Feminism is not compatible with Christianity?

[Thursday]

And I would guess that a post about Hitler is about abortion. LOL. You are the one carrying it on. You made that post an hour ago. You should take it somewhere else.

I simply look at my alerts and respond to posts directed to me.

 

[RedPonyDriver]

There is no love without respect or respect without love. But both are earned. A person who treats their partner with contempt and hatred, who cheats on them and/or abuses them will most likely lose that person's love, and respect works the same way. You have to earn both.

And you just described the problem I have with a book called "Love and Respect" by Hartley. He does not say that respect is earned. He also claims that his book will solve all marital problems. I wrote a paper destroying his argument.

 

[RedPonyDriver]

Enough with the abortion thing. That is not on topic here. Read the OP to get the aim of this conversation

 

[Hetta]

And you just described the problem I have with a book called "Love and Respect" by Hartley. He does not say that respect is earned. He also claims that his book will solve all marital problems. I wrote a paper destroying his argument.

I was once in a church class where that book was used. It was so illogical to me that I handed back the book and left the class. It is a typical example of how the modern church takes a small piece of scripture and builds it into a major pillar of marriage - women only desire love, men only desire respect. What nonsense. Both are an essential part of what makes a marriage, and you cannot have one without the other.

 

[NothingIsImpossible]

I will say in response to the definition of a feminists, it doesn't really matter what a dictionary or whatever says it is. If you ask anyone what a feminists is you will get varied answers because there are many forms of a feminist. Just like there are many forms of christians.

As for Thursday (the member) looking at his posts elsewhere this is what he seems to do with every topic. Endless back and forths. Honestly you need to know when to agree to disagree because internet arguments are all that useful and waste time. Also to note Thursday is 51 from Texas. Not sure what point I am making with that but I know my friend from texas was very "rowdy".

 

[HannahT]

And you just described the problem I have with a book called "Love and Respect" by Hartley. He does not say that respect is earned. He also claims that his book will solve all marital problems. I wrote a paper destroying his argument.

I wouldn't have such a big issue with that book if people didn't take it so legalistically. Look to the spirit of what is being said - and grow from it. Don't take it so literal, and that makes problems BIGGER than they were before.

I mean it should be a no brainer that everyone wants love and respect - and you can't have one without the other.

 

[HannahT]

I will say in response to the definition of a feminists, it doesn't really matter what a dictionary or whatever says it is. If you ask anyone what a feminists is you will get varied answers because there are many forms of a feminist. Just like there are many forms of christians.

I agree.

Yet, if you want to shed some negative light on something? Feminist in the negative light - the barrier of all evil - the opposite of Christianity....and all that jazz. Problem have no problem pulling it out and using it.

Today, it is the Christian's "F" word.

 

[mkgal1]

Merriam-Webster:

1. Full Definition of feminism
   1. 1: the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes
      
      
   2. 2: organized activity on behalf of women's rights and interests

I think the word you are looking for is "Misandry".

Feminism is about equality. Not about hating men.

See post 184 above. We don't get to make up our own definitions to suit our particular political or religious agenda.

Agreed which as is another reason why I'm not a feminist

Wait a minute, I'm confused....BlessedWife. You agree with JackRT (on something) ...so *what* are you saying exactly is the reason why you are not a feminist there (that we don't get to make up our own definitions? That a feminist is about equality of the sexes and you aren't of that belief? What?

 

[mkgal1]

I just read this blog post today and since it's on this topic I thought I'd share.

Looking at the relationship of Adam and Eve before that first sin is revealing:

But for Adam no suitable helper was found [among the animals]. So theLord God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man’s ribs and then closed up the place with flesh. Then the Lord God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man. (Genesis 2:20-22.)

The original Hebrew language speaking of a suitable helper in the passage gives the impression of someone far superior to what we think of in modern English when we read the word helper; it is a person of equal strength who helps carry the burden, a helper of the same kind as the one being helped. There is no leadership component between the helper and the helped person. In fact, the same Hebrew for “helper” can be found later in the Old Testament when God is described as a helper to his people. God certainly is not the inferior party in that relationship.

The word translated as “helper” is “ezer”, which comes from Hebrew root words meaning strength and power. The word translated as “suitable” is “kenegdo”, which means facing, corresponding, or equal to.In English “helper” suggests an assistant or subordinate, but the Hebrew doesn’t carry that connotation. In fact, the term is used more than 20 times in the Old Testament to describe a superior helper; usually God. So a better translation is: “I will make him a “strength corresponding to” him, or “a rescuer equal to him”. (Gail Wallace, In The Image Of God: Implications for Gender Equality.)

Since “ezer” is used to describe God as our superior helper, then the word “kenegdo” might be seen as bringing the word “ezer'” down to Adam’s level so that it is clear Eve is a helper equal to Adam rather than superior to him. ~https://timfall.wordpress.com/2016/02/08/a-coalition-built-on-false-premises/

 

[mkgal1]

And you just described the problem I have with a book called "Love and Respect" by Hartley. He does not say that respect is earned. He also claims that his book will solve all marital problems. I wrote a paper destroying his argument.

Ugh.....that's one of my *least* favorite books of all time. What Eggerich is calling "respect" I believe is actually really "pride" and "entitlement"---traits that certainly shouldn't be catered to and built up and encouraged (and certainly NOT a man's "greatest NEED").

Harley wrote Love Busters, which if I recall correctly, isn't a bad book. I think he is the one that writes about the policy of enthusiastic mutual agreement.

 

[mkgal1]

Yes.....it was he that wrote about that (the policy of joint agreement). I completely agree with this. Here is an excerpt from the web site:

The Policy of Joint Agreement
Never do anything without an enthusiastic agreement
between you and your spouse

This rule teaches couples to become thoughtful and sensitive to each other's feelings when they don't feel like it. If both spouses follow this policy, they avoid all the Love Busters because they won't mutually agree to anything that hurts one of them. Demands, disrespect and anger are eliminated because even negotiating strategy must be mutually agreed to, and no one likes to be the recipient of abuse. Annoying behavior is eliminated because if one spouse finds any behavior or activity of the other annoying, according to the policy, it cannot be done. It even eliminates dishonesty, because a lie is certainly not something that you would agree to enthusiastically ~ http://www.marriagebuilders.com/graphic/mbi3500_policy.html

 

[mkgal1]

Great resource for articles and information on equality based on the Bible:

http://www.cbeinternational.org/

 

[RedPonyDriver]

Sorry, I get them mixed up. Anyway, I really tend to stay away from most "Christian" self-help books. They tend to be the worst of pop-psychology and random scripture quotes.

 

[RedPonyDriver]

Great resource for articles and information on equality based on the Bible:

http://www.cbeinternational.org/

YES!!!!

 

[blessedwife318]

Wait a minute, I'm confused....BlessedWife. You agree with JackRT (on something) ...so *what* are you saying exactly is the reason why you are not a feminist there (that we don't get to make up our own definitions? That a feminist is about equality of the sexes and you aren't of that belief? What?

Feminist make up their own definition of different terms all the time for political agenda. But they should not that is what I agree with so again that is another of many many reasons I'm not a feminist.

 

[mkgal1]

That's the typical result when liberals get backed into a corner.

Change the subject!!

Actually, that *wasn't* a change in subject---that was in direct reference to what you'd posted.

Anyway......"liberal" = another word that has turned into a term meant as an insult. Personally.....I'll gladly agree to that description as well (it seems much like the Bereans):

Liberal

1. open to new behavior or opinions and willing to discard traditional values.
   "they have more liberal views toward marriage and divorce than some people"
   • 
     
2. 2.
   (of education) concerned mainly with broadening a person's general knowledge and experience, rather than with technical or professional training.
   synonyms: wide-ranging, broad-based, general
   "a liberal education"
   
   Also....Chip Ingram has a study called Diabolical that contrasts the things of our enemy and the things of Christ. Holding tightly to tradition is something that caused Stephen to be killed when he was speaking Truth from the Holy Spirit in Acts 7:54-60

 

[mkgal1]

Feminist make up their own definition of different terms all the time for political agenda. But they should not that is what I agree with so again that is another of many many reasons I'm not a feminist.

Well.....the feminists in this thread are using the definition directly from Webster's---so we aren't "making up our own definition". Like it's been said before, if we were to substitute the word "feminist" for "Christian" and were to say how a lot of people use that term wrongly (like WBC)......is that a good reason to abandon the term? Things of value always have counterfeits.

ETA: I went back in the thread and found this post of yours:

I'm only a women and I think that true feminism is about hating men.
One of the many reasons I'm not a feminist.

Why is it okay in your own morality for YOU to make up your own definition then? You cited that as your main reason for NOT being a feminist (b/c "they make up their own definitions")....and then you did just that.

 

[RedPonyDriver]

Great definition! Thank you Lord for dictionaries. I find it funny that some insist on the "plain meaning" of one book but "interpret" another.

Personally, I have yet to understand why being a "liberal" is such a bad thing...case in point...the "conservatives" in the Michigan legislature just passed a bill making certain sex acts illegal...yet have done nothing for the people of Flint who have water that will kill them. Anybody else think of Nero and the burning of Rome here?

 

[HannahT]

Feminist make up their own definition of different terms all the time for political agenda. But they should not that is what I agree with so again that is another of many many reasons I'm not a feminist.

Politicians in general do this too. Popular culture? Yep, them as well.

I don't do labels. They are too fluid along with definitions today.

 

[mkgal1]

Great definition! Thank you Lord for dictionaries. I find it funny that some insist on the "plain meaning" of one book but "interpret" another.

So true!

Personally, I have yet to understand why being a "liberal" is such a bad thing...case in point...the "conservatives" in the Michigan legislature just passed a bill making certain sex acts illegal...yet have done nothing for the people of Flint who have water that will kill them. Anybody else think of Nero and the burning of Rome here?

Oh, I know. I was called a "bleeding heart liberal" and thought "why is it bad that I have a concern for others?" (and that typically comes from "Bible-believing Christians" that go on and on about their reading of the Bible being the superior variety.

I totally agree with you over what's going on in Flint. The fruit of the Holy Spirit isn't "judgement of others".....it's "love, kindness, goodness....". Thank God for those "Liberals" like Cher, Michael Moore, Mark Ruffalo, Magic Johnson, and Jimmy Fallon.