of feminism, because it was always an ultimate

01:32:23 – 01:32:30:	goal of feminism. But it was not laid out early on, because the intelligence, the animating

01:32:30 – 01:32:35:	intelligence behind feminism saw where it was going, knew what he wanted to achieve. But many

01:32:35 – 01:32:40:	of his human actors may not have seen it along the way. Undoubtedly, most of them did not. Perhaps

01:32:40 – 01:32:47:	some of them had some conception. The most wicked ones may have wanted to achieve this. But one

01:32:47 – 01:32:55:	of the active goals of fourth wave feminism now is the destruction of what it means to be a man

01:32:55 – 01:33:02:	or a woman. Not just the destruction of the roles of men and women in society in the home,

01:33:02 – 01:33:07:	the relationship between men and women, but the destruction of masculinity, femininity,

01:33:07 – 01:33:13:	what it means to be by nature male or female. And that's why we have the transgender movement.

01:33:13 – 01:33:20:	That is fourth wave feminism. And so there was a pivot to some degree. You have some feminists now

01:33:21 – 01:33:26:	who write about men and masculinity, instead of writing about women and women's issues so called.

01:33:27 – 01:33:32:	Because the goal is to destroy what it means to be a man. Because if you have no men,

01:33:34 – 01:33:39:	well, you can never roll back all of these supposed gains, this progress of feminism.

01:33:40 – 01:33:44:	Because there's no one to stand against it. There's no one to stand up in opposition and say these

01:33:44 – 01:33:49:	things are wrong. They disagree with scripture. We cannot do this if you destroy men and if you

01:33:49 – 01:33:55:	destroy masculinity, which they have done quite an effective job thus far. There are not very many

01:33:55 – 01:34:03:	actually masculine men left in the world at this point. But that's why you'll see some modern

01:34:03 – 01:34:08:	feminist writers who will try to argue that well, men should be more emotional, should express their

01:34:08 – 01:34:13:	emotions more in public, should cry, should do all these various things. If you are a man.

01:34:14 – 01:34:21:	Now, Wo may want to add a comment on to this or disagree in part. But for me, my position is very

01:34:21 – 01:34:26:	clear. If you are a man, you generally should not be crying and expressing these things in public

01:34:27 – 01:34:32:	with the exception of a handful of situations, which would be the death of a close relative,

01:34:32 – 01:34:38:	the death of your dog, or the passion of Christ, those you're allowed to cry for those, that's it.

01:34:39 – 01:34:44:	But there is a difference between what it means to be a woman and what it means to be a man.

01:34:45 – 01:34:49:	And the goal is to destroy that with fourth wave feminism, it is to make,

01:34:49 – 01:34:56:	instead of humanity, sexually and psychologically, spiritually dimorphic as God created us,

01:34:58 – 01:35:03:	it is to make some androgynous new man where it doesn't matter

01:35:04 – 01:35:09:	how you were born, what parts you have, all of that is irrelevant. Because ultimately, of course,

01:35:09 – 01:35:16:	their goal is to make it so that you can put off being physically male and become physically

01:35:16 – 01:35:21:	female, the same as you would put on or off a new suit. Now, they won't get there, they won't

01:35:21 – 01:35:27:	achieve it. But that's their goal. That is the reality that is the mindset of the enemies we

01:35:27 – 01:35:35:	are facing. They think that the science fiction they've been reading, where you can just swap

01:35:35 – 01:35:39:	bodies, where you can become whatever it is you want to be, instead of, I don't feel like being

01:35:39 – 01:35:44:	a human today, I'll be a wolf today. They think that that's a reality and they will fight tooth

01:35:44 – 01:35:50:	and nail and they will burn everything to the ground in an attempt to get there. And that's

01:35:50 – 01:35:57:	fourth wave feminism. That's why you have to oppose third wave and second wave and first wave

01:35:57 – 01:36:04:	and proto feminism, because it leads inevitably to where we are today. We are living in the

01:36:04 – 01:36:13:	aftermath of centuries of virtually unopposed feminism. Now, there were times in history

01:36:13 – 01:36:18:	where these revolutions were put down, where Christians stood up and said, no, we will not

01:36:18 – 01:36:24:	permit this. This cannot be done. This is wicked. A great example would be the peasants revolt

01:36:24 – 01:36:29:	in the 1500s in Germany. That was one of the first times where Satan really pushed hard.

01:36:30 – 01:36:35:	In the aftermath of the Reformation, he saw that perhaps there was an opportunity here

01:36:35 – 01:36:42:	to overthrow rightful hierarchy, because some of the peasants got it into their mind that because

01:36:43 – 01:36:49:	the Protestants had rejected Roman so-called authority because of Rome's transgressions,

01:36:49 – 01:36:55:	that, well, we should be allowed to reject all authority, because that's the spirit. That's

01:36:55 – 01:37:00:	always the spirit. It's always to push, always for more. And so they attempted to overthrow

01:37:01 – 01:37:07:	their barons and their lords and all hierarchy. They wanted to completely destroy the government,

01:37:07 – 01:37:12:	basically create anarchy. And they succeeded in creating anarchy in certain states,

01:37:12 – 01:37:17:	where imperial forces had to be called in to put them down at the cost of quite a bit of blood and

01:37:17 – 01:37:24:	treasure. But that was put down. Martin Luther actually wrote against the peasants in this case.

01:37:24 – 01:37:30:	It's worth reading. I'll put a link to it in the show notes. I believe I have an English translation

01:37:30 – 01:37:36:	that's not encumbered by copyright. But that was put down. That time Satan tried and he failed.

01:37:38 – 01:37:46:	1848, he tried again, that failed. 1918, he tried and he succeeded. And he succeeded in a lot

01:37:46 – 01:37:52:	of the Western world with those revolutions. And we are still living through the aftermath of that

01:37:52 – 01:37:59:	today. And the thing is, even Christians today who will point out that there were problems with

01:37:59 – 01:38:03:	those revolutions, which I would hope so, because many of them were effectively communist revolutions,

01:38:04 – 01:38:07:	they won't go so far as to say that the intellectual

01:38:08 – 01:38:15:	forebears of those revolutions were also wicked. And we're right back to the idea of the wicked tree.

01:38:15 – 01:38:24:	If the fruit is poisonous, evil, then the tree is poisonous and evil. You cannot say,

01:38:24 – 01:38:28:	well, I won't eat this fruit off the poisonous tree, but I'll eat that one. They're all poisonous,

01:38:28 – 01:38:35:	because the poisonous tree bears only poisonous fruit. And the poisonous fruit came from a poisonous tree.

01:38:36 – 01:38:42:	And so you cannot, as a Christian, say, well, I oppose the communist revolutions, but I don't

01:38:42 – 01:38:49:	oppose feminism and egalitarianism and all of these various things, liberty in the conception

01:38:49 – 01:38:55:	of the French Revolution and in the conception of the American Revolution. If you say you don't oppose

01:38:55 – 01:39:00:	these things as well, all you're doing is saying, I want to return to the point where Satan only

01:39:00 – 01:39:06:	ruled us from the shadows instead of openly. And that is not a Christian position. And so as

01:39:06 – 01:39:12:	Christians, we have to oppose all of these things, because we have to stand on scripture,

01:39:12 – 01:39:19:	on God's word, on what God has told us, on what He has done in creation, the order that He has

01:39:19 – 01:39:24:	created, the rightful hierarchy He has instilled. These are the things that we have to defend.

01:39:25 – 01:39:30:	We do not get to defect from the truth, because we don't like this particular truth,

01:39:30 – 01:39:34:	because this one makes us uncomfortable, because society says you cannot hold these views,

01:39:34 – 01:39:38:	because society says if you hold those views, we will persecute you,

01:39:39 – 01:39:44:	because those who fall away during persecution, you don't inherit eternal life,

01:39:46 – 01:39:52:	because it says those who persevere to the end. And so as Christians, we have to take a stand

01:39:52 – 01:39:58:	on these issues, on all of these issues, not just push back a little. You don't just push back

01:39:58 – 01:40:04:	against the most recent evil, as has often been said, conservatives today politically are just

01:40:05 – 01:40:13:	liberals or leftists going the speed limit. And so that often plays out. In our political sphere,

01:40:13 – 01:40:20:	in our government, you will have the so-called conservative parties are just 20, 30,

01:40:20 – 01:40:27:	maybe 40 years behind the left parties. And we have Christians doing the same thing in the church.

01:40:27 – 01:40:34:	You have the ones with the so-called rainbow, it's not a rainbow, it's missing a color,

01:40:34 – 01:40:39:	the so-called rainbow flag, the BLM flag, all these various things festooning these beautiful

01:40:39 – 01:40:43:	buildings that were built to the glory of God and now serve as sanctuaries for Satan. But you have

01:40:43 – 01:40:52:	these buildings full of pastors, so-called, many of whom are women now, proclaiming that they are

01:40:52 – 01:40:59:	Christian and then lying in God's name and proclaiming immense wickedness. Today, it's going

01:40:59 – 01:41:07:	to be transgenderism and anti-racism and all the various talking points of the Marxist. But down

01:41:07 – 01:41:15:	the street, you'll have a supposedly sound Christian church proclaiming the proto-versions

01:41:15 – 01:41:21:	of all of the same wickedness just from a century ago. Sure, the Christians are taking a little

01:41:21 – 01:41:25:	longer to catch up than the political realm did, but they're doing it more quickly.

01:41:26 – 01:41:31:	And so you'll have Christians who are preaching abolitionism and egalitarianism

01:41:31 – 01:41:38:	and mutual submission and a litany of a thousand other evils. That is not faithfulness to God.

01:41:39 – 01:41:45:	Pushing back against only the most recent wickedness of the culture, the most recent thing

01:41:45 – 01:41:51:	that Satan happens to be propping up is not faithfulness. Yes, if you are opposing the

01:41:51 – 01:41:57:	place where Satan is attacking, that is faithfulness. But not if you've let him into your camp

01:41:58 – 01:42:03:	and he's living beside you, which is what we are doing today as supposed Christians.

01:42:04 – 01:42:11:	And that's why we addressed all of the various forms of feminism. Yes, we didn't go into detail

01:42:11 – 01:42:16:	on the third and the fourth wave because you're living in it now. You know what it is.

01:42:18 – 01:42:24:	But the reason you start with the Enlightenment and even before that, the reason you start with

01:42:24 – 01:42:32:	proto-feminism is because that is the wicked tree. You cannot eat from the wicked tree. If you approve

01:42:33 – 01:42:38:	anything that comes from Satan instead of from God, you are in rebellion to God.

01:42:39 – 01:42:44:	And you will eventually end up where we are today and worse.

01:42:45 – 01:42:51:	To be clear, we're only talking about the last 300 years, which is Christians matter,

01:42:51 – 01:42:56:	because the Christian Church has been around for 2000 years and the Christian faith has been around

01:42:56 – 01:43:04:	for 6000 years. So when Corey and I point back to Scripture and to history prior to the Enlightenment,

01:43:04 – 01:43:10:	I hope that those are convincing arguments to you. I hope that as a Christian in the 21st

01:43:10 – 01:43:18:	century, you can understand that if you're personally held, strongly held moral convictions,

01:43:19 – 01:43:25:	our fruits of the Enlightenment, such that they were alien to every Christian for 5700 years,

01:43:25 – 01:43:31:	I would hope that that fills you with profound dread. That's our goal. If you hold some of these

01:43:31 – 01:43:37:	beliefs, and it's in good conscience, and we tell you, did you know that no Christians for 5700

01:43:37 – 01:43:43:	years believed what you believe? And in fact, Scripture and every believer in heaven teaches

01:43:43 – 01:43:50:	and believe the opposite of what it is that you're saying today. That is important. I don't

01:43:50 – 01:43:57:	know how to say it. That is the essence of the continuity of Christianity. It doesn't come in

01:43:57 – 01:44:02:	fits and spurts. That's a hallmark of the devil. When you have revolution, when you have new things

01:44:02 – 01:44:07:	popping up all the time and changing all the time, that is alien to the Christian faith.

01:44:07 – 01:44:13:	That's not something that should be a part of our Church. It should not be part of a

01:44:13 – 01:44:19:	Christian nation, of a Christian civilization. When we had Christendom, none of this existed.

01:44:19 – 01:44:25:	Christendom ended with the Enlightenment to be explicit. Christendom died in the Enlightenment.

01:44:26 – 01:44:32:	This has all been dancing in the ashes of a Christendom that would have been our inheritance

01:44:32 – 01:44:38:	if our grandfathers had preserved it, but instead they failed. They betrayed us. They defied God.

01:44:38 – 01:44:44:	They've handed us a pile of evil. That's why we're talking weird. That's why we're talking about

01:44:44 – 01:44:48:	stuff that people don't want to talk about. That's why we're talking about history,

01:44:48 – 01:44:53:	ancient history from 250 and 300 years ago. That's not relevant to your life today, is it?

01:44:54 – 01:44:59:	Those matters are long settled. Why would anyone care today? It's because this is the

01:44:59 – 01:45:07:	genesis of these modern heresies. These are teachings of demons. I've pointed many times to

01:45:07 – 01:45:12:	1 Timothy 4. Teachings of demons is a very low threshold. Anything that is contrary to Scripture

01:45:12 – 01:45:19:	is a teaching of demon. These are all things from hell. The illumination that we have today from

01:45:19 – 01:45:25:	the Enlightenment. Frequently in text, it doesn't work as well verbally. In text, I call it the

01:45:25 – 01:45:30:	Inlusifermint. It's harder to say, but that's really what it is. Lucifer the Lightbringer

01:45:30 – 01:45:37:	in Lucifered the 17th century. He brought the light of hell to illuminate the world,

01:45:37 – 01:45:41:	and Christendom ceased to be Christendom when it bought and gobbled it up.

01:45:42 – 01:45:48:	All those things that appeal to our natural vanity, just as Satan appealed to Eve's vanity in the

01:45:48 – 01:45:53:	garden when he said, you can be like God. She said, wow, it's a really pretty fruit. That sounds

01:45:53 – 01:45:59:	like a good deal. I won't surely die. God wouldn't kill me. God loves me. He's the God of love.

01:45:59 – 01:46:05:	This is going to be great. That refrain has echoed through the ages in different ways.

01:46:05 – 01:46:12:	Our problem today in the West is the final version of that. Not only has it ended Christendom,

01:46:12 – 01:46:16:	but it's going to end Christianity if our churches are not reclaimed in the name of

01:46:16 – 01:46:22:	Scripture and the name of Scripture as God. The last 300 years have left us with virtually nothing,

01:46:22 – 01:46:27:	and our churches and our pews are filled with people who, when they hear these enlightenment

01:46:27 – 01:46:32:	teachings, teachings of feminism, teachings of abolition, all of these things that are

01:46:32 – 01:46:36:	opposed to God fundamentally, and you can demonstrate clearly from Scripture as we have,

01:46:37 – 01:46:42:	people hear those things from the world, from Satan's mouth, and they hear the voice of God.

01:46:42 – 01:46:52:	They hear the voice of God in Satan's words. What does that mean for their salvation? I don't know,

01:46:52 – 01:46:59:	but I can tell you that God promises that his sheep recognize his voice, and when men like

01:46:59 – 01:47:04:	Corey and I speak with the words of God, like we're not prophets, we're quoting Scripture and

01:47:04 – 01:47:10:	making simple arguments from Scripture. This is not fancy. We could be fancy, but I don't want to.

01:47:11 – 01:47:15:	I want to be as simple as possible with this stuff. I want to be as simple as they were 300

01:47:15 – 01:47:20:	years ago when they believed it still. When Christians still believed these things,

01:47:20 – 01:47:25:	we had Christendom, and then we threw it away when we picked up what Satan was selling instead.

01:47:26 – 01:47:32:	When you have churches today where Christians hear the scriptural words and they don't recognize

01:47:32 – 01:47:38:	them and they hate them, that means that Christianity is going to die. It's going to die

01:47:38 – 01:47:43:	in this century unless something turns around, because Christianity can only be propagated

01:47:43 – 01:47:49:	and perpetuated by Christians, and there are vanishingly few of those left. When you look

01:47:49 – 01:47:54:	at the surveys of Christians of their beliefs, most Christian beliefs on the very most basic things

01:47:54 – 01:47:59:	forget feminism and slavery and these hot button issues on whether or not Jesus is God,

01:47:59 – 01:48:04:	on whether or not Scripture is the word of God. Most Christians disagree with those statements.

01:48:04 – 01:48:09:	They're not Christian. Even in our churches, which themselves are largely not Christian anymore,

01:48:09 – 01:48:14:	most of the pews and the pews of those non-Christian churches are themselves not Christians.

01:48:14 – 01:48:18:	The teachers are ceasing to be Christian. No one hears the word of God. They don't

01:48:18 – 01:48:22:	hear the voice of God. They hear the voice of Satan, and they think, that's my God. I'm going to

01:48:22 – 01:48:29:	follow him. This is an existential battle, which is why we chose these things, these hot button

01:48:29 – 01:48:35:	issues as subjects for the Stone Choir podcast, because as hard as it is here, and as angry as

01:48:35 – 01:48:39:	it may make some of you to hear these things, we're not telling you anything that we were told

01:48:39 – 01:48:45:	anyone 400 years ago because there had been no point. They would call us radical liberals for

01:48:45 – 01:48:50:	the things that we don't agree with them about, and I would happily receive that reprimand.

01:48:50 – 01:48:55:	I wish there was someone to tell me, I'm not going hard enough, because I'm sure I'm missing

01:48:55 – 01:49:00:	something, and it's not going hard enough for the sake of earning salvation. I want to be faithful

01:49:00 – 01:49:06:	to God. I want you to be faithful to God. How do you do that? You hear his word and you obey it.

01:49:07 – 01:49:11:	Jesus died on the cross for you. You're already saved. There's nothing you can do to earn your

01:49:11 – 01:49:18:	salvation. There is something you can do to reject your salvation. You can take those sins down off

01:49:18 – 01:49:22:	the cross and take them back to your own heart and say, I don't think these are sins anymore.

01:49:23 – 01:49:27:	That's not a sin, so Jesus didn't need to pay for that. If that is your belief,

01:49:27 – 01:49:32:	if that's your confession, God will decide on the last day whether he's going to credit

01:49:32 – 01:49:36:	Christ's righteousness to you or whether he's going to believe your confession,

01:49:36 – 01:49:40:	that these things are not sins because they are. He knows they are. He declared them from

01:49:40 – 01:49:45:	before eternity to be evil because they're contrary to his eternal will. If things that

01:49:45 – 01:49:51:	are contrary to God's will are part of your religion, I hope and pray that you'll change

01:49:51 – 01:49:57:	because time is running short for every one of us. These matters, while they don't seem on their

01:49:57 – 01:50:03:	face to be principal matters of salvation, when we get down to the nitty-gritty of people despising

01:50:03 – 01:50:08:	God's word, they absolutely are because when someone shows you in Scripture that the man is

01:50:08 – 01:50:12:	the head of his wife, his Christ is the head of the church, and you have Christians who've

01:50:12 – 01:50:16:	literally never heard the man as the head of his wife, and they demand to know where is that in

01:50:16 – 01:50:23:	Scripture. Time is short for all of us. This is stuff that we have to get right, not for our

01:50:23 – 01:50:29:	salvation, not to earn salvation, because if we deny God, when He's standing before the judgment

01:50:29 – 01:50:35:	thrown, how is He going to receive us? I know how He's going to receive me. He's going to receive

01:50:35 – 01:50:40:	me covered in Christ's blood because that is the only thing that can cover my sins. But I confess

01:50:41 – 01:50:45:	everything that Christ says, not just the stuff that I like, not just the stuff that makes me

01:50:45 – 01:50:50:	look good, the stuff that makes me look the worse, and the stuff that makes me the most ashamed,

01:50:50 – 01:50:56:	that is what I confess. These controversial matters are matters of confession for all of us.

01:50:56 – 01:51:03:	We were born in a demonic society that does not view God, and it hears the words of Satan and

01:51:03 – 01:51:08:	believes that they're the voice of God. We must reject that if we are to have salvation because

01:51:08 – 01:51:11:	although Christ earned it on the cross for every one of us, if you reject Him,

01:51:11 – 01:51:23:	you reject the salvation that He was given to each of us.