← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Petr
Thread ID: 20490 | Posts: 1 | Started: 2005-10-02
2005-10-02 21:04 | User Profile
[I]Many non-Christians may not realize just how rich and relevant doctrine Trinity really is. It is not a small matter - it is fundamentally related to the basic way men view their relation to the Divine and towards other men.
Actually Trinity is a sublime example of the principle "separate but equal (before God)" in action! True Christian who follows this example will be able avoid both of those un-Biblical pitfalls, [B]elitism and egalitarianism[/B], and find the golden middle road between them.
Here is a piece from just "averagely" conservative (but "non-racial") Christian blog, followed by an un-PC commentary from Little Geneva:[/I]
[FONT=Arial]
[SIZE=5]Feminism and the Trinity[/SIZE]
One of the central idolatrous ideologies of our day is feminism. Although it is just one of the hydra heads (the monster being egalitarianism), it is nevertheless one of the most important hydra heads. This is because God created us male and female, and our sexual identity is right at the center of the image of God in us. Therefore, even though egalitarianism is the general error, when the error is applied to something as important as sexual identity, the results can be disastrous. Apply egalitarianism to something like money, and you get the inequities and imcompetencies of socialism. Apply egalitarianism to sexual identity and you get Michael Jackon. [B] So feminism is the one of idols of the day that must be toppled, an idol that must come down. Every faithful Christian must oppose feminism, root and branch.[/B]
But unfortunately, many traditionalist Christians have assumed that feminism can be effectively opposed with something that might be called "not feminism." A moment's reflection should reveal the problem here. There are many things that are "not feminism" that are also "not biblical." Take the Saudi view of women for just one example. Take rape for another. [B] Feminism is actually a Trinitarian heresy, but unfortunately many of the Christian world's "not feminism" reactions are [I]equally [/I]heretical. Within the triune Godhead, we learn that authority and submission on the one hand, and [I]equality [/I]on the other, are ultimately harmonious. At the point of ultimate reality, the Son of God is begotten by the Father and submits to His will. At the same time, Paul tells us in Philippians that Jesus did not consider His equality with God something to be grasped. Consequently, for the [I]Trinitarian[/I] Christian, submission and equality together are not examples of trying to square the circle.[/B]
Our gender heretics feel like they have to pick one or the other. The feminists choose equality and so they think they must reject submission. The "masculinists" choose submission and so they think they have to reject equality. The feminists are modalists, who think that all the persons of the Godhead are the same, morphing into one another, depending on the circumstances. Whenever we hear of sex change operations, we should understand it as an idolatrous attempt to mimic a false understanding of god. Psalm 115 makes it very clear that we become like what we worship.
The so-called traditionalists are Arians, believing that if Jesus Christ was submissive to his Father, He must therefore be created, and ontologically inferior to the Father. This is why Unitarian cultures (like the Muslim world) are so readily hostile to women, and contemptuous of them. And this is also why any "Christianized" form of contempt for women is evidence of a functional Unitarianism in our midst. It is not enough for our answer to feminism to be "anything but feminism." Sabellianism is not Arianism, but they are both heretical. [B] Posted by Douglas Wilson - 6/18/2004 12:10:46 [/B]PM [/FONT]
[url]http://www.dougwils.com/index.asp?Action=Anchor&CategoryID=1&BlogID=257[/url]
////////////////////////////////////////////////
[FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3][B]Here Doug Wilson rightly calls feminism a trinitarian heresy because it is sexual egalitarianism. His problem is in understanding that another form of biological unitarianism that we like to call neo-Babelism is also a trinitarian heresy; it is racial egalitarianism. Recall that race is not accepted by the Babelists as a legitimate divider among men because of their interpretation of Galatians 3:28, which is the very interpretation that logically undercuts their rejection of feminism and sodomy[/B].
Because they have twisted themselves into a logical pretzel, it is not surprising to read rubbish like this from Dougs Wilson and Jones. Quite frankly, this is one of the most bizarre articles ever printed in Credenda (and thatââ¬â¢s saying a lot). It even surpasses the sophistry that emanates from CCL, but it shouldnââ¬â¢t be surprising to any of us. Sodomite marriage is the latest chapter in anti-Christian debauchery, but its logical progression is not what most would expect. Most Christians would like to connect it to another great act of judicial tyranny, [I]Roe v. Wade[/I]. They forget about the [I]Loving v. Virginia [/I]decision which outlawed the ban against miscegenation, and they forget about it precisely because they think it was just. Badonicus points out that the Massachusetts court cited [I]Loving [/I]25 times in their decision but mentioned [I]Roe[/I] in passing only four times. The very heart of the decision was based on the illegal Fourteenth Amendment, which was cited 13 times. So if youââ¬â¢re looking for a logical progression, it is to be found in the religion of Equality: citizenship was granted to ex-slaves, therefore interracial marriages may not be forbidden, therefore sodomite marriages may not be forbidden. It all makes perfect sense if you have the courage to open your eyes.
If you donââ¬â¢t open your eyes, you might find yourself nodding in agreement with the Dougs. They say that homosexuality "is not a typical sin that cultures face like theft, lying, or murder" but is "the sign of Godââ¬â¢s abandonment of us," that it "is primarily a judgment against the Churchââ¬Â¦ Godââ¬â¢s curse of homosexuality is a special judgment against His peopleââ¬Â¦ Christian fathers are a primary cause of the curse of homosexualityââ¬Â¦ We should, therefore, ââ¬Ëownââ¬â¢ homosexual sinââ¬Â¦ So we openly accept homosexual marriage in the civil realm as Godââ¬â¢s means of undermining that civil realm, and we accept that He has done this in judgment for wicked fathering within the Church." They even go so far as to say that "we mean we must accept the fact of [homosexuality] as justââ¬Â¦ we should own the curse of same-sex marriage and not fight it so far as it concerns them." In other words, we should not proclaim biblical law. We should pretend that God has not prescribed the means of dealing with this particular sin. Instead, I should gaze at my navel and cry that Jimmy and Steve are down at the courthouse getting married because Iââ¬â¢ve been a poor father. We must accept this state of affairs "as a just judgment on us and our culture"! "In the brewing culture wars, we ought not to stand with those seeking to ban same-sex marriage (or with those seeking to impose it). We ought to declare publicly (frustrating both sides) that we embrace this curse." They actually say that "gay-baiting" (whatever that is) is as bad as sodomy! When punishment is severed from the crime, it shows that we donââ¬â¢t really believe there is a crime. All Christians pray that sinners will repent of their sin, but God told us how we are to deal with certain sins. Christ Church is apparently content to ignore these commands. They have abandoned every pretense of theonomy.
[B]Perhaps the most ironic passage of all: "At its root, homosexuality is a love of sameness rather than difference. Jehovah teaches us to love difference, and in this fallen world obsessed with finding ways to deface God, homosexuality rejects difference in order to spite God." If only they could extend this principle to miscegenation. God created a diverse and beautiful world. Why are so many people trying to destroy that diversity, and why are ministers of the gospel assisting them? The Dougs complete their metamorphosis by lapsing into utter absurdity at the end of the article, calling true marriage "queer" because men and women are different. Actually, this is the most ironic statement: "we confess our disobedience in refusing to see the world in Trinitarian ways." Amen! [/B][/SIZE][/FONT]
[url]http://littlegeneva.com/?p=169[/url]
Petr