There is Nothing New Under the Sun

The “Carousel,” and the women who participate in it, is a frequent topic in the manosphere,  especially the Christian manosphere. Many are the laments about the current state of affairs, and many are the wishes of a return to “better times.” But we forget that harlotry and wanton sexual immorality is nothing new. We seemed doomed to repeat a terrible cycle: that once the memory of dark times is past us we repeat the sins of our ancestors, until we are plunged into darkness once again and cry out for deliverance from God, who invariably delivers us from the darkness, only for us to forget it again. There is nothing new about the carousel at all:

19 Yet she increased her whoring, remembering the days of her youth, when she played the whore in the land of Egypt 20 and lusted after her lovers there, whose members were like those of donkeys, and whose issue was like that of horses. 21 Thus you longed for the lewdness of your youth, when the Egyptians handled your bosom and pressed[c] your young breasts.”

(Ezekiel 23:19-21)

Sound like anything you might have heard before?

This passage provides us with a valuable truth: the original carousel rider was Israel.

For some reason I find this both humorous and tragic at the same time.

What has been is what will be,
and what has been done is what will be done;
there is nothing new under the sun.

(Ecc 1:9)

[Post inspired by a comment left here.]

Advertisements

31 Comments

Filed under Christianity, God, Red Pill, Sex

31 responses to “There is Nothing New Under the Sun

  1. There really is nothing new. There are cycles of feigned restraint born of necessity and social pressure, but I was reminded of this post I read recently:

    http://thepracticalconservative.wordpress.com/2013/11/20/dont-lie-about-sin-in-the-past/

    She’s right. We make a mockery of the Cross when we pretend that people of generations prior were somehow less sinful.

  2. This is true. And what is also true is that we are not stuck in a never-ending loop, either. God speaks of redemption through a covenant with Him. Particularly in Hosea, speaking first of punishing *Israel*, and then drawing Israel back to Him in love, binding Israel to Him forever.

    I’ve also been struck by this verse:

    “I will not punish your daughters when they play the whore,
    nor your brides when they commit adultery;
    for the men themselves go aside with prostitutes
    and sacrifice with cult prostitutes,
    and a people without understanding shall come to ruin.” Hosea 4:14

    I understand that the discussion generally will revolve around the sins of women, as feminism is quite problematic in our society. And yet, from God’s perspective, men are complicit in the same. The ruin that comes to a people is the result of the sins of men and women together. (There’d be no carousels without horses.)

  3. @ Elspeth

    Thanks for providing that link. That mindset, that things were perfect back in the past, has always irked me. People might have been less sinful in action in the past, but as you point out, it isn’t necessarily because they were more righteous but because they could get away with less.

  4. @ Arid

    . And yet, from God’s perspective, men are complicit in the same. The ruin that comes to a people is the result of the sins of men and women together. (There’d be no carousels without horses.)

    I’ve been meaning to write a post on this when I get the time, but you are right that men aren’t free of sin in this either. Women seem to be the more sinful ones right now because they can get away with those sins. But men on the whole would be just as sinful if that option was available to them. I’m busy for the next week or so, but after that I should write that post. Some personal anecdotes should give it flavor.

  5. Yeah, yeh. Not all sluts are like that. But you men sin too!

    Etc etc

    What we have here is an implicit claim to overlook the sexual sin of 80% of women because it is gender equivalent to the 20% of men the sluts sin with.

    Holy moral agency, batman!

  6. People might have been less sinful in action in the past, but as you point out, it isn’t necessarily because they were more righteous but because they could get away with less.

    I agree. We had the exact same capacity for sin and temptation to sin.

    What is incorrect, however, is saying that exactly as much sin is always going on in all time periods. In slightly more sane time periods, people acknowledge the need for societal limits. When there are strong social norms in place against premarital sex, you get less premarital sex going on. People are still very tempted by it and might be willing to do it if they thought they could get away with it, but if they think they’ll suffer negative consequences for it, they’ll try to refrain.

    So I disagree with the post Elspeth linked to; there are times in the past (not all times, but some times) where there was a lot less sin occurring; again, this wasn’t because people were more virtuous but because external controls in the form of social sanctions were in place.

  7. Observer, sin is as much about thought as it is about deed. Many women more women commit these sins because they can commit them, whereas the men cannot. If men were able to sin as frequently as they desired, then the discrepancy between the sexes would be much smaller. That doesn’t excuse women from what they are doing. It just points out that men aren’t angels either.

    Which in the context of crying out to God for Justice does matter.

  8. @ SSM

    What is incorrect, however, is saying that exactly as much sin is always going on in all time periods. In slightly more sane time periods, people acknowledge the need for societal limits.

    Exactly. The truth is that you can legislate morality in a lot of case. Now, those rules and limits don’t necessarily make people moral, but they do make people less likely to commit immoral actions. Or otherwise stated: you can’t make them good, but you can make them less bad.

    This is one of the areas where I disagree with some Christian bloggers and commenters around these parts. They focus on God’s Grace and the saving power of the Word and Salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ and just that. In so doing, they fail to acknowledge, or perhaps lie to themselves, that many if not most people will reject the Way. They are so focused on individual salvation that they forget about the well-being of the community.

  9. But men on the whole would be just as sinful if that option was available to them

    Men sin differently to women. I very much doubt men choice of vice would be the same as womens.

    Women seem to be the more sinful ones right now because they can get away with those sins.

    The enemy has swayed society to reward familial destructive behaviours. Aka nofault divorce, mother custody and crippling alimony. Damn suffragettes…

    If men are deficient, it is in failing to recognise and resist the progressives in dismantling the means by which industrial civilisation made our lives better.

    Vox suggests this leads inevitably to grass huts with mud floors, where women live in harems with their bastard children. After several centuries getting away from that, i hope he is wrong, for a change.

  10. the truth is that you can legislate morality in a lot of case

    Without shared values, thats hopeless. Compliance will be surface only, and resistant underneath.

    Legislating morality implies using coercion and the power of the state to achieve it. That has always failed.

    Values must be shared to be enforced, and enforceable. It has to be at a grassroots level, like a church, club or group.

  11. Or otherwise stated: you can’t make them good, but you can make them less bad.

    I really like the way you put that.

    They are so focused on individual salvation that they forget about the well-being of the community.

    YES! That is exactly the problem with 99.9% of the writes at places like Christianity Today. They don’t understand that their cheap grace destroys social stability.

  12. @ observer
    I was going to add your tumblr to my blogroll; which category do you think you would fit best in?

  13. @ An Observer

    Men sin differently to women. I very much doubt men choice of vice would be the same as womens.

    True, but that doesn’t mean they will sin any less. And since the main topic here is fornication, I dare say that men are just as likely to engage in it as women, given their more powerful sex drive.

    Vox suggests this leads inevitably to grass huts with mud floors, where women live in harems with their bastard children. After several centuries getting away from that, i hope he is wrong, for a change.

    If left unchecked, yes, that will be the result. However, it won’t be an instantaneous transition. Which is good news for us.

    Without shared values, thats hopeless. Compliance will be surface only, and resistant underneath.

    It is true that shared values are important. You don’t need 100% of the population on board, but you do need a majority. But aren’t people naturally resistant to any kind of legislation that restrains their actions? That is just human nature.

    Legislating morality implies using coercion and the power of the state to achieve it. That has always failed.

    Really? Are you trying to tell me that outlawing thievery (which is immoral, don’t you know) is a failure? It is only if you define success as theft never, ever happening.

    Lets be honest here. People will always break the law. Especially if they disagree with it. Or if they think they can get away with it. Or if the benefit is great enough.

    Everyone runs this basic equation in their minds when they think about violating a law:
    Benefit of breaking the law – Costs of getting caught x Odds of getting caught

    If the benefit is greater than the costs and odds, then people will likely break it.

    Lets look at an OT law, for example. Adultery resulted in stoning to death. Did some people still commit adultery? Yes. But far fewer committed it than would have been the case if that law was not in place. That is the way every law works, even “moral” laws.

  14. @ SSM

    I really like the way you put that.

    Thanks. When you look at the OT, you can see that while the prophets worked to try and get the Israelites to be good, they had to settle for them being less bad.

    YES! That is exactly the problem with 99.9% of the writes at places like Christianity Today. They don’t understand that their cheap grace destroys social stability.

    Yup. They don’t understand the difference between individual forgiveness and social/communal forgiveness. Lets take adultery as an example (sorry for choosing something so close to home, but it fits). They and their ilk see adultery as a crime against God, the spouse, and perhaps any children. But adultery is as much a crime against the community as it is against any of the above parties. This is because adultery tears apart the social fabric of the community by weakening families and pitting them against one another. The inevitable result of not punishing adultery, therefore, is to weaken the family and render it increasingly insignificant. Fornication and unchastity have similar effects, because they interfere with pair bonding of spouses, which weakens the family, and since the patriarchal family is the bedrock of a stable community, weakens the community as well. Not to mention those sins spread disease among other negative effects.

  15. Oh, and I forgot to mention that there is a circular/cyclical aspect to how the family and community interact. Weak families lead to a weak community, but a weak community is also one which might not be able to protect families, or might even work against them. This is what happened here in the US: our community became weak, and stopped protecting the family as it should, by allowing things like no-fault divorce for example.

  16. theshadowedknight

    Men do have plenty of blame on their part. I am not one to play the “men, too” game, but neither will I deny the reality. “Men, too” is false because it is a false conflation or a false equality relating to the two sexes different approach to mating. “Men sleep around, too” is one of the false applications, “men sin, too” is not. If men were unwilling to tolerate horrors like abortion and divorce, they would not be nearly the problem they are. That men voluntarily abdicated their responsibilities does not excuse them; it makes them complicit.

    Donal, the interesting thing is that with a weak community, the family will strengthen to compensate. If you cannot rely on anyone but blood, you will have to rely on them that much more. That brings its own problems, but it is also the solution. As a community becomes interrelated again, the trust in blood becomes a communal trust once again.

    The Shadowed Knight

  17. @ TSK

    Donal, the interesting thing is that with a weak community, the family will strengthen to compensate. If you cannot rely on anyone but blood, you will have to rely on them that much more.

    Weak was a poor choice of words on my part. Unhealthy would be more accurate. A healthy community is good for the family, but an unhealthy community is bad for the family. A “weak” (as in, passive and uninvolved) community is not necessarily unhealthy, as you suggest, because it allows the family to do its own thing. An unhealthy community will interfere with the family, and it is actually better for the family if the community is “weak”, because then the damage the community can do is less. But a “strong” community that is also unhealthy can do a lot of damage, as we see now.

  18. theshadowedknight

    Donal, fair enough, but sick will lead to weak soon enough. The sickness is weakening the community as it weakens the family, and that will do two things. One, lessen the amount of interference it can bring to bear on the family, and two, strengthen the family through increased self reliance.

    Insane strength is no good if you are clipping off your limbs.

    The Shadowed Knight

  19. When TSK mentions abdication of responsibility, it reminded me of (I think) Edmund Burke who stated that “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.” It is this willingness (on the part of both men and women) to do the easy thing rather than the right thing that has led us to this place.

  20. theshadowedknight

    Maeve, you are correct. That is in my list of favorite quotes and sayings. Another one I enjoy is, “Why does treason never prosper? If it prospers, none dare call it treason?” The same goes for evil, especially because evil is rarely grand in scale. It is the venal, lesser evils that men choose over the righteous struggles.

    The Shadowed Knight

  21. There’s more to it though, because although Mr. Burke’s quote implies not taking some direct action or other, in fact we lose when we fail to adopt an approach of conversion. I have for a long time noticed that “conversion” is met with suspicion – and while it may be understandable, the fact is that we need conversion of men’s minds and hearts (I use “men” as in “people”) if we are to bring about change. And we cannot on the one hand purport to try and bring about change and then reject those who come around. I’m not wording it well. (and I’m not talking about the Jenny Erickson-type evolution of position on marriage thing – cost that’s just rationalization)

  22. deti

    Societies always, always legislate morality.

    The only question is which, and whose, morality will be codified into law and enforced on the body politic.

  23. theshadowedknight

    Fair point there, Deti. All the people quick to decry legislating morality will be there to force you to marry homosexuals or pay for bastards because it is the right thing to do.

    Maeve, I do not see where converts are turned away, at least not men. Suspicion of women is completely natural, given how hard it is to get your sex to focus and stick to it. The endless explanations and repetition of simple concepts because it is uncomfortable. Denial of obvious realities because of the tone or their mood. It is sensible and necessary to be suspect of the motives of women. That is the only way to keep them on task.

    The Shadowed Knight

  24. @TSK – I was thinking a little more broadly (not this community specifically – actually was thinking of someone who had made a radical change from pro-abortion views), but see where you’re coming from. A little skepticism is healthy as you are correct that motives can be suspect. I suppose that I’m more musing than anything else – it can be very hard to set aside long-held convictions/positions, particularly if doing so means losing friends or even family; those who do try and break free often face a rough road; the world is hostile to those who try and thwart our modern conventions (I am preaching to the choir – you’ve mentioned the difficulties you have faced for choosing to live a life of principle 🙂 as have many who post here).

  25. Morality and upright living has to be a voluntary choice arising from shared values. Those deviating from the values can be punished or expelled. Using coercion to enforce those values results in the price of those consequences being changed. Meaning the marketplace of values becomes a relativistic hodge podge.

    People do not make rational assessments of risk. People are not rational. This must be the starting point, and is why values are so important.

    Western industrial civilisation has succeeded precisely becuase it shares enough values to generate enormous wealth. The forced diversity program weakens that momentum, and will if unchecked eventually reverse it.

    Not something to look forward to.

  26. Ssm,

    Flattered, am I.

    Not sure which category it belongs to. I dont think you have one for ‘farce.’

    🙂

  27. theshadowedknight

    I suspect everyone. Especially women. I trust in God and myself, and I am not too sure about me. It is not paranoia if they are out to get you–unless it is you out to get you, then it probably is paranoia.

    The Shadowed Knight

  28. theshadowedknight

    That said, I do enjoy the conversations I have around here. I did not mean to come off so crotchety. You are okay in my book, Maeve. Even if I do talk to myself.

    The Shadowed Knight

  29. LOL TSK – you didn’t sound crotchety. I can’t ever tell how I come across, so I’m just always hoping I don’t sound half-baked.

  30. theshadowedknight

    No, Maeve, you are usually the most calm and sensible of the women here. By quite a bit, in fact. You are something of a relief, to be honest. I would say your tone is somewhere between resigned and serene. Keep it up. Go you–but not to your head.

    The Shadowed Knight

  31. jack

    Once you go Egyptian, you never go back?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s