Feminism and the Whore of Babylon (Part 1)

photo credit: richyvk. All photos via photopin cc,

(From the comments at Alpha Game Plan, a diversion from the ostensible topic of Vox's post, but one still well worth thought.)

Trust said... "In jest, I used to say "i think feminism is the false religion in Revelation, where we are warned to 'stay away from that Woman.'"Now I seriously wonder if it may be, with its denominations including even supposedly patriarchal Christian churches. Nothing has corrupted our society more than feminism, and there is no place where more blood has been spilt more so than in a feminists womb, and no class of despot with more blood on their hands than a feminists hands soaked in the blood of their own children."

Although my personal suspicions lie elsewhere, he raises a good point. While feminism is largely seen in American culture as innocuous, and promoted heavily by the media, educational, and business elites, feminism is an ideology that has shed the blood of hundreds of millions (1) throughout the world, and brought further harm and suffering to billions. In America alone, the death toll due to abortion equates to 57 million since Roe v Wade, almost 6/8 of the total deaths caused by World War II. Add in the number of suicides caused by rampant divorce, and we have ourselves a truly virulent ideology and a horrifying death toll.

photo credit: x-ray delta one

Feminism might be drenched in blood, but sadly, so is much of our world. The question posed today is does feminism rises above that, to a level of apocalyptic evil? Does it swim in the blood of the saints, and draw the particular wrath of Almighty God? In order to tell, we'll have to delve into the Biblical text, examine what exactly has been said about the Whore, and line that up with the attributes of feminism, as well as other selected contenders for the position. That being done, we will be in a better position to make the call. 

From Dubrovnik: a guest writer on wealth, women and wine...

From Dubrovnik: A guest writer on wealth, women and wine... also the Sea Dance Festival...

Borders are interesting.

They say the world’s most unequal border is between San Diego and Tijuana, Mexico. I should know, I live in the former and have visited the latter. Today it’s a harsh militarized border, but back in the 1970’s it wasn't unheard of to see people playing volleyball using the fence as a net. (Or at least I saw that photo once somewhere. To be fair, it was probably never very common…)

Another fun border is Little Diomede Island to Big Diomede Island, where less than 2 miles separate the United States from Russia. It’s even possible to load a jet-ski with some extra fuel and cut across the strong, freezing Bering Strait currents until you reach Russian soil. On arrival, you’ll promptly be arrested, because there’s a Russian military base right there. Your jet-ski will be impounded and taken to the chop shop. The rims will be taken off, the stereo jacked (Taylor Swift CD and all), and you’ll have to sit in a holding cell for 48 hours before being sent back to Alaska to sit and think about what you did. When you return you’ll have an awesome story. And no jet-ski.

Back to the topic at hand, though. Recently I returned from a caper through the Balkans...

Cannibalism and Catholicism?

A recent apologetics segment on the local Catholic radio station (It's staticy, but good) struck me. The topic was a Protestant charge that transubstantiation amounts to cannibalism. While the charge might be a marginal one, and the on air talent gave it as much time as it is worth, I found the illogic of the charge to be worthy of examining in its own right. Why? Well, lets dig in!

"We live in a world that is run by white supremacy"

Why yes, just ask US President David Duke, UK Prime Minister Nick Griffin, and French Prime Minister Jean Marie Le-Pen. Oh wait...

Car Alarms

Let's be honest, if someone was actually stealing the car, you'd consider them to have earned it for driving that stupid noisemaker somewhere else.

Home of the Far From Brave

Talk to a Boomer about how it was like going to bars back in their day. Ask them about their experiences; it's quite educational. Likely what they'll describe to you will sound to Millennial ears like a cross between the movie Roadhouse and the Vietnam War. Going out to the bar back in those days was downright dangerous, a place where you had to keep your friends close and your wits closer.

The Universal Three

The word three stays strikingly similar across the Indo-European languages. This makes me wonder... The word one is all over the place. Two is a little easier to chart. However, no matter what language you dig up from the meta-family, you usually aren't going to have much trouble recognizing the word three.

Just look at this handy chart of proto-Indo-European numerals from Wikipedia. Focus particularly on the part excerpted below for your convenience, that which specifically deals with the variant forms of the number three (all rights, of course, reserved to the original authors).

three

*trei-

Hitt. teriyaš (gen. pl.), Lyc. trei, Ved. tráyas, Av. θrāiiō, Pers. çi/se, Osset. ærtæ,ærtæ, Kashmiri tre, Kamviri tre, Gk. τρεῖς,treĩs, Lat. trēs, Osc. trís, Umbr. trif, ON þrír, Goth. þreis, Eng.þrēo/three, Gm. drī/drei, Gaul. treis, Ir. treí/trí, Welsh tri, Arm. erek῾/yerek῾/yerek῾, Toch. tre/trai, OPruss. tri, Latv. trīs, Lith. trỹs, OCS trije, Pol. trzy, Russ. tri, Alb. tre/tre

As you can see, not much variation in threes across the Indo-European language sprachraum. Personally, I have no clue what to make of it. Is it that these low numbers are used more often, and thus stayed more regular? Wouldn't using a word often contribute to, rather than detract from, linguistic drift and sound change? Was "three" more commonly used in trade and diplomacy across linguistic divides? Your guess is as good as mine.

First Thoughts

Have you ever wondered about the first thoughts? No, not of Adam, but of the One who came before him. Orthodox theology posits a timeless communion between the Trinity before the creation of time, but I wonder if this is correct, or merely the effluent of the philosophical ideals of yesteryear.

What would it truly be like, to exist alone, before all thought, before all of the language and categories that make up or thought, that we take for granted? Today, I'm going to try and plum the depths of pre-time and put forward a possible answer. Hopefully this will inspire wiser, more intelligent minds to do the same.

Presumably the first thought was a self awareness. "I am". With nothing else to act upon Him, the only thing that could act in God was Himself. Mind you, I don't actually suggest a vocalized "I am" but more a feeling of sentience, an awareness, a feeling.  Without sensory organs or a concept of the other, the void would not yet come into contemplation.

The next thought, I would guess, would be "what?" What is this Me that exists? What does it do? What are it's powers, what is its extent? All of these, but undifferentiated and without, at this time, any knowledge of the metrics by which such a thing could be measured.

I imagine that "what" would be frustrating. There is nothing else in the universe, just the two states of abiding and questioning. This leads us to the third concept "difference". There is a difference between "I am" and "I am what". Things are not always the same.

From difference, from the movement of thought,  comes change, and from change time.

The next step is the combination of difference and "I am" written in our language as, "Is there anything else?" Without sensory inputs, this is not that easy a question to answer. I would guess that the answer would not be found in thought but in exhausted silence. There, having the knowledge of existence, the question, and difference, the silence without thought would be recognized as the void.

Difference plus the void generates creation. By thinking, God fills the void, He imposes change outward. Now He can say "what?" plus creation, and begin to examine all of the possibilities. He is no longer bound by what is, but only by what could possibly be. So from nothingness, we have come to limitless creation.(At least I think, please poke holes in this theory in the comments below. ;-) )