/christianity/ - Christian Theology & Philosophy

>conjecture about women

>if you deny my position, you are ignorant trash. I'm on the side of science despite providing no citation.

sage

hide

Do not reply to bait

>>9127

i’m not baiting. the data is solid. religious women are no less assortive. religion only plays a filtering role. it’s not a qualitative influence.

the most effective religion would show increased weighting of religious scoring as you look at more and more devout ones. but actually it’s just a ticket that needs punching, “ascribes to my religion, is ok”.

this is why religious societies used to arrange marriages. but that only hid the truth: no women are religious, at their heart of hearts.

That's the way it's supposed to be

>>>/r9k/

i think the silence says it all. the true revelation of truth of this age is incel. there is no meaningful rebuttal possible in any of the institutions.

>>9125

If I were to venture a guess, it's because those who go to church know they have to lie about believing in God anyways, so the lies compound. The authorative concept the churches are built around, is utterly broken. Someone has to expend some mental effort into making it not only palatable, but reasonable for (post)modern women.

>>9125

retard thread of the month

1 Tim 2:15 Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.

Everyone knows if a woman has a question she should ask her husband at home. Everyone knows there are two kinds of women, married women and unmarried women. The Bible is clear about what women ought to do and nonsense about faggots is used as an excuse to ignore it.

>>9202

>nonsense about faggots is used as an excuse to ignore it

can you expand on this?

>>9181

I’m finding the religion doesn’t speak to me anymore. Even the basics cannot find in the deity’s hands expression, the very most basic things. it’s so strange. rude people, that's what i find. muslim, kike, christian, dyke, fag, all rude, all living garbage.

>>9255

Jesus will still be waiting for you when you stop being 12, anon.

>>9257

you are rude, but perhaps you could be saved by childbearing. but who can believe anymore?if there is anything good, surely woman is 99.99999999% damned.

i am inclined to believe this to be the principle cause of disbelief amongst young Christian men. I am therefore bumping. I know of only five similarly pressing issues:

1. the immodesty of christian women, obvious enough, just look, you cannot help it, can you? yes, they keep about one inch more than the rest of the gals, or a slight bit less transparency, they are i appearance dressed in as little or even less than street walkers of the inner city of the 1990’s.

2. the consumption of abhorrent media, from romance trash women read, to the silver screen, tv series, and of course pornography, not to mention the insanity of every man having a detailed plan of how to get the Raiders* back on the path to victory, meanwhile remaining ignorant of the scandal of our age, which is the israel mossad child rape entrapment whoring operation of epstein, it being tied to ehud barak, former israeli pm, running again for the position now, etc etc etc, elaborate thoughts about absolute nonsense!!!

3. the false belief jews hold some type of superiority to Christians except by compact with hell as shown by epstein and weinstein

4. the rejection of every moral intellectual pursuit as too nerdy, by Christians, and the ostracism of “nerds”. for the female side, there is derision from Christians for women too “pure”/plain. i refuse to pair this with an obsession with involvement in sports, it’s quite possible to pursue improvement of both mind and body.

5. the inability of Christianity to speak out in support of Christians worldwide as they are threatened and indeed slaughtered by atheists and muslims, the inability to criticize the institutions which abuse us, and, this is really the same thing, the unwillingness to fund Christian news, Christian fb, Christian Twitter. within this is also the inability to speak against atrocities against white people, the glorification by jews of soft white genocide by various processes, regardless of the question of fact, that they express desire for it should receive sharpest rebuke, but it’s so perfectly filtered out, due to the Christian thirst to be patted on the head by the degenerates of the world, especially the jews.

6. yeah, I said 5, it’s not likely you'll read this far anyhow, so I hardly feel guilty about this. the 6th is appropriately enough then faggotry, and how that leaven is leaking in, deeper and deeper into the souls of the churches

7. why not? a severe lack of development in the area of reexamining assumptions made by translators of the NT. and a total unwillingness to do it. this is accompanied by transfixion by judaizing influences (proudly I can report at least one resists delusive notions which romantacize or talismanize jewry)

8. i can’t think of an 8th, though I suspect wives are in an epidemic of refusal to work hard supplying their husbands their sexual needs. i rather obviously can only suspect, and am very well aware relationships aren’t a one way thing.

9. it’s not one of the bigger issues, but jingoism of Christians really is ridiculously stupid, the government which engaged in “strategic” bombing is no nation to respect.

10. this is actually issue #1, but it has sub-parts, listed above, which, resolved, would resolve this one, which is a lack of community and community work, which is NOT to say work programs. REAL work, REAL community, FULL status. I know a man, who is Christian, and who has rescued many men, with legitimate work, not second class crap. He stands out, now, others may be more wealthy, but I know whom I want next door to me heaven, and it’s not the ceo snobs.

11. this would be repaired by others, but it’s that Christians have not forced Spotify to censor filthy songs. my spotify has played, recently, in a major playlist(!) a song “lick it down, lick it lick it down take it hold it, that’s it, down”. the FCC has the power, but boomers are lazy and filthy. the explicit filter would have prevented ME from hearing it. they are perverting children of less competent parents. shall we say, “let them go to hell, we don’t care”? the boomer certainly does!!!

12. yeah, this one would improve if others did, but especially boomers are super rude, regardless of how supposedly Christian they are. they are extremely arrogant. but then just smirk, because their boomerbros are ok with their behavior, plus, you can never really PROVE someone is rude.

*etc.

do schizophrenics go to heaven?

>5. the inability of Christianity to speak out in support of Christians worldwide as they are threatened and indeed slaughtered by atheists and muslims, the inability to criticize the institutions which abuse us, and, this is really the same thing, the unwillingness to fund Christian news, Christian fb, Christian Twitter. within this is also the inability to speak against atrocities against white people, the glorification by jews of soft white genocide by various processes, regardless of the question of fact, that they express desire for it should receive sharpest rebuke, but it’s so perfectly filtered out, due to the Christian thirst to be patted on the head by the degenerates of the world, especially the jews.

>10. this is actually issue #1, but it has sub-parts, listed above, which, resolved, would resolve this one, which is a lack of community and community work, which is NOT to say work programs. REAL work, REAL community, FULL status. I know a man, who is Christian, and who has rescued many men, with legitimate work, not second class crap. He stands out, now, others may be more wealthy, but I know whom I want next door to me heaven, and it’s not the ceo snobs.

This is a particularly good point and I haven't been able to flush it out quite like this. I envy the jews in how they "have each others backs" and create communities where they can isolate themselves from wordly poz if they wish (think haredim). I hate how christians don't have tight knit communities like this and if they do, they don't let christians who browse imageboards integrate. It's very much a "you gotta be born into this" to be accepted. Meanwhile those tightknit jewish and muslim communities readily welcome converts and integrate them.

I hope this will change soon

1. the immodesty of christian women, obvious enough, just look, you cannot help it, can you? yes, they keep about one inch more than the rest of the gals, or a slight bit less transparency, they are i appearance dressed in as little or even less than street walkers of the inner city of the 1990’s.

In my opinion it's actually worse since they larp like virtuous women but actually are more entrenched in degenerate values than their secular counterparts. I trust them less than atheists.

>"tee hee im a christian but i dont follow all the rules ;)"

>>9286

If you look into the history of schizophrenia, the diagnosis is predicated on naturalism even though many of these patients would have historically been concluded to be possessed.

Whatever proportion of schizophrenics are actually under possession, those are certainly not saved and will not go to heaven in that state.

>>9133

>The data is solid. religious women are no less assortive [sic]. religion [sic] only plays a filtering role.

Post the data then. Oh, you also have to show that the "religious" women are genuine believers rather than larpers or nominal, de jure believers. We'll be waiting.

>>9125

You're calling women whores simply for having standards for men…

>>9294

WRONG.

Possession resides in the body, not in the soul. A person can be in a state of grace despite being possessed, and whatever your possession causes you to do is not something you are culpable for as long as it does not have the consent of your will.

>>9328

>A person can be in a state of grace despite being possessed

How can you simultaneously be indwelt by the holy Spirit and an unholy demon?

>>9357

award for most loony threadjacking lol

>>9325

for having precisely a whore’s standards wholly. it’s absolutely understandable to be somewhat worldly. but completely? and without distinction from the world? even unsaved men are often superior to all women, thus religious women of the supposedly different types.

>>9305

what part of you, saturated in delusion, have no part in this thread did you not find yourself informed of? begone accused whore!!!

>>9290

thank you. hope’s about all we got. but sometimes i think my rejection is like a huge amount of freedom that i can’t explain. i take a mystic approach, because my very existence necessitated this.

>>9291

interesting. you’ve been closer to any of them than i have..

>A wife of noble character who can find? She is worth far more than rubies. -Proverbs 31:10

Even Solomon recognizes most women are shit and here’s what God said and what Isaiah prophesied in Isaiah 3:16-26

> The Lord says, “The women of Zion are haughty, walking along with outstretched necks, flirting with their eyes, strutting along with swaying hips, with ornaments jingling on their ankles. Therefore the Lord will bring sores on the heads of the women of Zion; the Lord will make their scalps bald.” In that day the Lord will snatch away their finery: the bangles and headbands and crescent necklaces, the earrings and bracelets and veils, the headdresses and anklets and sashes, the perfume bottles and charms, the signet rings and nose rings, the fine robes and the capes and cloaks, the purses and mirrors, and the linen garments and tiaras and shawls. Instead of fragrance there will be a stench; instead of a sash, a rope; instead of well-dressed hair, baldness; instead of fine clothing, sackcloth; instead of beauty, branding. Your men will fall by the sword, your warriors in battle. The gates of Zion will lament and mourn; destitute, she will sit on the ground.

There’s a good reason why you never heard you female angels you know

>>9381

Of*

>>9366

So you think a whore's standards are:

- looks

- ability to support the family

- personality

+ for Christian women: being a Christian

An actual whore's standard would "is currently in possession of the expected monetary sum".

>>9187

this

>>9134

Every human being is wicked, be it men or women.

Take that trash back in >>>/Islam/

>>9411

>expecting your wife to be virginal and chaste is Islamic mentality

You're either a cuckold or a harlot. You are so corrupted by modernity you can't even see it.

>>9367

>LOL you should know the data already

So you don't have the data then. Gotcha! You need to repent of blabbering assertions without any proof, as if you were God.

"Whoever speaks the truth gives honest evidence, but a false witness utters deceit." (Pro. 12:17)

>begone accused whore!!

Kek, I'm not even a woman.

>>9381

But we do hear of female angels:

Then the angel who was speaking with me went out and said to me, "Lift up now your eyes and see what this is going forth."

I said, "What is it?" And he said, "This is the ephah going forth." Again he said, "This is their appearance in all the land

(and behold, a lead cover was lifted up); and this is a woman sitting inside the ephah."

Then he said, "This is Wickedness!" And he threw her down into the middle of the ephah and cast the lead weight on its opening.

Then I lifted up my eyes and looked, and there two women were coming out with the wind in their wings; and they had wings like the wings of a stork, and they lifted up the ephah between the earth and the heavens.

(Zech. 5:5-9 NASB)

>>9381

You do understand that, in context, a woman is saying that Proverb verse, right? It's not Solomon.

>>9412

Don't be so disingenuous. The whole point of this thread is to bash all women, whether truly Christian or not, as whores without proof or without sharing how to give the proper Christian response via preaching the Gospel, counseling, teaching, etc., all in love.

>>9412

>>expecting your wife to be virginal and chaste is Islamic mentality

No, smartass, this is

>but that only hid the truth: no women are religious, at their heart of hearts.

Which, asides from being outright heretical, is also extremely pharisaic and hypocritic, considering that men having numerous partners is considered to be a very manly thing to for a while already, far longer than the sexual revolution and inventing numerous idiotic, godless reasons to justify it. See log in your eyes before a twig in eyes of others.

>>9424

At least you are humble to admit error, unlike OP and one or two others here. So kudos and credit to you brother!

>Pic

if she was real, I would want to give the right girl all the hugs and kisses she wants.

>mfw no waifu that is your helpmeet and wants payment in hugs and kisses

>mfw I have no face

>>9424

Understandable. I also apologise, if I was rude towards you. /Christian/ had lots of autistic threads like this that always turned into simply bashing and outright hating women with outright Mohammedan ideas popping up here and there. That place generally got its toll on me.

on a more humorous note:

>>9421

>Then I lifted up my eyes and looked, and there two women were coming out with the wind in their wings; and they had wings like the wings of a stork, and they lifted up the ephah between the earth and the heavens.

>tfw even Valkyries are Christian

Christianity: ∞

Fagans: 0

>>9381

but even Jesus can’t into change women out of whorishness and into Chris-likeness?

>>9472

* a christlike nature

>>9125

t. incel

>>9394

no sir. i KNOW how their selection works, because of the literature and the massive amounts of data. let’s look again at it. i will attempt to clarify.

women have certain rules, requirements. these aren’t actually especially important to them. they’re “triggers”. they just have to avoid getting “triggered”. those rules, those filters, are sometimes things that can be controlled, sometimes are so stupid and unreasonable that nobody can live up to the rules. but….

THESE ARE BINARY RULES

pass/fail.

And bullshit non-compliance trickery, like a turn if a ohrase, may be enough to satisfy those points. the only thing that matters is to not trigger her. example, “whores don’t take off their panties on the first date”. so the guy is like, “well, we had coffee once, that was technically our first dat, so this is our second, totally not the first date”. and then she’s untriggered, all is fine.

Now, there are three things which are NOT boolean, but are variables, and those are the three, looks, money, charisma (i lump popularity in with this one, some separate it out). these enter into the calculation women make.

What no woman does, so far as science has ever been able to find, is prioritize some other weighting. we could list other things. a common complaint is that women do not care for things like niceness, honesty, work ethic, musical skills, intellect (iq).

and, for a religious person it is rather damning if his faith that for a woman the deepest change the faith brings the woman is some of the boolean rules. this doesn’t do that much for atheism, though, because it’s equally impotent (the atheist religion would never approve misogynistic measures incels suggest… a true atheist (there seem to be ZERO of them), would immediately prescribe at most).

side note, as you may be a boomerxoomer, whore doesn’t mean what your old culture, which is irrelevant and completely gone, took it to mean.

>>9474

but is incel the truth, the light, the Way?

>>9411

you’ll need a real argument, not just a satanic smear. islam is surely superior to atheism at whoring!!!,

>>9395

solid post. i could only read part of one of them. such powerful horrors!!!

>>9421

>So you don't have the data then.

you state that without evidence yourself! how you chose to show yourself one of the damned!

>>9442

Christian Cinematic Universe featuring Valkyries and seraphim and the like when?

>>9483

Sorry bud, the burden of proof is on you to provide the data when you first claim to have it.

>Constant uses "!!!" instead of "!" or, better yet, just "."

You're not from around here, aren't you?

>you state that without evidence yourself! how you chose to show yourself one of the damned!

Trolling or not, you blaspheme things you don't understand. You need to repent of this foolishness and turn to Christ. You are not exemplifying the fruits of the Spirit throughout this thread.

>>9486

you aren’t my buddy. you’re being rude, so i will have nothing to do with you, but say only this, god damn you!

>>9489

God bless you with spiritual sight and may God save you .

>>9495

Anon I respect your maturity here

>>9495

>>9500

curse you to hell, arrogant abusers.

as you can see, no religion has an answer. women are the property of hell.

OP is a faggot

Clearly the argument stands!

>>9504

That's Mohammedan theology

Narrated Usama:

The Prophet said, "I stood at the gate of Paradise and saw that the majority of the people who entered it were the poor, while the wealthy were stopped at the gate (for the accounts). But the companions of the Fire were ordered to be taken to the Fire. Then I stood at the gate of the Fire and saw that the majority of those who entered it were women."

>>9686

it’s the philosophy of Saint Paul, who came first:

>>9202

but you can see there is only an attempt to sully the argument by association. dirty tricks. the facts are the facts, millions of samples deep we are overwhelmed by the significance of the findings against the very notion a moral woman!!!

The bible says there are godly women, St. Paul mentions a few in his writings and proverbs goes into extensively describing godly women

if Godly women don't exist, then the bible is a lie. Clearly it is more likely that OP is wrong

>>9125

Most 'religious' women aren't religious at all unless they have a father who has his head screwed on right.

For heresy free women go to >>>/christian/

>>9720

catholic women are exactly religious women, which are the same. what a shame, claiming otherwise, now, i know what a lie that is. but your laziness in discussion is evidence enough of a fool!

>>9704

sadly, it’s just untrue. they don’t weight any factor other than the three (or 4, depending on how you fount them). they may have more rules. and they may be nicer (duh) … as PEOPLE. but when it comes to the most core, the most important decision, that which shows the world what they are in their innermost selves, it’s just worldly metrics. it’s true of every religion, hinduism, amerindian cults now forgotten, atheism and its veneration of iq, all the well-known cults and religions in operation.

and the question isn’t if. it’s why. no philosophy, no deity, nothing amends the oman, at her core.

>>9701

however, i think you’ll find they are never unmarried women (we of course may find the birth mother of Jesus, Mary, a plausible exception, but her marriage was obviously arranged, so i’m not impressed one bit!) let’s analyze each passage - if you care what God has to say. i doubt you do. you have an arrogant, thus doubtless eternal fires stoking wpirit!

weird troll. anyway, back on topic, women who are religious are assortive on worldly metrics, indicating all religions fail to transform women (yes, atheism too, which places moral value on iq).

>>9851

But anon, don't put all the blame on women if you aren't prepared to abandon worldly metrics yourself.

>>9854

men have no influence, no voice, no choice, and that's why you women don’t care to listen. that “gross” feeling you get re. me is your biology informing you that i lack stylization matching dumb controllable males which satisfices your interests, alone charisma, looks, most of all money. even the most worldly man is less worldly than women, because he doesn’t care if his woman is charismatic or rich. but men have no say, and never will (because this would require an incel solution, such as arranged marriage!) I don’t blame you. i’m discussing with men the question of women being unmoved at their innermost place, their most important decision evidencing, by any of the deities (including atheism). i know you can’t overcome your feelings, which are just your biological programming.

if you knew the literature, missy, you would know that men aren’t in control of mating (in a society where women have supposedly free choice (it amounts to reducing humanity to the animal level to give control to women)).

what women do is that they’d rather join a harem, have 5 minutes with the chad than a life with mr incel.

women see 80% of men as below average in looks (it’s worse than that, because extremely ugly men self deselected).

so 50% of men are incel. incel in Christ!

>>9125

Surely there is some fat girl with a history of mental illness or something who could be willing to accept you if you decided to pull yourself together and also decided that you didn't care about material aspects such as beauty.

>what women do is that they’d rather join a harem

In real life women are jealous and hate to share.

>so 50% of men are incel.

Not true. You only think that way because you live inside an incel bubble taking your life advice from other incels who had never been able to talk with a girl either.

>>9871

>incel in Christ!

no, it doesn't work like that

>if you knew the literature, missy, you would know that men aren’t in control of mating

cite said literature that proves men have no agency in the romantic field

>>9889

<no, it doesn't work like that

<no

yes, arguments don’t work like that. you don’t have an argument! incel in christ indeed! millions of men incel in christ!

<cite said literature that proves men have no agency in the romantic field

??? why the hell would i fetch for you, rude npc?

>>9888

<In real life women are jealous and hate to share.

in real life women fight over the same man and effectively take turns riding the same dick. that they get into fights doesn’t change the fact that they orbit the man. it’s the way of nature.

<Surely there is some fat girl

dull insults. the topic is “why are all women regardless of deity whores?” why are all deities incapable? even the atheist deity is useless when it comes to the woman and her innermost self! and to even influence! but not even that is achieved.

<[50% of christian men are incel] Not true. You only think that way because you live inside an incel bubble

another insult. look, you’re human trash, that’s quite obvious, damn your soul forever, but respecting the fact, it’s simple stats. 80% of men are considered below average by women. when you match this up you will see i am being generous, massively.

jesus failed. he can’t fix the whores.

>>9901

>that they get into fights doesn’t change the fact

Just a while ago you were saying that women would join a harem. When a Muslim has two wives it's always because the man wants it, and then the two wives make each other and the entire family miserable with constant strife.

>the topic is “why are all women regardless of deity whores?”

The real topic is "Why is OP's view of reality so warped?" You sidestepped the issue, but it very much sounds like that you would reject a girl based on just the sort of reasons you deride when women use them.

>it’s simple stats. 80% of men are considered below average by women.

I know where you come from. There is an incel infographic about a single small study about the comparative attractiveness levels of the posted facial photographs of male and female users of a dating site. You shouldn't make over-extended conclusions based on said infographic, but incels do so constantly because it validates their despair and tells them that they don't need to apply themselves because it won't do any good anyway.

Incel "science" is highly flawed. A detailed analysis of what's wrong with the referred-to logic is left an an exercise for the reader, but it's not a hard exercise.

>>9902

> Just a while ago you were saying that women would join a harem.

they would, and in the scenario i indicated. they would - and do. they prefer chad’s harem to nerd’s undying devotion.

< When a Muslim has two wives it's always because the man wants it

wrong.

< miserable with constant strife

take polygamy to its own thread, as we aren't talking about that, who fucking cares? incels in christ definitely aren’t worried about that!!!

< There is an incel infographic about a single small study

it’s not a “small study”. it was big data. ok cupid. it means it’s established fact. no wiggle room. thus sayeth data gods.

< overextend

keeek wtf u talkin about dum fuk?

< Incel "science" is highly flawed.

uhuh. so, here’s the thing, that’s the feminist crap you’ll get shoveled into the mainstream press, meanwhile incel truths are glistening throughout the literature. they of course have to be careful to offer “possible explanations” which flagellate masculinity to the whore goddess feminism (ironic, that’s how it was in roman times, lads would chop their dicks off for the whore goddess), but the actual findings are resolutely and positively incel.

and this is no surprise. men are much more intellectual than women (ie able to separate emotions out, and apply general intelligence (iq) to problems). the findings of incel fedora-wearers may be IMPERFECT, but they are a force to be reckoned with. when a woman speaks, what a fountain of retardation.

>>9909

is having beauty standards being a whore? I'm a man and i would never date a woman who i don't find attractive, even if she was the pious person. Because in a relatioship to fully work both need to be attracted to each other. We can be friends no problem, but a sexual relationship is different. And don't kid yourself, you wouldn't date a very ugly girl even if she was very devout.

>>9940

oh. you’re numale. well, males don’t decide. that is, you may be unaware, but your compromise would be most extreme, should you bring yourself to settle enough to have choice.

>I'm a man and i would never date a woman who i don't find attractive

yes, but this is binary. again, it matters not, you are wise to wed the fist acceptable woman to come along, as to find one is only luck, men being incel in christ (or atheism or whatever). but why not pretend like you had a choice? it’s a laff to do so, because we are entertaining the impossible, like beggars comparing which mansion they’d like best. but let’s think about it, since women are not religious, or really anything but whores, and shall not be found in places of such as this is (hopefully you catch my sarcasm at your effete delivery, if not, so informed).

now, your standard, let’s see it again, and compare it to women!

>I'm a man and i would never date a woman who i don't find attractive

you have no idea how different this is from women, because you were simply not paying attention! ok, women have THREE… VARIABLES. and then some BOOLEAN screens. like if thens. like if you’re not a cop then you have to have worked as a lifeguard (stupid shit)… or legit shit like “is a member of my church”. but those are BOOLEAN. checkboxes. obstacles to the sale, do you catch my drift?

YOUR STANDARD FOR BEAUTY IS A BOOLEAN, UNLIKE WOMEN, WHO HOLD IT AMONG THEIR THREE VARIABLES!!!

this is how it is for men. good enough, in beauty, let’s check the quals (as VARIABLES). you would pick the most moral, the most chaste, the most this and that, with whatever weighting you may have (only retards look at only 1 variable).

see how you’re inverted? with women, they weigh carefully worldly variables, and satisfy (often extremely minimally, i could tell stories…) the “rules”, the booleans. with men, the worldly factors are minimums, and really men only care about looks (hidden within looks is of course the ability to make babies). on religion, men… WOULD (but cannot)… make it a variable, women would receive a score, and religion would be given a weight, higher for the more moral man, lower for the more materialistic man.

all fantasy, of course. it’s a whore world, thus 50% of christian men are “Incel In Christ”.

please don’t take my calling of women whores as hatred. i genuinely believe they and the gods are incapable of such change, it’s simply an outright impossibility, women are, in that most critical aspect of their lives, simply animals.

>>9948

salty schizopost

>>9970

ok, see, that’s not an argument.

that silence strikes me as verification. Incel In Christ

since this is the most important issue (though the connected one, the decline in membership, seems the greater), i bump to nominate this thread for your consideration!

>>9125

I've never had problems with women, because I recognize them as the weaker vessel and that I am required to LEAD them.

Be a man, stop being effeminate.

>>10075

if you didn’t, then you wxcll on a materialist basis, and would be fine in the world no less. these are the three variables alone women consider:

1. charisma

2. looks

3. and most of all money

50% of christian men are incel in christ.

>>10077

*excell

>>10078

lol

*excel

>>10077

No, you're wrong and don't want to accept your own weakness.

Listen to me, in the Word of God it says that if a man does not work he should not eat. There is no shame in earning a wage.

God says not to go for dumb whores. If a dumb whore is attracted to you, reject her. Once you reject a couple dumb whores, actual good women will notice that.

>>10081

you are a fool.

you say, how righteous am i! and, how unworthy are you.

but the topic ain’t us dudes, my dumb nigger, oh foold, dumb nigger, the topic is THAT ALL VAGINAS ARE THE PROPERTY OF HELL.

we look at the numbers, undeniable. and so, if you contradict me, you are a liar! but we also consider various factors.

oh fool, dumb nigger, the topic is the women, and how no deity (neither the anit deity atheism) intercedes in their hearts, in their most important life decision.

oh fool, oh nigger, have you ears to hear?

>>10082

THE LORD GOD saw that it was not good that the man should be alone. And he made him a WIFE.

Listen, trust in the Lord.

You are denying your weakness and saying half of all the people God made are destined to hell no matter what, even though they are heirs according to the promise.

I know I am weak, and so I listen to God's advice.

>>10083

the first marriage was an arranged marriage. but later, the idea of christ in the heart came along. i guess satan in the vagina gets along like awesome with neighbor jesus in the heart.

<i am weak

<you are weak

meaningless. the topic is why women are ruled by hell. as in, overwhelmingly!

>>10084

(men are meaningless in this topic, because women are in charge of reproduction in the modern world)

>>10084

Why are posting here when you don't believe in God?

>>10086

i’m not a woman. th topic is women, and why they are ruled by hell, regardless of religion (including atheism).

that is, their decisions don’t change much if they have a religion. they essentially erect a permeable barrier (which permits easy entry) and continue to prosecute mate selection by worldly metrics within that barrier.

>>10087

I got to choose the woman I'm with. And she chose me. I assume now you'll tell me I'm a "materialist" because I don't hate everyone for no reason.

What do you even mean by "barrier to male selection"? Are you implying you have the right to choose ANY woman you want?

>>10088

you didn’t read the thread. how dull.

well, that guy was a real waste. anyway, this is the most pressing topic of religion and society, that women’s vaginas are ruled, all, by satan, and that no deity intervenes, thus 50% of christian men are incel in christ.

those who are familiar with the literature know why women are in charge of mating. it’s because women skew enormously their own self evaluations, so unless men compromise most brutally, they are the maidens in waiting, hoping a non shit woman will deign to find someone her match indeed her match.

>>10088

also, i didn’t say that. weird. you didn’t even read what i wrote…

bump

>>9125

Sad little incel thinks his personal failures constitute "data" lmao

>>10207

rude bitch. well, i will give you, in particular, nothing in the way of supporting evidence, but the data is ironclad.

it’s this way: 50% of christian men are Incel In Christ.

idk if i should bump. maybe nobody else recognizes this is the central issue facing christianity today.

>>10448

not to mention refusing to support the ancient boundary stone (border walls).