How the Word "Homophobia" Hijacks Genuine Dialogue

I hate, hate, HATE the word "homophobia." It's a misnomer, at best, but a blatant, close-minded, hateful attack most of the times it's used.

Wikipedia defines "phobia" this way:
In clinical psychology, a phobia is a type of anxiety disorder, usually defined as a persistent fear of an object or situation in which the sufferer commits to great lengths in avoiding, typically disproportional to the actual danger posed, often being recognized as irrational. In the event the phobia cannot be avoided entirely, the sufferer will endure the situation or object with marked distress and significant interference in social or occupational activities.

I also looked up common phobias here: The Phobia List

So the word "homophobia," according to these two sources, actually means: An anxiety disorder manifesting in a persistent, irrational fear of sameness, monotony or of homosexuality or of becoming homosexual, from which the person experiences marked distress and a significant interference with social and/or occupational activities to a degree disproportional to the actual danger posed.

Here's a question for you: Do you actually know ANYONE who fits this description?

I sure don't. And I know a lot of people, several of which could be considered pretty caustic and cruel toward homosexuals. However, their cruelty is in no way an indication that they have a clinical anxiety disorder. The one thing does not equal the other. Sometimes people are just mean. Other times they just disagree. Neither situation, though, means they have some kind of mental illness that should be medicated.

So, why is the word "homophobia" used so much? Why is it slung around like a bag of crap at the head of anyone who dares breathe a conservative word about marriage and family?

Because it's a conversation stopper. It's a way to get what you want, not through logical, charitable discourse, but through name-calling. It's an intimidation tactic used by people who want to avoid genuine dialogue. Because, if genuine, open, charitable dialogue did take place, they might discover their arguments to be lacking. So, why test them at all? Let's just demand what we want, ignore the scientific and social and political and historical and biological and medical and spiritual arguments, and call anyone who dares stand in our way a "homophobe." That should stop them.

You see, calling someone a "homophobe" is the same as calling him/her clinically irrational. Naturally, anyone who is clinically irrational can't possibly have anything of value to add to the conversation. We shouldn't listen to them at all. That's the upshot of what is happening in just about ANY conversation in which the words "homophobia" and/or "homophobe" are used. The speaker of this word has his/her ears and mind closed. They're done listening. They're done thinking. They're done caring what anyone but themselves has to say. The arguments don't matter. The evidence doesn't matter. The relationships don't matter.

And that is why I hate that word.

Can You Find Complete Freedom In Christ In This Life? (The Answer Might Surprise You....)

On October 14, 2012 I lost a very dear friend to cancer. The following January, I moved in to a new state and left my home of eleven years (and my entire support system). Needless to say, 2013 was a really sucky year. Everything made me cry. And I mean everything. Commercials. Songs on the radio. Silent moments. Small frustrations.

Now, as my regular readers know, I'm a Christian. I love Jesus. I don't just believe--I know--He is in control and that He is coming back and is going to kick some serious butt in the suffering department. He will wipe every tear away and show us something so awesome that nothing we have suffered will matter.

But that's then....

I have to live right now. In this time. In this place. In this mess.

And so do you.

Sometimes (okay, always) it's hard for me to try to explain my burdens and sorrows to other Christians because I’m afraid I’m going to get some kind of pat, "versish" answer, like, "Just cast all your cares on Him and He will set you free." Or, "You just have to trust in Jesus to get you through it." Or, my most favorite (NOT!), "Well, you know God will never give you more than you can handle."

(OK, that last one is not even in the Bible. Look it up. I don’t care if there’s a popular song by Group 1 Crew right on the Christian stations that say it. It’s still false. The Bible says He will not tempt you beyond what you can bear. (I Corinthians 10:12-13) It even says He can’t tempt anyone to sin. (James 1:13) And most suffering—unless it’s actually God disciplining us, which is rare—doesn’t and can’t come from God anyway, (Job 34:10-12) so that misquote is seriously messed up. So let’s all just stop saying it.)

The fact is, in this life we will suffer. (That’s actually in the Bible—John 16:33. Not surprisingly, it’s one of Jesus’s less quoted promises.) But, that fact is not what I really struggle with. I expect to suffer and I know Christ suffered, died, and rose again to conquer the cause of our suffering—to break sin’s hold on the world and our own allegiance to it. But the Christian can find a sort of eternal perspective for most bad things that happen. When my friend died, I knew I’d see her again in Heaven. It doesn’t make me not miss her now, but I can look forward to a time I will no longer miss her. And Christ can bring amazing healing in what seem like insurmountably bad experiences—broken marriages, abuse, neglect, addictions, etc. Granted. (But it’s still pretty awesome and amazing!)

…But I still have some burdens that I feel will never go away. What about all those people who do not know Jesus? What about all of my friends and family and the strangers in China or down the block who suffer needlessly because they either don’t know or have rejected Him? I have this incredible burden for the people who share this world with me, and yet I often feel so incredibly powerless to really help them. I have cried and prayed about this often lately. That even if I am being incredibly blessed (which I am), I yet constantly grieve for those around me—I wear my sorrow for them like a heavy blanket I can’t put down. This doesn’t feel like “freedom in Christ.” It feels like being burdened by Christ. How can I find joy in my salvation knowing so many don’t yet know Him and, maybe, will never know Him?

The other day, as I was again contemplating these things while driving home, I was suddenly struck by a thought.

Jesus, too, was deeply emotionally burdened for the lost and suffering people of the world.

Duh, right? I mean, it’s pretty simple. It’s not like this is new information. But, to me in that moment, it was like I was seeing it for the first time. When the Bible says we have “freedom in Christ,” it’s talking about having freedom from our own sinfulness (if we so choose to accept it), it does not mean some kind of blanket freedom that means we should always be happy or jumping for “joy in the Lord.”

Even Christ didn’t have that kind of freedom in Christ!

He was a seriously miserable guy a lot of the time. (He weeps: John 11:35, He loses His cool: Matt. 23:33, He really loses His cool: John 2:15, He is in so much anguish His sweat fills with blood: Luke 22:44.) And I believe He STILL feels that way—for every man, woman, and child who is suffering in this moment, who feels rejected, who is fighting cancer, who is being cruelly abused, who is blinded by sin or pride, who has lost someone they love… who has not recognized God’s saving grace through Jesus’s sacrifice.

Freedom in Christ is not complete freedom from any and all feelings of despair or sorrow or longing. Christ mourned for the lost (John 11:35), He felt deep sorrow and anger at the lack of faith of His own disciples (Matt. 16:33), He longed for our salvation so desperately that He was willing to die a horrific death to make it possible (John 3:16-17).  

Some sufferings in this life we get over, we heal, we see beyond. Some we don’t. Sometimes we have to wait and trust and hope even as we go through it. And that’s okay. God wants us to be burdened by the sufferings of those around us (Col. 3:12-13 & a boat-load more). He wants us to empathize and sympathize with those who need help, a leg up, a word of encouragement, a second chance….

So I can now pray, “Lord, break my heart for what breaks Yours,” and know that I’m not giving up my joy in the Lord. I’m just sacrificing some of my temporary happiness so I will be motivated to share that lasting joy with as many people as I can, while I can.

As a Christian, How Should I Respond if a Friend of Mine Makes a Rude, Angry, Incindiary Comment on One of My Social Media Posts?

An 11-Year-Old Speaks Out About Inappropriate TV Commercials

Television Commercials Should Be More Appropriate

                “AAAAAAARG! There are children in the room for goodness sake, just wanting to watch a movie!”

            This is how I react to the dumb rated “R” movie commercials. If someone has a rated “R” movie commercial, they shouldn’t be allowed to let it be shown during a family friendly movie. That just doesn’t make any sense. Family friendly means that it is more than likely that a child somewhere will be watching, and that almost seems abusive for children to endure that insane commercial. If someone wants to post their commercial on TV, they should just put it on an already “R” rated movie. If there is a “PG” movie or TV show, have “PG” commercials. If there is a “PG-13” movie, have “PG-13” commercials, and so on. “R” rated commercials in my opinion shouldn’t even exist, let alone “R” rated movies.  Maybe people aren’t satisfied with how they are currently living, and think they need that inappropriate stuff to make them feel satisfied; I suppose they need that nonsense to fill in what God can easily fill. My conclusion is that children, really small, young, dependent, innocent people are being scared by the stupidity of people’s actions on television, and it needs to stop. I know, because I am a kid. Please get rid of the gross stuff from being on TV, because I still need to grow up in this world.

By Novik Isaiah Thomas, age 11

What Christian Feminism Is About

 This post is a response to The Matt Walsh Blog. Click here to read the original article.

Dear Matt Walsh,

I just read your blog article, “Christian Women: Feminism Is Not Your Friend,” posted April 22^nd.

I have to say, that although I’m glad to meet another brother in Christ, I found your attitude toward feminism and, apparently, women in general disappointing. First of all, it should be pretty obvious that, as a man, you are standing on somewhat precarious ground when you choose to preach to women about how they should think and what they should and should not expect in terms of how they should be treated by men. Given our vast history and continued battle for equality with men, any man who does so with the purpose of getting women to give up the fight could be accused of succumbing to a conflict of interests. However, I am not writing accuse you of this and will try to simply provide a response to your concerns, taking them at face value.

First, let me point out that you are working under the false assumption that feminism is about securing equal rights. That’s only part of it. It’s about changing the culture. It’s about recognizing that women have value in and of themselves without any reference to men. It’s about teaching women that they can just be who they are without feeling guilty. It’s about creating an environment where women can be safe in their relationships with men and one another—safe to speak their minds without being told they are stupid or should think more like a man, safe to say ‘no’ to sexual advances without feeling like they are taking something that doesn’t belong to them, safe to walk down the street at night without fearing being beaten and then raped to death.

Because you are a man, it’s unlikely you fully understand the genuine fears and self-doubt and emotional sacrifices women are forced to make that have absolutely nothing to do with whether she is paid as highly as a man or whether she can vote. Were those important victories for women? Of course. But, that is not the final goal of feminism. Feminism is about identity, safety, value, being.  And, because feminism is only, in a very small part, about legal rights, it is by no means made obsolete when some male judge condescendingly agrees to “let” us do something (that should’ve been a human right, not just a man’s right)—and probably does it just to get his own wife off his back. Can’t you see that the denial of freedoms and rights are only a symptom of the bigger problem? The problem is how femaleness is viewed—not only by society and the men in our lives, but by ourselves.

Consider the following current trends in the United States today:

“Child sexual abuse is not rare. Retrospective research indicates that as many as 1 out of 4 girls and 1 out of 6 boys will experience some form of sexual abuse before the age of 18. However, because child sexual abuse is by its very nature secretive, many of these cases are never reported” (“Child Sexual Abuse Fact Sheet, 2009.” The National Child Traumatic Stress Network. Retrieved April 24, 2014 from: http://nctsn.org/nctsn_assets/pdfs/caring/ChildSexualAbuseFactSheet.pdf)

“Men spend $10 billion on pornography a year. 11,000 new pornographic films are made every year. And in those films, women are not people. In pornography, women are three holes and two hands” (Jensen, Robert. “A Cruel Edge: The Painful Truth About Today’s Pornography—and What Men Can Do About It.” Retrieved April 24, 2014 from: http://uts.cc.utexas.edu/~rjensen/freelance/pornography&cruelty.htm)

“Cultural representation of glamorized degradation has created a situation among the young in which boys rape and girls get raped as a normal course of events” (Wolf, Naomi. The Beauty Myth. William Morrow & Co.: New York, 1991. 167.)

“In 2007, intimate partner violence resulted in 2,340 deaths; 70% of the victims were women” (Clark, Cat. “Intimate Partner Violence.” The American Feminist, Fall/Winter 2011, pp. 12-17.)

“Females (76%) experienced more domestic violence than males (24%).” (Morgan, Rachel E. and Truman, Jennifer L. “Nonfatal Domestic Violence, 2003-2012.” Bureau of Justice Statistics. Retrieved April 24, 2014 from: http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=4984)

“Implicit messages such as those found in the Twilight series appear elsewhere, too. A newspaper story might describe a crime in a titillating manner or encourage readers to blame the victim. A novel might suggest it is noble for a woman to allow an abusive partner back in her life. A popular song might devalue or objectify women, or a movie might portray domestic violence as a ‘lover’s quarrel’ leading into a romantic interlude,” (Clark, Cat. “Intimate Partner Violence.” The American Feminist, Fall/Winter 2011, pp. 12-17.)

Approximately 90% of rape victims are women (“Get The Facts.” Rape Crisis Center. Retrieved April 24, 2014 from: http://www.rccmsc.org/resources/get-the-facts.aspx.)

Women are more likely than men to think victims should take responsibility for their assault, and women ages 18-24 are, of all female groups, most likely to believe the victim is responsible. (The Havens. Wake Up To Rape Research: Summary Report. 2010: 5.)

And as bad as this is in our country, that doesn’t even touch what happens to women in other countries. Consider, for example, this report on the ongoing child bride phenomenon: http://www.soroptimist.org/whitepapers/WhitePaperDocs/WPPlightChildMailOrderBrides.pdf

After seeing all of this—and this is only the tip of the iceberg—can you still claim that women in this country are just as valued as men? That we have been endowed with all the rights and securities due us? That we have somehow “arrived?” That we have nothing more to fight for? No reason to raise our voices against injustice? No right to demand equality?

But, of course, lest I forget, you also make the mistake of defining “equality” as “sameness.” This is not at all what is meant when women demand equality. We do not demand that the government pay for us to be given sex changes so that we can be men. We don’t want to be men. We want to be fully woman—in all the beauty and even the mess that entails—and know that that’s enough. If a woman believed that the only way she could become equal to men was to become a man, that would completely defeat the purpose of “feminism.” But, frankly, we are already equal (meaning of equal value and capability and responsibility) before God; we just want our husbands and fathers and sons and friends and pastors and bosses and co-workers to wake up and recognize that fact.

A third mistake you make is, I’ll admit, and understandable one, but a mistake nonetheless. You assume that being a feminist and being pro-abortion are inseparable. You assume that it was feminism that created the monster of abortion. First of all, I think it is easy to conflate the ideal of feminism with the feminist movement. These are two very different things. Just as there is the ideal Christian (follower of Christ) and there are the Crusades, which will forever be recorded in the annals of “what you shouldn’t do in the name of Jesus.” So, your claim, “Feminism, they say, exists largely to combat the patriarchal evils of pro-life Christianity,” (aside from being divorced from any reference to whom the “they” is referring to) is deceptive.

Feminism exists because women have consistently throughout history been viewed as “the weaker sex,” “less than men,” “second to man,” “subservient to men,” etc. (And, yes, these are all current, modern ideas.) Culture often teaches us that this is our lot, and we must accept it to be good, desirable, and worthy of love. Men are often sent the message that they get to control, manipulate, belittle, and use women, and they are heartily congratulated when they deign to give women respect (that she should’ve had all along). Feminism exists because there is something wrong with this picture. And, frankly, Christianity has not solved it. (And by Christianity, I do NOT mean Christ or the Bible. I mean the traditional religious practice itself.) Why? Because Christianity is led almost exclusively by men who find these ideas convenient for them and, like an ego-enhancing drug, difficult to avoid.

You wrongly follow the idea that modern, pro-abortion feminists have embraced abortion “logically” somehow stemming from the early anti-abortion feminists. No. Their arguments are anything but logical. There is no such thing as a pro-abortion argument that is an exercise in good logic; they are each one absolute perversions of reason. I have a master’s degree in philosophy, know logic well, and have studied all the arguments on both sides of this issue. Trust me. The pro-abortion ones are bad, bad, bad—often not structurally valid, and always unsound. They utilize every logical fallacy known to man, including blatant lies, straw-man arguments, red herrings, and skewed emotional arguments that hinge on misdefinitions.

But, logic aside, you seem bent on laying the blame of the tragedy of abortion at the feet of feminism. Or, more accurately, at the feet of women. This is baffling to me.

Which gender has exclusively controlled the White House since President Washington? Which gender has consistently held the most seats in the Senate and House of Representatives? Which gender holds the most public offices, attorney degrees, and police officer positions? Which gender holds the most seats as university presidents, deans, provosts, and professors? Which gender owns the most businesses and hires the most employees? Which gender leads the most churches and synagogues and temples? Which gender holds the most positions as physicians, and surgeons, and abortionists? Which gender is most active in the sale, trade, and use of pornography and (mostly female) sex slaves? Which gender is more able and statistically more likely to leave a domestic situation if it doesn’t conform to his personal desires?

The answer to each of these questions is: MEN.

So, who is most in control of our legal system and our culture and how we live our lives? MEN.

And who most benefits from abortion? MEN.

The noisy, angry voices of a few very messed up women make it easy for men to step aside, just like Adam did in the garden (who was right there with Eve the whole time—Gen. 3: 6), and let women take the blame and suffer the consequences for their mistakes. God didn’t let Adam off the hook, though. And He’s not going to let men off the hook for the tragedy of abortion, either, be assured.

Do you know the number one reason why women have abortions? It’s not because they want an abortion. No little girl dreams of growing up, getting sexually used and then disposed of by men, and having one abortion after another. So, why do women have abortions?

“The reasons most frequently cited were that having a child would interfere with a woman’s education, work or ability to care for dependents (74%); that she could not afford a baby now (73%); and that she did not want to be a single mother or was having relationship problems (48%).” (“Reasons U.S. Women Have Abortions: Quantitative and Qualitative Perspectives.” Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 2005, 37(3):110-118. New York: Guttmacher Institute. Retrieved on April 24, 2014 from: http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/journals/3711005.pdf)

 

When I see this, things begin to add up for me. A woman has an abortion when her husband or boyfriend refuses to help support her or the children he creates, when her boss says, “We have no way to help you find childcare,” when her school says, “You are going to lose your scholarship and be kicked out of student housing if you have a child,” when her pastor says, “If we support you, that means we’re condoning what you have done.” The truth is that society (again, largely led by men), does not see pregnancy and childbirth as a natural and expected and beautiful part of womanhood. We see women as good for sex, but burdensome when that sex leads to a baby. So, we tell women that they have a “choice,” when really we mean they have only one choice: abortion. But, abortion is in no way pro-woman. It deeply wounds the woman and pits her against her own children—all the while letting her male user and abuser get away free of consequences so he can mistreat the next woman he meets. As the pro-life feminist group, Feminists For Life (www.feministsforlife.org) says, we force women to choose between her own life and the life of her child; but women should refuse to choose!

Yes, it’s hard to be abandoned by the man who claimed to love you. It’s hard to be a single mom. It’s hard to find a job and support and an education with a child. It’s hard to place your child for adoption, even when he or she came from an unplanned pregnancy. But, when society, including “feminist” organizations like NOW (National Organization for Women), NARAL (National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League), and Planned Parenthood, tells a woman that she can’t handle these hardships, that she’s not strong enough to do it on her own, that she can’t get by without the job she wants or the education she wants or the love she wants, what are we saying about womanhood?

We’re saying women are weak! That they can’t handle the tough situations! That, without a man, women can’t make it! I wholeheartedly disagree! You see, I was that woman! I was the girl who believed that girls were lesser than boys, who fell in love with an abusive, controlling, self-righteous, manipulative man, whose emotionally abusive boyfriend then kept pushing and pushing and pushing for sex, who finally gave in, who got pregnant, whose boyfriend then demanded she have an abortion, who refused, whose boyfriend then threatened to steal her child but dumped her and abandoned his child instead, whose parents were disappointed, whose school said, “You can’t be here anymore,” who lost her job when the baby was born, who lived on $100 a month, who felt completely alone!

...except for that precious little girl’s smile that lit up the dark places of my world. And a family who came around and helped me out as best they could. And a Church who forgave me and supported me and welcomed me back with open arms. And a God who said, “Despite your mistakes, I’m going to bless you with a beautiful daughter who you will love with your whole heart for the rest of eternity—because I’m a God who loves and romances and blesses, even when you don’t deserve it, just because I can and because I want to.”

Now, I am a Christian woman. I am also emphatically pro-life. I am married to an amazing man and mother to an intelligent, hardworking daughter and two sons who are equally so. But, I am also a feminist. I am a feminist because I understand the difference between feminism, the ideal, and the issue-driven, political, feminist movement. And, I am a Christian because I recognize the difference between Jesus Christ and His followers.

Feminism itself simply means being pro-woman. We’re, literally for woman, meaning not against woman nor indifferent toward woman. And, Who defined what it means to be a woman? Who decided to make woman in His image? (Gen. 1:27) Who was the first to honor woman? Who gave His life and conquered death for woman? Who gave woman a free and clear, direct path to relationship with God—without having to go through a parent or spouse or priest first? Jesus did these things! Jesus, who is also the Creator (John 1:1-3), and a member of the Triune God, was the first feminist. He was the first to be pro-woman. As it happens, He’s also very pro-man, having done all of this for man, too—showing that one need not be anti-man to be pro-woman or vice versa.

I am the founder and president of The Coalition of Christian Feminists (www.facebook.com/christianfeminists)—a small group of men and women who recognize that feminism is an ideal defined by God Himself, who seek to bring our worldviews under His direction in all things, and who take the Triune God (the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit) as the correct relationship model for marriage (Jesus, Man, and Woman)—with perfect harmony between the three. We avoid getting distracted by particular issues, such as whether or not a woman should be a pastor, but place all these things at the feet of Jesus, seeking to keep Him in sight at all times.

Just because certain self-proclaimed “feminists” are angry and noisy, doesn’t give them the exclusive right to define the term “feminism.” Because feminism is an ideal, and because right and wrong, good and bad, only make sense in reference to our Creator, isn’t it preferable to let Him define it for us?  

One amazing thing about God is His ability and proclivity to redeem. He doesn’t wipe everything out and start over from scratch. He takes the little that is there and does something new with it—imbuing it with His own self. Even in Genesis 1:1, we see that His act of creation of Earth and mankind was an act of redemption. It was not, in that description, creation ex nihilo (out of nothing); there was something there, variously described as waters, the “deep” (which had a surface), darkness, chaos, a void. And, so God stepped into this mess, became the Light in the darkness, and turned something ugly and empty into something beautiful and full and valuable. He did the same thing as Jesus Christ. He stepped into the mess and offered a way out through His own death and resurrection.

So, I think it is a mistake to allow people who deny their Creator to define our ideals. Yes, the word “feminism” has been taken to mean something ugly, something confused, something perverse. But the word itself is a good word. It has a good base meaning. And, I think it’s time we take it back, give it to Christ, and let Him do what He does best—redeem it for His glory. We’ve given up enough territory to the Enemy. It’s time we started taking some back.

May you be blessed,

Susan

What is Christian Feminism?

 

The Stereotype	The Reality
Burns bras! Sexually liberated! Women should feel free to engage in casual sex, just as men do.	The true feminist recognizes the beautiful form given to her by her Creator, values her body and her purity, and protects herself from those who would selfishly use her.
Pro-Choice! A woman has a right to do whatever she wants with her own body and shouldn’t be forced to carry a child to term if she doesn’t want to.	Pro-Life! The true feminist recognizes, not only her own value, but the value of all human lives—including those in an earlier stage of development. A woman has a unique ability to bond with her young, long before they are born, so a true feminist embraces this God-given strength and uses it and her wisdom and love to defend her children from those who would seek to cause them harm.
Uses her body to seduce men and manipulate men.	The true feminist can be sexually attractive, but does not rely on her sexuality to define her relationships with men. She realizes that love requires respect, and so improves her mind and character to be worthy of the respect of those around her.
Hates men. Men are the enemy. They only want “one thing!” And, when they get that, they either treat you like dirt or leave.	Loves and respects men! A true feminist is very much pro-man! She realizes that a single gender of any species will never be complete without it’s complementing half. So, she encourages and challenges the men in her life (husband, sons, brothers, fathers, etc.) to become men of God and establish their identity in their Creator as men, just as she seeks to do the same as woman. But, she will not sell out and allow herself to be used or mistreated by anyone who fails to recognize her worth as a daughter of the King (and, if necessary, she will wait a long time until she finds a man willing to rise to the challenge).
Experiments with lesbianism. Feminists don’t need men for anything, not even romantic relationships.	A true feminists relishes in her uniqueness as a woman. Femininity is not the enemy! Being “girlie” is just fine! (As long as you exhibit respect for yourself in the process.) The goal of the feminist is to realize what it means to be woman—not to try to force herself to become more like a man. God made women to sexually desire men—the manlier the better! It’s our differences that spark the chemistry between us.
Anything men can do, we can do better!	A true feminist does not play the game of one-upmanship. The goal of discovering and claiming the beauty and value of Christ-honoring womanhood is not to gather ammunition for male-bashing. True feminists are strong enough to encourage one another and the men in her life, recognizing their unique, God-given abilities, desires, and talents.
Feminists get offended when men open doors for them or behave with chivalry. Who do they think they are? Men are being condescending when they treat us like the “little lady.”	A true feminist is unafraid to open both her mind and her heart to the people around her. She can tell the difference between common courtesy and condescension or insult. She is gracious to the former, but uses her good judgment with the latter—evaluating the relationship and the situation to decide whether the battle for respect is worth her time. Sometimes a gentle or subtle reminder of her equal status as human is necessary and helpful. Sometimes, it is not and contrary to God’s purposes for that interaction. She seeks and follows Godly wisdom in these matters and refrains from letting her emotions control her actions.
Feminists make terrible wives! Everything has to be split 50/50—chores, free time, and bank accounts. She refuses to take her husband’s name, fights for control over every decision, and finds it insulting to have to obey her husband, nagging to get her way. No man wants to live with a woman like that.	A true feminist makes a wonderful wife! She realizes that marriage is a relationship that is supposed to reflect the character of the Triune God—where each participant (husband, wife, and Christ) gives 100%! Stages of life come and go. Sometimes she will sacrifice a disproportionate amount for her husband and children. Sometimes he will. But the trend should be a fully-dedicated partnership—working side by side for a common purpose—to become more like their Creator. Decisions are made through open, respectful discussion coupled with prayer—not through power struggles. She speaks her mind, but is wise enough to listen. She will admit when her husband is better at something, but works diligently at everything under her purview, seeks new ways to exercise her abilities, and refrains from overburdening him. She rises to the challenge of being her husband’s equal partner, but never humiliates or undermines him. She is his champion, and he is hers. She finds him desirable, capable, and worthy of respect. She laughs at his jokes, inspires him to greatness, and brags about him behind his back.

 From the Coalition of Christian Feminism, 2/24/2014. For more about what it means to be a Christian Feminist, visit www.facebook.com/christianfeminists

 

Would a Good God Send People to Hell? (Logic Flow Chart)

The Objectification of God

"I'm struggling with my faith."

"The experience increased my faith."

"My faith gets me through the day."

Have you ever heard or said anything like the above sentences? Here's my problem with them: they mean almost nothing. Why? Because this way of speaking makes faith into an abstract concept. The word can be applied to anyone or anything. It is, at least, one step removed from the object of that faith.

I don't like talking about faith as if it is a thing in and of itself. To talk about our faith makes us sound very spiritual, but our faith is only so good as the object or person in which it is placed. If I have faith in a chair to hold me up when I sit in it, my faith means nothing if someone came along before I got there and removed all the screws. If I have faith in God, my faith is only so good as my relationship with Him as a Being.

That last sentence is very important. My faith is only so good as my relationship with God as a BEING. It is essential that we recognize God as a BEING, as opposed to a BELIEF. Many of us good, well-meaning, "spiritual" Christians find the fact that God is an actual Being very inconvenient. That means He has a personality. He has opinions (that I may not agree with). He experiences emotions. He thinks about things differently than I do. He has His own goals and methods of accomplishing them. He works on His own timetable.

It's much easier to think of Him as a belief and just try to fit that belief into our world and our plans as best we can. That way, I can go to church and try to be good and even pray once in a while, but I don't have to rearrange my life to fit with Someone else's agenda. I don't have to sacrifice my lifestyle (as long as it's "good enough" to sooth my conscience) to step out of my comfort zone into the unknown realm of relying on a Being I can't see. I don't have to study the Word in its minute details to learn how to hear His voice in my life and then wait and listen for Him to speak to me.

Adding god to my life is so much easier and less messy than aligning myself to God.

But, do I really need another belief? I have lots of them. I believe dark chocolate is better than milk chocolate. I believe it's scary to drive on icy roads. I believe Nietzsche would have made a very good Satanist. I believe my dog is prettier than my neighbor's dog.

Do I really need one more belief? Isn't it better to have a relationship?
Think of it this way. What would you prefer--to believe that you have a spouse who loves you or to actually have a spouse who loves you?

I want the spouse. I want the love. I want the messy. I want the challenge and the disagreements and the making up. I want the sounding board for my insane, crazy emotions and my deep, profound thoughts about the meaning of life. I want the discovery of the depth of who he is--weird or not. I want the teasing and the wrestling and the love making and the rolling of the eyes. I want it all. I don't want just a belief in him, I want HIM.

Without Him, I'm stuck with just...

me.

The difference I'm talking about is a difference in the kind of knowledge we have a right to claim. It's the difference between propositional knowledge ("I know that God exists.") and interpersonal knowledge ("I know God.")

Knowing a fact is propositional knowledge and it's fine, for what it is, but it's very impersonal. It's no more important than knowing the moon exists. OK. Got it, but what does that really matter for my day-to-day?

Knowing a person is interpersonal knowledge (IPK) and it is a vastly different experience than knowing a fact. It's the difference between knowing Shaquille O'Neal exists and knowing Shaquille O'Neal. Which is more dynamic? More life-changing? More involved? More intrusive into our world?

So, when we think of using the word "faith," perhaps we should instead use the Name of the Person---the BEING--we really mean: Jesus Christ.

"I'm really struggling in my relationship with Jesus Christ."

"The experience with Jesus increased my dependence on Him."

"Jesus Christ gets me through the day."

Suddenly, these statements start to make sense. I want to hear more. I want a glimpse inside a relationship that is dynamic and real. I want to know this Person, too.

Closing thought:
The word "faith" isn't the only word we use to objectify God. Consider the words/terms: "moral right," "religion," "justice," "hope," etc. There are many, many ways we push God away through the way we conceive of Him and substitute abstract words for Him. When we think of Him as a belief, our word choices betray us. When know Him as a Being, our word choices reflect that relationship. This week, listen to the way people talk about God. Is He a belief or a Being to them? How about to you?

True Hope

 

God is a God of hope. He wants to give us true hope—a hope that lasts and endures, regardless of the situations we find ourselves in.

Hope is a forward-looking idea. The Spanish word for hope is esperanza. It comes from root word esperar, or 'to wait'. In this country we usually think of waiting as a negative thing, like waiting in a line at the supermarket. But hope is the part of waiting that anticipates the blessings to come. Hope is the knowledge that something better is coming. Esperanza is the feeling the groom has as he waits at the altar for his bride to walk down the aisle in her white wedding dress.

Revelation describes the joy and anticipation Christ inspires as He waits for His bride--us, the Church:

"Let us rejoice and be glad and give him glory! For the wedding of the Lamb has come, and his bride has made herself ready. Fine linen, bright and clean, was given her to wear."  Then the angel said to me, "Write: 'Blessed are those who are invited to the wedding supper of the Lamb!' "  Revelation 19:7-9 (See also: Rev. 21:1-7)

How else does the Bible describe hope?

1. Hope is a kind of faith—the faith we have in a person we know personally and trust unconditionally.

Why are you downcast, O my soul? Why so disturbed within me? Put your hope in God, for I will yet praise him, my Savior and my God.  Psalm 42:5-6a    

For you have been my hope, O Sovereign LORD, my confidence since my youth. Psalm 71:5

Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see.  Hebrews 11:1  

Through him you believe in God, who raised him from the dead and glorified him, and so your faith and hope are in God. I Peter 1:21

Command those who are rich in this present world not to be arrogant nor to put their hope in wealth, which is so uncertain, but to put their hope in God, who richly provides us with everything for our enjoyment. I Timothy 6:17

So, like all faith, hope is based on something else. If your hope is based only in people, then, when those people let you down, your hope will also fail. And you find yourself feeling hopeless. But when you base your hope in Jesus—in His salvation and in His promises—then you will find true hope—a hope that will never prove false—because Jesus can never be false. (Numbers 23:19)

2. Hope is eager anticipation based in certain knowledge of good things to come.

But as for me, I watch in hope for the LORD, I wait for God my Savior; my God will hear me. Micah 7:7

For in this hope we were saved. But hope that is seen is no hope at all. Who hopes for what he already has? But if we hope for what we do not yet have, we wait for it patiently. Romans 8:24-25

3. Hope in Christ has the power to lift us out of our present circumstances, no matter how dire, and set our eyes on what really matters.

Out of the depths I cry to you, O LORD; O Lord, hear my voice. Let your ears be attentive to my cry for mercy. If you, O LORD, kept a record of sins, O Lord, who could stand? But with you there is forgiveness; therefore you are feared. I wait for the LORD, my soul waits, and in his word I put my hope. My soul waits for the Lord more than watchmen wait for the morning, more than watchmen wait for the morning. O Israel, put your hope in the LORD, for with the LORD is unfailing love and with him is full redemption. He himself will redeem Israel from all their sins. Psalm 130:1-8

A horse is a vain hope for deliverance; despite all its great strength it cannot save. But the eyes of the LORD are on those who fear him, on those whose hope is in his unfailing love, to deliver them from death and keep them alive in famine.  We wait in hope for the LORD; he is our help and our shield. In him our hearts rejoice, for we trust in his holy name. May your unfailing love rest upon us, O LORD, even as we put our hope in you. Psalm 33:17-22

Indeed, in our hearts we felt the sentence of death. But this happened that we might not rely on ourselves but on God, who raises the dead. He has delivered us from such a deadly peril, and he will deliver us. On him we have set our hope that he will continue to deliver us, as you help us by your prayers. Then many will give thanks on our behalf for the gracious favor granted us in answer to the prayers of many.  II Corinthians 1:9-11

4. Hope in Christ provides insight into our present circumstances, wisdom to know how we should respond to them, and certainty within our relationship with Him.

Therefore, since we have such a hope, we are very bold. II Corinthians 3:12

We have this hope as an anchor for the soul, firm and secure. It enters the inner sanctuary behind the curtain, where Jesus, who went before us, has entered on our behalf. He has become a high priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek. Hebrews 6:19-20

Let us hold unswervingly to the hope we profess, for he who promised is faithful. Hebrews 10:23

5. We are called to hope in Christ. It is not something we can access on our own strength. It is an invitation from God to us and a gift to all who respond to Him.

I pray also that the eyes of your heart may be enlightened in order that you may know the hope to which he has called you, the riches of his glorious inheritance in the saints, and his incomparably great power for us who believe. Ephesians 1:18-19a

There is one body and one Spirit--just as you were called to one hope when you were called...  Ephesians 4:4

A Good God Would/Wouldn't.... (Fill in the Blank)

(As first published at http://relationshipphilosophy.blogspot.com/)

In 1860, Charles Darwin wrote a letter to Asa Gray in which he described one of his motivations for rejecting belief in God. He wrote:

"With respect to the theological view of the question; this is always painful to me.— I am bewildered.— I had no intention to write atheistically. But I own that I cannot see, as plainly as others do, & as I sh^d wish to do, evidence of design & beneficence on all sides of us. There seems to me too much misery in the world. I cannot persuade myself that a beneficent & omnipotent God would have designedly created the Ichneumonidæ with the express intention of their feeding within the living bodies of caterpillars, or that a cat should play with mice (emphasis added)."

Two years ago, I attended a creation talk (a series of talks, really) given by a Seventh Day Adventist pastor. The research and argumentation was exceedingly well researched and delivered, I thought, and presented a wealth of evidence for the existence and involvement of a good, loving Creator. However, on the last evening of the series, the pastor said this (which I'm paraphrasing as best I can from memory):

"I want to suggest that when people die and go to Hell, that they are not completely destroyed and neither do they stay there, suffering horribly, for an eternity. Now, bear with me as I explain why I think this is: When I read the Bible, I find a God who would do anything to rescue His children--us--even to the point of dying on the cross for us. Furthermore, the Bible says that when we get to heaven, that ever tear will be wiped away. But, could you be happy in heaven if you knew your husband or sister or child was suffering in Hell? No. So, I believe that people who die without knowing Christ go to Hell and suffer for a time, but are then destroyed--burned up, so to speak. People do not suffer for an eternity in Hell. A good God wouldn't let that happen (emphasis added)."
FYI, there was no mention of the many, many passages in the Bible that clearly describe an eternity of suffering in Hell for those that do not accept Jesus Christ's payment for their sin.

But, the maligning of the Word aside, the dangerous thinking I'm pointing to here is revealed whenever we start a sentence with: "A good God would..." or "A good God wouldn't...."

This kind of statement requires that we base our understanding of the world on a complete reversal of our moral position with God's moral position. It sets me up as a judge over God. It implicitly claims that I am of a higher moral ilk than God is, that I have the right to judge His behavior or motivations, and (in a bizarre twist) that the truth of His pronouncements and, indeed, His very existence is dependent on my verdict.

Our first mistake is to conceive of God as a moral Being. No. He's the Standard. He doesn't have to follow the rules, He is the Rule. His very character is the standard. He is completely sovereign. There is no free-floating "morality" that exists independently of Him. And, even if there were, what makes us think we would have access to it?

Our second mistake is to assume we, of our own accord, have anything good to contribute to the conversation. We are irreparably flawed, in and of ourselves. Our insight is limited, our judgment is poor, our behavior atrocious. So, where do we think this nebulous standard of "good" comes from, if not from God? Certainly, it doesn't come from us. And, yet, we presume to put God on trial and set ourselves up as His judge?