-John Moraga
Men are designed to be rulers in this world. It is indisputable that only two genders exist. This fact is supported by both the true religion of the Judeo-Christian Scriptures, as well as the secular religion of science (biology). However, there are psychologically-challenged social engineers with a demonic agenda to convince the sane that there are more than two genders, and that being a man is simply a state of consciousness. It is not my intent to be flippant about their claims. However, my use of hyperbole to identify them and their objectives is to animate how absurd their arguments are. I also acknowledge there are extremely rare outliers of those who are born with a mutation of their X,Y chromosomes, but typically one of the two genders is predominate in their physiology. (Even if there is concession granted to the possibility that there is an ambiguity of gender in these circumstances, gender identification should not be malleable to these anomalies).
There was a time when it was comical for men and boys to tease each other with accusations of effeminacy. That time has passed and that type of humor is now considered politically incorrect, or worse, bigoted. For example, historically, women were forbidden to perform on stage, so male actors dressing in drag has been a part of the theatre for centuries. From ancient Greece and Rome to the medieval Elizabethan age of Shakespeare, men portrayed male and female characters alike, which frequently required them to dress as women. However, even after women being cast in film and stage became normative during 20th century Hollywood in America, men dressing in women’s garb was part of comedy plots such as in the 1959 movie Some Like It Hot, as well as many other movies and TV shows. This punchline continued throughout the 20th century and even into the dawn of the 21st century, but it is now politically incorrect. Unfortunately, more than being an homage to the theatre’s ancestry, Hollywood’s use of men dressing in drag has been useful idiocy to propagate the agenda of emasculation. This agenda is further progressed by Hollywood’s glorification of homosexuality, but even more effectively by stupefying the roles portrayed by men such as bumbling father-figures i.e. Al Bundy, Homer Simpson, among too many others.
The metamorphosis of feminism in the 1960’s and 70’s into the Women’s Liberation Movement was another successful assault on the role of men in our society. No-fault divorce and single-mother homes (widows exempt, James 1:27) have also greatly contributed to the diminishment of masculinity. The ease of divorce provides little to no incentive for men to take responsibility for being leaders of their own households, and fatherless homes have impressed upon countless children that a man is unnecessary for a healthy rearing.
Gender distinctions are articulated throughout the Bible. In fact, the very first chapters of Scripture identify only two genders (Genesis 1:27), and the responsibility of men to be rulers, if only in their homes (Genesis 3:16). There are numerous other examples found in the Bible, which reinforce the place of men to lead their families, as well as society. It was Joshua who was commissioned to lead the charge into Canaan, never was there a sole-ruling legitimate *queen of Israel, and Messiah incarnated as a man. This culture of patriarchy in no way diminishes the roles of women, or the importance of femininity. On the contrary, just as Adam required a female counterpart to be made whole, Christ is married to His bride, the Body (Church). However, if the delineation of gender roles is to be compromised, arguably, the entire message of the Bible is nullified.
Men must reclaim our masculinity, while at the same time commit to loving our wives as Christ loves us, and honor our mothers as dictated in the Ten Commandments. We are designed to be kings who rule, warriors who fight, husbands who protect, and fathers who provide. We must not concede to those who wish to reengineer our roles in society and minimize our significance. May God bless you, and may He keep you.
*Although Deborah was a judge, she was not a queen. Athaliah was technically a queen of Judah, and only siezed power by murdering the royal blood-line of Judah. She was later executed (see IIChronicles 22:10 - 23:15).
Write a comment