-
-
Replying to @RationalMale @GeorgeBruno and
I usually like your stuff but I can't even make it through this article. You've taken thousands of churches and different denomination/beliefs and clumped them into "The Modern Church." I agree there are a lot of men who cannot be masculine due to man made doctrine.
2 replies 1 retweet 8 likes -
Replying to @tellfisher @GeorgeBruno and
I’m actually in the process of writing my 4th book about the Red Pill truths affecting religion. The Feminine Imperative is gradually assimilating virtually every faith in this era. You may think your own is immune, but I’m sure I could identify the inroads the FI is making in it
1 reply 0 retweets 12 likes -
Replying to @RationalMale @GeorgeBruno and
A majority of the red pill stuff can be found in the Bible. Loyal and submissive wives. Men who are strong leaders and not tyrants. Healthy relationships dynamics. Everything you guys want is in here..? I truly fail to see your argument.pic.twitter.com/ur8vnro2dy
3 replies 1 retweet 11 likes -
Replying to @tellfisher @GeorgeBruno and
You’re correct about the scriptures containing RP truths, the problem isn’t in the genuine faith (yet), it’s in the church culture that influences doctrine that eventually alters faith.
2 replies 1 retweet 12 likes -
-
Replying to @GeorgeBruno @RationalMale and
I could go down this rabbit hole and agree. All groups run into this problem. My issue with the article is you were attacking "the modern church" without defining it. Meaning my church falls under that. However, your tweets are attacking doctrine. With that I agree.
1 reply 1 retweet 2 likes -
Replying to @tellfisher @RationalMale and
I would call it "challenging" or "countering"... But not attacking. I think proper language keeps dialogue moving I know. Ive regrettfully shut down some dialogue here with a handful of emotional responses. Dont "raise your voice"... Improve your argument.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @GeorgeBruno @RationalMale and
Ahaha I did the same thing. This thread got heated for a moment. I do appreciate the dialogue. I've got a lot to think about. I misunderstood the original tweet as, don't marry a Christian woman. You were saying be wary of group thinking and baggage that comes w/ that. No?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @tellfisher @GeorgeBruno and
Projection and not listening or trying to understand aside this was a decent convo with solid points. I think fishers point went over many heads. If women are only women why is it that gender dynamics was better when Christianity was the law of the land?
3 replies 1 retweet 1 like
This is precisely what I was saying. You worded it much better than I was able to.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.