Start Your Divorce Today - Premium Divorce Online

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 >
Topic Options
#2959 - 10/03/04 05:17 AM A Biblical Response to the Feminist Agenda
Eric Offline
old hand

Registered: 05/30/04
Posts: 807
Loc: USA

----- Original Message -----
From: speaking_spiritualy
To: [email protected]
Sent: Saturday, November 29, 2003 7:27 AM
Subject: [The_Masculist_Order] A must read. Read it all Please


http://www.biblebb.com/files/MAC/FEMINIST.HTM

A Biblical Response to the Feminist Agenda
Copyright 1993
by
John F. MacArthur, Jr.
All rights reserved.

Let us open our Bibles to Titus, chapter 2. In our study of the
second chapter of Titus we are considering it under the title, "The
Character of a Healthy Church." In this chapter the Apostle Paul
gives instruction to the church as to how it is to conduct itself.
He directs his instruction to older men, older women, younger women,
younger men--selecting every category within the church and giving
basically some direct and specific instruction to them. This is very
crucial to the life of the church, not only for its own internal
well-
being, but for the sake of its witness. He says, in verse 5,
that "This instruction is so that the Word of God may not be
dishonored." Verse 8, "So that the opponent may be put to shame,
having nothing bad to say about us." And verse 10, "So that we may
adorn the doctrine of God our Savior in every respect." Those are
evangelistic matters. We want the Word of God honored; we want the
opponents of Christianity silenced; and we want God our Savior
adorned.

Let's look at verses 3, 4, and 5,
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-
Titus 2:3 The aged women likewise, that they be in behaviour as
becometh holiness, not false accusers, not given to much wine,
teachers of good things;
Titus 2:4 That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love
their husbands, to love their children,
Titus 2:5 To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient
to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-

One of the responsibilities of the older women, which we noted when
we discussed that, is that they are to teach the younger women, and
here it is very specific what they are to teach, as indicated in
verses 4 and 5. God has designed, very clearly, His own order for
the conduct of young women, just as He has for young men and older
folks as well. If there is anything in our culture that is being
attacked more viciously than any other, it is this matter of the role
of young women. In fact, if I were to title this message alone, I
might title it "The Feminist Attack on the Divine Order for Women."
We are going through that right now. No matter what I would say
about verses 4 and 5 it would be controversial. If I just read it--
it would be controversial.

One of the most devastating, and debilitating, and destructive
movements in our day is the "Feminist Movement." It is changing not
only the world but sadly it is changing the church, and as a result
the Word of God is being dishonored; opponents are having plenty bad
to say about us and God our Savior is being dishonored and shamed.
Radical feminism has brainwashed our culture. It has brainwashed our
culture to the degree that even the church has fallen victim to
this. Church leaders, theologians, professors of theology who are
supposed to be profound in the Scripture, as well as lay people in
the church have bought the feminist lies. There was even an
organization in America called "CBE" having to do with Christians for
Equality, and this is an evangelical group advocating a feminist
agenda.

Marriage and the family, the primary building blocks of social and
moral order, are in shambles in our country and the future is even
worse than the present. Unthinking Christians, unthinking believers,
not just in liberal churches but in evangelical churches, unthinking,
untaught Christians are falling prey to this agenda. The sad thing
is that most of us have no idea where it is coming from. Most of us
think that this is just a lot of women who really just want some
liberation and some freedom and they're tired of cleaning floors and
washing dishes, and they want equal pay, and they want equal jobs,
and they want to get out from under the mundane duties and express
themselves in more grandiose ways than they think they can in the
home--that may be a contemporary component--that isn't even remotely
related to the reason for this.

The real feminist agenda is frightening. The real feminist agenda is
Satanic and you need to understand that, so I am going to do
something this morning that is a bit unusual. Rather than diving
right into the text this morning, I want to give you some
understanding of where this movement today has come from, so that you
will see that text in its proper light.

What the public sees is women who want to be free. In fact, there is
even a book published by a Christian publisher written by a Christian
woman, called, "Woman Be Free;" and we think that this is a movement
about freedom for women, freedom from strictures that bind them to
their husbands and their children and their duties in the home. We
see it as a cry for equality in a society that is preoccupied with
life and liberty and the pursuit of happiness; a cry for opportunity
and privilege to use their abilities and their skills unhindered and
unrestricted; and sometimes the rhetoric does sound reasonable. But
the real agenda is not reasonable--it is frightening.

Let me help you to understand some of the philosophy that is behind
this movement, by giving you some quotes from the recognized leaders
of the feminist movement:
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-
Gloria Steinem says, "By the year 2000 we will, I hope, raise our
children to believe in human potential, not God.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-

Radical feminist leader Sheila Cronam (sp.), who is oft quoted by the
way, says this, "Since marriage constitutes slavery for women, it is
clear that the women's movement must concentrate on attacking this
institution. Freedom for women cannot be won without the abolition
of marriage."

The "Declaration of Feminism" goes back to November of 1971 when they
laid out their agenda and this is what it says, "The end of the
institution of marriage is necessary for the liberation of women;
therefore, it is important for us to encourage women to leave their
husbands and not live individually with men. All of history must be
rewritten in terms of oppression of women. We must go back to
ancient female religions like witchcraft!" Mark that, "We must go
back to ancient female religions like witchcraft!"

Anne Lori Gaylor writing an article called "Feminist Salvation" in
the "Humanist" in 1988 says, "Let's forget about the mythical Jesus
and look for encouragement, solace, and inspiration from real women.
2,000 years of patriarchal rule under the shadow of the cross ought
to be enough to turn women towards the feminist salvation of the
world."

Dr. Mary Jo Bane, feminist, Assistant Professor of Education at
Welsley College, and the Associate Director of the school's Center
for Research on Women, writes, "In order to raise children with
equality we must take them away from families and communally raise
them."

And that well known name, Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned
Parenthood, writing an article called "Women in the New Race," says
this, "The most merciful thing a large family can do to one of its
infant members is to kill it."

We cannot think lightly about this agenda--we have to think deeply
about it. The fact that you may feel in your heart some need to be
free because you become victimized by the current agenda, doesn't
really mean that you really understand the agenda. You don't know
that behind this entire feminist movement is some very Satanic
religious philosophy, and it runs very deep in the people who are
influencing our culture, the people who have influenced deeply and
provided the whole agenda, to say, Hillary Clinton and many others.
And we have to take these ideas very seriously because they are in
the White House, and now they will be creating laws that we have to
live by. They are obliterating our culture. They are being taught
through every avenue to our youth, and even Christians are falling
under the spell of the feminists.

Sheila Croonan (sp.) again, writing in the National Organization of
Women Times, in January of 1988, said, "The simple fact is, every
woman must be willing to be recognized as a lesbian to be fully
feminine!" Now, some people might think that this is some kind of a
20th century phenomena, that this is some kind of a new thing
connected to American democracy and egalitarianism--it is not--it is
old; it is very, very old. Though in our time, in our century it is
an expression of the anti-male, homosexual women who generated it, it
is not a human creation at all; it is Satanic--absolutely and utterly
Satanic. I want to take you back to some of its origins so that you
can understand it.

Feminism with all of its assorted features and its unique
companionship with homosexuality is an old, old heresy that is meant
to destroy God's design. It really started in the Garden when Eve,
the original feminist, stepped out from under Adam's authority and
thought that she would act independently and led the whole race into
sin; and thus the first act in Satan's feminist agenda was
successful.

Let's go back, say, to the time of the New Testament. We won't go
all the way back into ancient, ancient time; we can learn enough by
going back into New Testament times. When we get back into the time
of the New Testament, before the New Testament, running through the
New Testament and after, we have a religion that is generally known
as Gnosticism. It comes from a Greek word "gnosis" which means "to
know." Gnosticism was the religion, the mystical religion of
superior knowledge. You could experience mystical, intuitive,
spiritual knowledge, which was higher than the Bible--that was the
whole point of it. It was an anti-God, antichrist, anti-Biblical
religion designed by Satan to lure people away from Scripture. What
you see today in the feminist agenda is a repackaging, a
reincarnation of ancient Gnosticism. In fact, the parallels are very
striking.

Peter Jones, writing in his book, very interesting book, "The Occult
Empire Strikes Back," says, "Gnosticism is a broad term to describe
false, anti-God religion developed before the birth of Christ as the
meeting of the mysticism of the Eastern religions and the rationalism
of the Greek West." That's just a broad definition. Gnosticism took
Greek Rationalism (i.e., the musings and the mind of man) and Eastern
Mysticism (those intuitive, esoteric, fanciful, imaginatory
experiences that mystics supposedly have), and wed them together and
said, "This is the higher knowledge, this is the lofty knowledge,
this is the superior knowledge." It is very hard to pin down
specifics in the Gnostic religion because it is a kaleidoscopic
mixture of all kinds of mystical things, and anytime that you have a
mystical religion it is somewhat amorphous or shapeless because it
tends to ebb and flow in the minds and the imaginations of its
adherents.

Today, Gnostic religion is called the "New Age Philosophy," but it's
Gnosticism--it's the same thing. It's a new kind of mystical, higher
level of knowledge that is supposedly shows the weakness, the mundane
character of Biblical Christianity.

Now, let's look at Gnosticism and get some idea of what it is. The
best way to define it is by what it attacked, rather than what it is,
because as I said, it is so amorphous, it is so subject to
imagination and intuition that it can spin off in all kinds of ways.
But the one thing you do see in Gnosticism is that it continually
blasts everything the Scripture affirms. So you can know it by what
it attacks

At the heart of ancient Gnosticism was a central myth, and that
central myth drove the whole heresy. Here is that myth: the myth was
that the physical universe was never intended to exist--it's part of
that old Greek dualism "That matter is evil and spirit is good." But
the idea was we were all supposed to be free spirits, and free
spirits with full self-knowledge would be divine, and we were just
supposed to float around in the mystical free world of spirit life,
unencumbered and uninhibited by physical definition and confinement.
But, the physical universe came into being, and it came into being,
they said, because a foolish sub-god created the universe.

If you read ancient Gnostic literature you will see that they attack
the Creator God, they mock Him, they disdain Him with a disdain that
even has components of hatred in it. They hate the Creator God who
made matter because to them matter was evil, and it becomes the
prison of the free floating spirit.

According to one recently discovered Gnostic text, God the Creator is
presented as, "Blind, ignorant, arrogant, the source of envy, and
they call him the 'Father of Death.'" Gnostics believe that this
fake god somehow (and they have to believe this or their whole thing
would fall apart)--this fake god somehow, when he created the
universe, accidentally infused into humanity some spark of divine
life. They would have to say that or they would have no way to fan
the spark of divine life that they want to believe that is in them.
So that man is divine: there is a little component of divinity in him
which he needs to fan until it just consumes him and he becomes fully
divine. But here is this man with the divine spark, or this woman
with a divine spark imprisoned in evil matter, and he has to find, or
she has to find, a way to escape.

Gnostics taught that there is no such thing as sin, because there is
no such thing as right and wrong in the human realm; therefore, there
is no need for a Savior, there is no need for a death on the cross,
there is no need for an atonement. What they needed to do to be
saved was (listen to this) "Throw off the God of the Old Testament--
this evil God." Throw off the God of the New Testament with all of
His laws and all of His threats, and all of His so-called
punishment. Throw off the whole Old and the whole New Testament and
free yourself from the encumbering of this subgod, this bungling
creator who did what he never should have done and created a prison
for us in doing it.

So you can see that the first tenet of their system was a blasphemy
against God--calling God evil, bungling, ignorant. The system also
included (listen to this) lies that elevated women. Ancient
Gnosticism focused on women, this is what it said, for example, "Eve
was a spirit endowed woman who saved Adam." They said, "Final
salvation for the whole world from the imprisonment of matter will
come through female power, and the key is female self-actualization,
self-realization, self-knowledge, in which a woman becomes so fully
in tune with herself and so well knows herself, and actualizes, and
realizes and fulfills herself that she becomes fully divine, and as
she becomes divine she will rescue the rest of these lame men just
like Eve, fully divine, rescued poor Adam."

In fact, convoluting the creation account, Gnostic texts tell us that
Dame Wisdom was the heavenly Eve. There was a mystical heavenly
woman named "The Heavenly Eve" who is the same as Dame Wisdom (she is
the source of all wisdom). She entered the snake in the garden, and
she taught both Adam and Eve the true way of salvation. The snake
then is not called the "Tempter," the snake in Gnostic literature is
the "Instructor." The snake is ultimate wisdom, the snake was wiser
than anybody else. The snake, it says in Gnostic literature, is the
redeemer because the snake is the incarnated woman who comes to
heavenly Eve and teaches the truth about self-realization, which is
self-fulfillment, which is making yourself divine, which delivers you
from being encumbered by matter.

They also say this, "The serpent in the garden is the true Christ,
the true reflection of God." So, they take redemptive history and
stand it on its head like a Satanist cross in a Black Mass. God is
evil, the serpent in the garden is the true Christ, Christ in the New
Testament--the reflection of God--is equally evil. Now, again I say,
it is hard to pin all this stuff down, it's mystical stuff, but you
can see not so much by what it is, the clarity of it, but by what it
attacks. Right? It attacks God, Christ, the Bible, Creation.

"Though caught in matter," they say, the Gnostics, "humanity once
again can become part of the universal whole by a process of self-
realization." They say in the Book of Genesis, "The lack of self-
realization is really the problem that man has." The Bible says that
man's problem is sin--sin! And the root of his sin is his self-
preoccupation, so they flip that completely around.

So the heart and core of Gnostic religion then is
the "consubstantiality of self with God;" you make yourself into
God. You are the only God that exists: you get in tune with
yourself, you elevate yourself--self-esteem, self-knowledge, self-
actualization, self-realization, self-fulfillment; whatever your self
wants that's how you become God--you just give complete sway to your
own self-desire.

[The Gnostics say] "So the human plight is not because we have moral
offenses against God, but we are ignorant of human potential."
Listen to this, according to Gnostic writing, "The real Christ's
spirit actually sat on the branch of a tree watching the Christ on
the cross and laughed at Him." Let me read to you from the
Apocalypse of Peter (one of their ancient documents), this is from
that Apocalypse,
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-
He whom you saw on the tree, glad and laughing, this is the living
Jesus, but the one in who's hands and feet they drive the nails is
the fleshly part, which is the substitute part being put to shame,
the one who came into being in His likeness. Be strong, for you are
the one to whom these mysteries have been given to know them through
revelation, that he whom they crucified is the firstborn and the home
of demons, and He who stands near him is the living Savior.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-

The earthly Christ is a demon; the spiritual mystical Christ in the
tree laughing is the true Christ. Further, they said, "Since the
true Christ never died, there is no resurrection." Redemption, then,
is not a gracious, miraculous transformation of a person through the
sacrifice of Christ. Redemption is self-understanding, self-
actualization, that is, giving sway to anything your self wants:
getting out of the strictures, getting out of the limits, getting out
of the prison, being free. Peter Jones writes that, "The Gnostic
believers are saved when they realize who they are: a part of the
divine, processing within themselves the kingdom; capable of
anything; untrammeled by human traditions, creational structures, or
divine laws. It follows that part of self-redemption is the
rejection of Biblical ethical norms and the promotion of the
distortion of Biblical sexuality." In fact, they say, "That when a
person comes to full self-knowledge he becomes another living Christ,
and since the serpent had that knowledge; the serpent who was the
woman is also the true living Christ." Everything twisted and
perverted

Gnosticism is the blasphemy of Satanic distortion of God's truth:

The Bible says, God is a good God and He is the sovereign God--the
Gnostics denied it and blasphemed His name.

The Bible says, Christ is the Living God incarnate in flesh--the
Gnostics blasted it, blasphemed His name.

The Bible says the snake was the tempter--they say the snake is
wisdom personified who is the instructor.

The Bible says Jesus died on a cross for your sins--the Gnostics says
that the Jesus that died on the cross was a joke.

Obviously, this is Satan's lying heresy to confound God's truth.
This blasphemous stuff the Apostle Paul wrote against, even in his
epistles in the New Testament. It is the doctrine of demons from
seducing spirits. This wasn't invented by Gloria Steinem and Bella
Apsburg (sp.), this was invented in the pits of hell millennia ago.

Now, to the very central element in this; and that is the issue
of "Feminism." What role did feminism play in Gnosticism? Well, it
played a very, very important role, as I told you already. Eve was
the savior of Adam; and furthermore, the spiritual or heavenly Eve
was the personification of wisdom in the serpent who became the
instructor, and by thus, his instruction sets out to save men. But
let's take a look at some other things.

In the Gnostic system, Eve dominates Adam and sexual roles are
totally altered. And you can understand this, because Satan wants to
totally tear up God's created order. They wrote (the early Gnostics
did) that
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-
The divine revealer was feminine. The divine revealer said, "I am
Androgynous. I am both mother and father, it is through me alone
that the all stands firm. I am the womb that gives shape to the all
by giving birth to the light that shines in splendor. I am the aeon
to come. I am the fulfillment of the all, that is, the glory of the
mother."
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-

Now, all of that doubletalk is the talk of the Androgyny of
Gnosticism: that means the wiping out of all sexual distinction.
There are Gnostic texts where God the Creator is castigated by a
higher feminine power. That's that heavenly Eve called "Sophia"--
Dame Wisdom. And, "God the Creator," the Gnostics said, "finally
learned that the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom." In
other words, He learned to fear the feminine "Sophia," so that the
God of the Bible is now in fear of the feminine god "Sophia." The
feminization, then, of this higher God "Wisdom" led directly to the
ordination of women. The ordination of women flows out of the
feminization of deity.

The early Gnostic, well known to church history students,
named "Marcion," was excommunicated from the church in A.D. 150. He
then established his own church, in which he appointed women as
bishops and priests. In the Valentinian Gnosticism, women functioned
as teachers, evangelists, healers, priests, perhaps as bishops. This
movement in the church to put women in the roles of spiritual
leadership is simply reflective of this same kind of religious
attitude. In sum, Gnosticism, then, rejects the Creator God of
Scripture as blind, and envious, malicious, not hesitating to commit
the most heinous blasphemy of all. The Gnostics even called the God
of the Bible "The True Devil." For the true Gnostic, the real God,
whoever this force was, was unknowable, impersonal, untouchable--some
kind of unified sum of separated parts--a sort of pantheistic force.
But they said this, "The divine being, because he is all and all,
impersonal, untouchable--just this big force--is best expressed
by 'androgyny,' that is, the erasure of male and female distinctions.

The ideal for the Gnostic was to become sexless--a radical refusal of
sexual differentiation, and a complete confusion of sexual identity
and God's intended role.

See, this is how Satan has always tried to tear up God's moral order
in the world, and attacking the family, of course, does the greatest
damage. Diabolical reversal of everything--is Satan's approach.
Destroy God's created order; destroy the integrity of Scripture;
destroy the character of God; destroy the name of Christ.

Beloved, I am telling you this is what is behind today's feminist
movement. This is not some whimsical deal that popped up in the 20th
century by a few women who wanted to take off the apron and buy a
briefcase--this is not that. This is not something that was invented
by women who wanted to abort their babies and get into the corporate
halls and the executive washrooms. This "New Age" thinking (that's
what it is called today) is nothing but "Gnosticism." "New Age" is a
new way of talking about age-old Gnosticism. The heart of it is that
female power is the key to salvation. The "Goddess Cult" is
back!

Shirley McClain wrote a book called "Going Within," and in her book
she writes this dedication, "Dedicated to Sachi (sp.), Mother
Kathleen Anbila (sp.), and all the other women and men who seek the
spiritual feminine in themselves. Male is matter, matter is male,
matter is evil, male is evil, feminine is spirit, spirit is feminine,
and that's good."

Radical feminism today is being moved along by the idea that women
must be liberated and they can redeem humanity--they can save
humanity. These are the philosophers that are driving the movement--
the religionists: "Creator God of Genesis has to go, He is male,
tyrannical, he denies basic human liberties, He demands total
obedience, He threatens punishment for evil deeds."
Consequently, "Original sin is not to be found in man," they
said, "but in God. Feminist liberation releases us from God, and
from all His evil male values--like marriage, fidelity, family,
authority, and morality. The serpent Eve wants to set us free! The
God of the Bible is a jealous tyrant who wants to stand in her
way."

So when you hear about the Methodists, or the Presbyterians, or
whatever, or the Episcopalians, deciding to change the Bible and put
in "She"--you know that this is not some human contrivance to make
ladies feel better about themselves--this is a Satanic religion, as
Satanic as a "Black Mass!" And, as with ancient Gnosticism, the New
Age movement today, the goal of liberation, is total reversal of all
God-ordained values! That's why it is so unthinkable that Christians
would get sucked into this!

"I found God in myself and I loved her fiercely," said Roman Catholic
theologian Carol Krist (sp.). "I found God in myself and I loved her
fiercely,"--there you have in one simple statement the whole deal.
Where is God? In myself. What is God? Feminine! And, I am one
with God. And she found God in herself with liberation from all
Biblical constraint.

The path to the New Age involves destroying the Biblical male and
female differentiation--that's New Age feminism. Take for example
New Age author Charlene Sprentnack's (sp.) book, "The Politics of
Women's Spirituality," published by Doubleday, (by the way the same
publisher that published the Anchor Bible Commentary series; they are
publishing God's Word and Satan's at the same time). This book, "The
Politics of Women's Spirituality" is a book that calls for an end to
Judeao-Christian religion, and the call is that we will end Judeao-
Christian religion by a feminist movement nourished on goddess-
worship paganism and witchcraft that succeeds in overthrowing the
global rule of men. Feminism wants revenge.

Their real ideological goal, because it's Satan's goal, is to
absolutely erase any recollection of creational structure and
Biblical morality--wipe it out! And they are after it! You wonder,
don't you, two generations from now whether anyone will know what
Biblical morality is. Well, they might be able to read the ancient
Bible and see what it looked like, but they certainly are going to
have a hard time looking around town to find it. And here, witless
Christians jump on this feminist bandwagon as if it were some
harmless thing: "Well, we have a right to work, and we shouldn't be
confined at home, and I have a right to express fully myself." Silly
women who fall prey and silly men who do as well.

George Guilder (sp.) is a prominent writer. He makes no claim to be
a Christian, but he does understand the agenda. He was once a
feminist thinker, but since 1973 he has realized what their agenda is
and he's written about it; this is what he says,
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-
The revolutionary members of the "Women's Movement" say that sexual
relationships are fundamental to all our other institutions and
activities. If one can profoundly change the relations between the
sexes (they contend) one could radically and unrecognizably transform
the society.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-

[He is] dead right! The Satanic agenda is to destroy human society,
to just rip the family to shreds and to destroy marriage, so that God
has no means to pass righteousness from one generation to the next.
Right? Which was always the role of the family. There is no more
order maintained in society. There are no more ethical values left,
and the way you do that is sexually--you just shred all standard
norms sexually, so nobody knows how any one is related to anybody,
but everybody is free to do whatever they want to do and that is how
they become divine.

Guilder rightly affirms that "Sexuality is not simply a matter of
games people play, it is one of the few matters, truly, of life and
death to society." He warns that if the feminist agenda, even in
it's most moderate version, is carried through, "Our society is
doomed to years of demoralization and anarchy, possibly ending in a
police state."

Our society is doing exactly what I told you in Romans one happens to
a society when "God gives them over." What does it say? "God gave
them over," and what did they do? "Women with women doing things
which aren't even imaginable, and men with men doing things which
aren't imaginable." that's what happens to a society under God's
wrath--God lets them go--and they're going the way of the Satanic
lies.

Playing right into the hands of the Satanic lies is our own
government--working hard aren't they? What are they working so
hard? Our government, the government of the United States, State of
California, the City of Los Angeles, are doing everything they can do
to eliminate all gender differences. That is not an issue of
constitutional liberty; that is an issue of Satanic religion.

Homosexuality is the companion of feminism because of androgyny.
Homosexuality running rampant--no society can survive that. The
Roman Empire didn't survive it. This entire system is going right
into the "pit"--tearing up God's order--sexually; tearing up
families; tearing up marriage; blaspheming God; blaspheming Christ;
exalting the Serpent. I read one book this weekend where one man
suggested that the Antichrist might be a woman if we keep going the
way we are going. Satan is very successful with this; Vice President
Al Gore has written a book called, "Earth in the Balance--Ecology and
the Human Spirit." Peter Jones writes about that book, "Gore's
involvement in ecology is an expression of his belief in the
connectedness of all things, in the great value of all religious
faiths, and in his hope that ancient pagan goddess worship will help
bring us planetary and personal salvation." It is inconceivable that
these people call themselves Baptists--no it is not inconceivable!
Undiscerning Christians falling victim to these hellish heresies.
The destruction is not restrained by the church--the church has
joined it!

There is no doubt about what a woman's role is; there is no doubt
what a man's role is. Look at our text again. What has God designed
for a woman? Verse 4, "To love their husbands, to love their
children, to be sensible, pure, workers at home, kind, being subject
to their own husbands that the Word of God may not be dishonored."
That's very clear. You can get into a lot of trouble by suggesting
that kind of stuff. Try standing up in this culture and
saying, "Women you are commanded to love your husband, and to love
your children, and to work at home, and to be subject to your
husband." You'll get screamed down--I mean you could be in deep
trouble just reading that, let alone commenting on it!

It's been amazing since people knew that I was approaching this text,
they been telling me, "What are you going to say about this? This is
going to be very controversial. Boy, we can't wait until these tapes
come out--what's going to happen then?" Well, just to mitigate that
a little bit, I have said what I have said this morning so that if
you get upset--you'll know whose side you are on! God has laid out
His standards--they are not negotiable. I will tell you this, if the
Church doesn't wake up soon and obey the Word of God--all is lost!
We don't need to fall victim to this stuff. You don't need a
master's degree to figure out what it means "to love you husband,
love your children, and to work at home!" How hard is that? By the
way, there are no qualifiers there, no caveats, no footnotes--it is
just what it says. "Go home, submit to your husband, have children,
raise them in godliness, take care of your house." And that's what
older women are to teach younger women--they are to teach it not only
with their mouth; they are to teach it with their life.

I'm telling you what I said a few weeks ago is now is becoming so
vividly true. We are living in Romans one--aren't we? What's wrong
with America? God let us go, and we are plunging down the path and
the evidence of it is this reversal of sexual roles that Paul talked
about in Romans 1:26.

Now before we look at verse four, let's go to verse three for a
moment because it's connected. One of the duties of the older women
into which we looked a few weeks back, one of the duties comes at the
end of the list in verse three, "teaching what is good." Older women
have as their responsibility--"teaching what is good." Literally,
the Greek word here could be translated "teachers of what is
good," "kalodidaskalos" (Greek): "teachers of good." "Good" being a
word that means "noble, excellent, and lofty," and the idea in the
word is not some kind of formal thing. It's not conducting seminars,
writing a book, making tapes, holding formal classes--it is the idea
of "the very life they live becoming a model of a pattern of
goodness."

Older women, when their children are grown and gone and they reach
the senior years, are not supposed to just wander away from the
church and travel around as if they had no responsibility. In their
older years they are responsible to become teachers of the next
generation. They do that by mentoring, by disciplining, by modeling,
by setting the example of godly living with regard to marriage, and
the family, and the home.

Now, they are then to be "teachers of good" and the primary ones they
teach are the "young women;" and that's the transition into verse
four, they are to be teachers of what is good, in order that they may
encourage the young women. The primary responsibility of "older
women" is "younger women." Their children are raised, the children
are gone, hopefully they have raised up a godly generation of their
own. Now, within the framework of the church, the older women are to
give themselves in a very informal, personal way to the modeling of
godliness that only a woman can do to pass on to the next
generation. They are to demonstrate virtue as wives, and virtue as
mothers, and virtue as humble, loving, patient, kind, generous
servants to the next generation. Verse four begins with the
word "That;" it's a purpose clause "In order that" with the purpose
or the result "that young women will be encouraged."

Now, the word "encouraged" is probably not translated the best way.
It's a very interesting word: the root of it "sophra" (Greek) is used
all over the Pastoral Epistles; in fact, hardly anywhere else--I
think I may have found one or two uses of the root somewhere other
than the Pastorals, but it appears in the Pastorals many places, and
it has various, different endings which change the form of the word,
and we will see it several times, even in our discussion this
morning. But, the form of it that appears uniquely
here, "sophronizo," (Greek) which is a verb ending, means "to
train." To say it another way, "to teach someone self-control."
Some lexicons translate it "to make someone soberminded," "to make
someone balanced," "to make someone steady," "to provide someone
guidance." But the best translation is "to train someone in self-
control." There are other forms of this word, in 1:8, 2:2, and we
will see even in 2:5, and in those cases it is translated "sensible,"
but it is a little bit of a different word, the root is the same but
the form of it is different. One form of it is
translated "discipline." In Titus 2:12 it's translated "sensibly,"
in 1 Timothy 3:2, "prudent," and we will see later in 1 Timothy 2
it's translated "discrete"--it has the idea of being "discrete,"
or "chaste." But the best way to understand this term is the idea
of "training in the art of self-control," "Learning self-restraint;"
in fact, a form of it is translated "self-restraint" in 1 Timothy
2:15.

So, the "older women" then are to teach the "young women" the self-
discipline that trains them to be able to do their duty, which is to
love their husbands, love their children, etc. "Older women" are
engaged then in a training process--to raise a generation of
sensible, disciplined, prudent, wise, discrete, restrained women who
are committed to doing God's will. This is a tremendous challenge:
it's not easily done. A training process implies relationship,
ongoing relationship and responsibility, confrontation, and
affirmation. You older women who no longer have the responsibility
of your own children, now have the responsibility of training the
next generation of women.

Now, let's talk about the idea of the "young women." How young is
young? Now, what I am going to say is going to make some of you very
happy. To what age does "young women" refer? Well, in a general
sense, we would say it refers to women who are able to bear children,
or are still rearing children. We would say, generally speaking,
that it is sort of a pre-menopause category of young women; those who
are still able to have children. A good way to understand this is to
go back to 1 Timothy 5. I would add even to that, women who are able
to have children or are still rearing their children. And if you
think about it, women can bear children well into their forties, and
consequently for the next, say, "10 to 15 years" even after that,
they are going to be raising children, so that would push the sort of
child-bearing, child-rearing responsibility up to, maybe, sixty. If
you are still having children at 46, 47--remember in ancient times
without the means to prevent pregnancy, as we have them today, and
with a devotion to bearing children--(that was very different than a
society like ours that has been clobbered with the idea of reducing
the population), people had children and they continued to have
children. The home was the center of life. They bore children well
into their forties, normally, and so as approaching sixty they would
still be raising their own children. Now that is consistent with
what we see in 1 Timothy.

In 1 Timothy 5:9, it says, "Let a widow be put on the list." There
was a list of widows, whether cared for by the church or not, who
were official servants of the church, and they would serve the
church, they had a number of tasks, if you go back into the history
of the church, they had fairly defined responsibility: they would
visit the church's younger women, that was a priority obviously drawn
from Titus 2. They would visit these "younger women" to teach them,
to instruct them, to help them in daily tasks, to show them things
about being wives, and about being mothers, and about being
homemakers, and they had an ongoing responsibility to be available to
those women in the church who needed their help.

They were also used to provide teaching and counseling when women had
needs that were specific and problematic. They also visited the sick
and the afflicted and those in prison. They provided hospitality to
travelers, such as itinerant preachers, evangelists, and
missionaries, and traveling Christians, who may be coming into town
because they were being persecuted in another place. They had
responsibility also to help with their own grandchildren and their
extended family and whatever needs were there.

These women were to be models, then, of virtue. Their qualifications
to be put on the list are quite interesting, look at it in verse
nine. First of all, they had to be at least sixty years or
thereabouts, and they had to have a reputation of being the wife of
one man. That doesn't mean that they only had one husband--it means
a one-man woman in the Greek. I could only wish that they had
translated that right because every time it appears it is
misleading. In the Greek, they were a "one-man woman;" that's the
idea. That is to say, they were totally devoted to their husband.
They may have been married a couple of times, perhaps widowed earlier
in life and would be instructed to marry again. It may have been
that they had an "unbeliever depart" and left them, and they then
were free to remarry. The issue is not how many times they were
married--the issue is: were they known as a wife devoted to the man
who was her husband? They were virtuous in that sense that they were
loyal, faithful wives. That would be the moral qualification.

And then, verse 10, if she had a reputation for good works. That is
to say, she has done those kinds of things that have demonstrated her
excellent character: she is a noble woman, she has a unrelenting
pursuit of doing good for others, she is unselfish. She is devoted
to others, like the woman of Proverbs 31, or like Dorcas, who was
always making garments for the poor.

And then, additionally, if she has shown hospitality to strangers, if
she has washed saints' feet, if she has assisted those in distress,
if she has devoted herself to every good work, and then that one I
skipped which is really the heart of it--if she has brought up
children. This particular duty was for someone who had a godly
reputation, who had cared for strangers, who had humbled herself to
wash the dirty feet of those who had walked in the dust or the mud
(it was either one). She was known because she had devoted her whole
life to every good work, utterly selfless, but she had brought up
children, and the implication is they are godly children. She had
lived in, as 1 Timothy 2:15 says, "faith and love and sanctity with
self-restraint," and so she had preserved herself from the stigma
that woman bears for having led the race into sin, by raising up a
godly generation of children.

Now, on the other hand (let's follow this text a little bit), verse
11, "Don't put younger widows on the list." Why? They will want to
be on it! Some will lose their husband and they will be so
distressed and so bereft and mourning so deeply, and they will
say, "There will never be a man like him. I never want to marry
another. I don't want another man. He's the only man I ever want."
And in the emotion of that moment, and the devotion to that love that
was there with that man--they will devote themselves to Christ and
say, "I want to be on the list. I'll give the rest of my life to
Christ. I don't ever want to marry again."

"But," verse 11 says, "when they feel sensual desires," when the
normal sex drive rises, "in disregard of Christ, they want to get
married." And they will have made this public promise (and
apparently there was some public forum in which this actually took
place), and they will then incur condemnation because either they
will reluctantly keep their vow, or they will break their vow, and in
either place they will be condemned because they set aside their
previous pledge. Don't let the younger women do this. They have a
normal desire which results in the bearing and the rearing of
children and the need for a husband and all of that."

At the same time," he says in verse 13, "younger women who might be a
bit immature will go around learning to be idle, going from house to
house; and not merely idle, but they'll gossip and be busybodies, and
talk about things not proper to mention." They will just go around
talking and instead of going and helping and teaching and instructing
and counseling, they will collect information here and more it over
here, collect more information here and move it over here, and pretty
soon the thing will be all over the place. So, don't let younger
women do that. "The younger women you must instruct," verse 14, "to
get married, bear children, keep house, and give the enemy no
occasion for reproach; for some have already turned aside to follow
Satan." That's sad, if they don't get married, their physical desire
will lead them into sin. You need to get married and bear children
and keep house. That's their domain, that's their area, that's their
responsibility, that's their calling, that's their place--and that
allows the enemy no occasion to bring reproach on those women who
name the Name of Christ, and go out an scandalize the Name of Christ
by their sin. So, don't put the younger women on the list.

Now, what we have learned from that passage is that, there are
younger women and older women, and the older women are kind of in the
sixty and up category, and the younger women are below that, at least
at the point where they are still bearing children, capable of
bearing children, or rearing children. Now, let's go back to Titus.

Here, with that as a background, in Titus, chapter 2, we hear some
very familiar words. The young women were encouraged, you remember,
in 1 Timothy 5, "to marry and bear children," and all, and here is
the same thing, "encourage young women to love their husbands, to
love their children, be sensible, pure, workers at home, kind, being
subject to their own husbands." And again I remind you, that there
is always a move against this, and it rises out of the fallen flesh
of a woman who wants to lord it over her husband, who wants to
express herself, who wants to run independent of the plan and purpose
of God--that's what the sinful flesh does and it's exacerbated by
Satan as he develops the culture to call its siren call to the woman
outside the home.

Verse 4, "Encourage these young women (that is train them in the
matter of self-control) to love their husbands." That's one
word, "philandros" (Greek), to be "husband-lovers." That's what it
means in 1 Timothy 5, as we read, "to be a one-man woman," totally
devoted to your husband. Ephesians 5:25 says, "Husbands, love your
wives, just as Christ loved the church." That's the key--you love
your wife like Christ loved the church. How did He love the church?
He loved the church when the church was sinful; He loves us when we
are not worthy of His love; He loves us sacrificially; He loves us
protectively--that's how husbands are to love their wives--and that's
how wives are to love their husbands. You are to be a "husband-
lover," you are to love your husband.

You say, "You don't know my husband! I don't love my husband. My
husband is not lovable. He has turned me off. I don't love him
anymore. I don't care for him anymore." My response to you
is, "That is disobedience!" That is disobedience to the clear Word
of God, "You are to love your husband." Listen, that doesn't mean
that you are going to feel the rockets and hear the bells and
whistles. I read Newsweek magazine two weeks ago, and in their
edition they said that goes in about two years, because of chemical
changes. Isn't that amazing! Marriage isn't all rockets, and bells,
and whistles--it's a contented commitment with an occasional rocket,
and maybe a bell and a whistle now and then. It goes beyond that, it
goes beyond that to a devotedness, to a level of friendship that runs
deep and satisfying. And I will tell you how it works: if you don't
love you husband then you need to train yourself to love your
husband, and the way you train yourself to love your husband is to
continue to serve and serve, and do every good thing and every kind
thing, and every gracious thing, and every magnanimous thing, and you
will make such a massive investment in him, you will say, "I have got
too much in this guy not to love him!"

It is a sin to disobey this command. It is a sacrificial love. It
is not necessarily the love of emotion, it's the love of will and a
deep commitment, and that's where healthy relationships begin. It's
the kind of love Philippians 2 talks about when it says, "If there is
any love then do this, let no man look on the things of his own life
but the things of others, let each esteem others better than
himself." It's that sacrificial, humble, condescending, self-
effacing love.

Secondly, he says, "Teach these young women to love their children."
That's one word, "philoteknos" (Greek) to be "children-lovers."
Women, this is your highest calling, "to raise godly children" (1
Timothy 2:15), we have been mentioning it all along. You will
reverse the stigma of the curse by which women are stigmatized
because a woman led the race into sin, you will be preserved from
that stigma when you rear a godly generation--that's your highest
calling. Your greatest contribution comes in motherhood--that's
generally true. Now, let me hasten to say there are some women that
God wants to be single, and they are the exception--He doesn't want
them to be married. They have what the New Testament calls a "gift
of singleness," 1 Corinthians 7 says that women who are single should
remain single if they can do that; so should men, so they can devote
their whole life to Christ and not be encumbered by having to care
for a life partner, and a family, and children, and all of that. I
understand that. I understand what immense freedom a man could have
if he wasn't married and didn't have children.

Now, God hasn't made me that way, obviously, but some are, and some
women are designed by God to "be single for the Kingdom's sake." And
there are some women who are barren for the Kingdom's sake, for God's
divine purposes. There are some men who cannot produce children and
therefore their wives will never bear children; God knows that and in
His purpose and His providence that is a glorious and a complete and
total fulfillment for that individual woman. But, those are the
unique exceptions that God designs--the general rule is that women
bear children, and love the children they bear. Certainly, in
ancient times, this would even go for those women who though not
bearing children would have adopted some of those children that the
widows had scooped out of the market place, and would therefore have
the same responsibility for loving children who had been adopted.

Obviously, God doesn't want all women to be mothers or they would
be. God has designed some women to have the uniqueness of
singleness, and others not to have children for His own purpose. We
can thank God for what single women mean to the Kingdom, and we can
thank God (and I do daily) for what women who have no children mean
to the Kingdom because God has given them freedom to serve in unique
ways. But, generally speaking, women are mothers and they are to
bear children, and in bearing children they have then the
responsibility to love those children--that means to sacrifice their
life on the children's behalf. Again the love in not an emotion,
it's not standing in the corner gloating when your little child is
all dressed up, at how handsome or how beautiful she is--it is the
responsibility of pouring your life sacrificially into that little
life so that that child grows up to love Christ."

Women are to be taught," according to verse 5, "to be sensible."
There's that "sophron" (Greek) root again: to have sound judgment,
common sense, right thinking, right priorities--very basic. The
older women come along and they teach the young women the common
sense stuff of life, just the normal processes of knowing your
priorities, thinking right, making sound judgment, applying wisdom.
You know, so many young women today don't understand this, Patricia
and I have talked about this through the years. We can't imagine
ever going to a marriage seminar. We can't imagine ever going to
some kind of a child raising seminar. People say, "Why can't you
imagine that?" The reason is simply this: we were both raised in
families where the Biblical pattern was modeled. I will tell you
something that will shock you: I have never in my lifetime have seen
my father and mother argue. It's hard to pick a fight with me. I
have never seen my parents argue. I seen a model of commitment to
one another. I watched my parents raise children. My wife watched
her parents raise children. Nobody needs to give me a book on how to
do this, there is something that is built into the fabric of a home
that becomes reproductive in the next generation, and when that gets
severed you have a major problem of trying to undo the bad modeling
and restructure the whole thing. That's why the Old Testament says
where you have wickedness in the family, it takes three or four
generations to turn it around--it's not easy and it will take a long
time before it gets turned around in our own culture.

But where we are living today, in this society, it is desperately
needed--that some women come along and teach the young generation how
to think right--what we think is common sense parenting. That's why
the whole parenting process is taught with such zeal in our church,
because we have to fill in the gap here. With the second generation
of women exposed to a "Feminist Agenda" and coming out of broken
homes, devastated marriages, some of them divorced and some of them
stayed together but equally devastating.

Then he says, "Teach the young women to be pure," "hagnos" in
Greek, "chaste," "morally pure," "virtuous," "sexually faithful to
their husbands." Teach them that they are devoted to one man and
that's it--morally pure. 1 Peter 3:3 says that women are not to
adorn themselves merely on the external. It's fine to do a little
work out there--we all appreciate it, but mostly--this is true isn't
it? But mostly, he says, don't be worried about "braiding your hair,
and wearing gold jewelry, or putting on dresses; but you worry about
the hidden person of the heart, with the imperishable quality of a
gentle and quiet spirit, which is precious in the sight of God. For
in this way in former times the holy women also. . . .used to adorn
themselves."

So if you want to be a holy woman you work on the inside, and that's
what he is saying, "Teach women to be adorning their heart; teach
women to be virtuous and godly on the inside." Back in 1 Timothy,
chapter 2, and verses 9 and 10, this same is said, women are not to
adorn themselves in any way that would call attention to themselves,
but they are to put on "proper clothing, modestly and discreetly, not
with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly garments; but rather
by means of good works, as befits women making a claim to
godliness." So if you are going to claim godliness, and virtue, and
holiness, and purity--it ought to show up on the outside. Those two
words in 1 Timothy 2, "modestly" and "discreetly," very interesting.

"Modestly" means with a sense of shame, with a healthy blush. Not
ashamed that you are a woman, but ashamed that you might cause
someone to be distracted from worshiping God, or ashamed that you
might cause someone to look at you in lust. You want to have that
kind of sense of shame--the thought of inciting lust or distracting
someone from worshiping God. And the idea of "discreetly" is the
same root again "sophra" (Greek), and again it means controlling all
of your passions. Women who make a claim to godliness have their
passions under control and they wouldn't do anything to excite lust;
they wouldn't do anything to draw attention to themselves when God's
people come together for worship. Holy women have always conducted
themselves that way, so Paul says you teach the young women to be
pure like that.

And then he says, "workers at home," and here's the one that gets all
the heat nowadays. Forty-five percent of the American work force is
women. "Megatrends 2000" says in the past 20 years U.S. women have
taken two-thirds of the millions of new jobs, and that will
continue. Fifty-six percent, says "Megatrends," 56% of mothers with
children under 6, work outside the home. Seventy-three percent of
mothers with children 6 to 17 work outside the home. By the year
2000, that's in 6 years or so, 90% of women between 16 and 65 will be
at work outside the home. Nobody will be home--nobody.

The word "workers at home" one word in the Greek, "oikourgos" from
two root words, "ergon" which means "work" and "oikos" which
means "house." It's simply the sphere of a woman's life is her home--
that's her domain. It doesn't mean she has to be there 24 hours a
day and can never leave. I am not saying that, because you don't
want to lock her up with Soap Operas either, but what it does mean is
that is the sphere of her life; that is her domain. It is not that
she is simply to be home, but that the home is her sphere. The woman
in Proverbs 31 left home when she needed to buy a field, she left
home to prepare that field, she left home and went afar to find
things that would help the family. The woman did what she needed to
do, but the focus of everything was the home, and that's where she
poured her life. She got up early and she went to bed late for the
sake of the home. She is to be a "home-keeper" that's the sphere of
her responsibility, that's her place of employment, that's where she
should pour her life.

For a mother to get a job outside the home and send the children to
some kind of "Day-care" place is to shirk her God-given
responsibility. It also is a failure to understand that her husband
is to be the provider, as Ephesians 5 makes it very clear. Even if
you wanted to work outside the home to pay for your children to go to
a Christian school you made a big mistake. Better that you should
stay in the home and raise your own children to be godly than to pass
it on to somebody else. Now we know today there are a lot of
wonderful things that we have in the home that ancient people didn't
have. I mean that you are not in there with some kind of a stone pot
beating out the grain to make flour. And you are not down at the
creek slapping your clothes on a rock--we know that. And you are not
just spinning thread so that you can make fabrics so that you can sew
garments, so we know that you have more time. You need to be very
careful how you use that time discreetly. You do have more time, and
there may be things outside the home you can do that will assist the
home and that will assist others, that may even be enterprising like
the
_________________________
Equality is not a difficult concept

Top
#2960 - 10/03/04 01:13 PM Yeah, my ex used to spew this crap... [Re: Eric]
almostheaven Offline
Carpal \'Tunnel

Registered: 07/14/04
Posts: 10468
Loc: West Virginia
He was an abuser too.
_________________________
Char Fox

Top
#2961 - 10/04/04 01:52 PM religious psycho babble -didnt hold my attententio [Re: almostheaven]
kssmul Offline
recently joined

Registered: 06/24/04
Posts: 6
If the 'Leader' of the house would act like a man of God, serving (housework), providing (pay bills), nurturing (take care of emotional needs) - then what woman could NOT respect him and be a virtuous woman?
It ALL starts with the man, as it did with Adam. Yes, the man wants to be RESPECTED, well tell me what woman who works, cooks, cleans, pays the bills and plays with the children has any energy left to RESPECT the 'MAN of the house'?!!

Top
#2962 - 10/04/04 09:49 PM Heck, my ex didn't want respect... [Re: kssmul]
almostheaven Offline
Carpal \'Tunnel

Registered: 07/14/04
Posts: 10468
Loc: West Virginia
He was continually telling me that I was to "obey" him. And if I didn't, it earned me a dragging through the house by the hair, or a fist shook in my face, threats of death, and household items being smashed/kicked in.
_________________________
Char Fox

Top
#2963 - 10/05/04 02:41 AM Re: Heck, my ex didn't want respect... [Re: almostheaven]
Diane67 Offline
enthusiast

Registered: 08/14/04
Posts: 341
Loc: California
We are to serve each other like we serve the Lord. Approach each other with love and humility. Didn't happen in my household.

Top
#2964 - 10/05/04 10:03 AM Re: Heck, my ex didn't want respect... [Re: Diane67]
almostheaven Offline
Carpal \'Tunnel

Registered: 07/14/04
Posts: 10468
Loc: West Virginia
Was that also the type of marriage where you approached him with love and he approached you with his fist? And some of these kooks equate that to some kind of sick twisted type of love. And think they're justified by the Bible.
_________________________
Char Fox

Top
#2965 - 10/05/04 05:25 PM Re: Heck, my ex didn't want respect... [Re: almostheaven]
Diane67 Offline
enthusiast

Registered: 08/14/04
Posts: 341
Loc: California
He didn't approach me with his fist either. He just stopped approaching me with love, anger, or otherwise. Marriage failed due to lack of interest.

Top
#2966 - 10/05/04 06:15 PM Re: A Biblical Response to the Feminist Agenda [Re: Eric]
bonkers Offline
newbie

Registered: 07/29/04
Posts: 31


WHO is this guy????? How insulting! Is this guy for real? I have now read a few of his posts and I am actually horrified at what I am seeing. I expect the person behind this is quite the woman hater.

Just what did your momma do to you anyway? :confused:

Top
#2967 - 10/05/04 07:46 PM Re: A Biblical Response to the Feminist Agenda [Re: bonkers]
bonkers Offline
newbie

Registered: 07/29/04
Posts: 31
never mind, in reading more...I see the problem....sheesh!

Top
#2968 - 10/06/04 01:40 AM Re: A Biblical Response to the Feminist Agenda [Re: bonkers]
almostheaven Offline
Carpal \'Tunnel

Registered: 07/14/04
Posts: 10468
Loc: West Virginia
The poster behind this is an idiot and best only for a laugh or two but never to be taken seriously.
_________________________
Char Fox

Top
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 >

Moderator:  dsAdmin 


Resources & Tools
Start Your Divorce Online Start Your Divorce
Several Options to Get Started Today.
Divorce Tools Online Divorce Tools
Keeping it Simple to Get the Job Done.
Divorce Downloads Download Center
Instantly Download Books, Guides & Forms.
Divorce and Custody Books Discount Books
Over 100 of the Best Divorce & Custody Books.
Negotiate Online Negotiate Online
Settle your Divorce and Save.
Custody and Support Tracking Custody Scheduling
Make Sure You Document Everything.

Easily Connect With a Lawyer or Mediator
Have Divorce Professionals from Your Area Contact You!
Enter Your Zip Code: