Sex is NOT a toy!

The following report from the Age details some of the effects of not allowing children to have their innocence, by bringing them up in a society with views on sexualisation that are based on the perverted desires of adults rather than the good of children:

http://www.theage.com.au/national/children-involved-in-sex-club-20080913-4ft4.html

If children are not allowed time to grow up and mature before they are confronted with (a) information about sex (b) images of a sexualised/pornographied nature then it is no surprise that they become sexually aggressive and/or promiscuous. After all they are children, and if they try to force other children to give them toys by force, then why on earth wouldn't they use the same methods to procure sexual favours?????

We need to protect children from being prematurely exposed to both information about sex, and more particularly images that will form their views on what the sex act should look like. If their primary views on sex are formed by sexualised/porn images then they will likely not see sex as a loving thing (between a husband and wife-God forbid), since the images so often portray one party (usually the woman) in servitude to the other, and that's when there's only two people involved. They will also not be able to distinguish lust from love, and that lays a foundation for devastation and destruction in their lives. If we do not do something about this now, the next generation will likely never experience true intimacy which can only be experienced in the context of marriage, and many many more will fall victim to relationship breakdown and the devastation that accompanies that.

Sex is NOT a toy, a truth that adults need to model for children, rather than pandering to their own childish desires, damn the consequences.

God bless,
Bec

Dancing with the Stars needs to "put its knickers BACK on"

Last night's season opener of Dancing with the Stars was very disappointing. There was an overwhelming amount of sexualised content, and this is particularly inappropriate considering the 7:30 time slot when children may be watching.

By the end of the third dance we had:

• Daniel McPherson touching Sonia's leg
• Bruno saying he couldn't keep his eyes off Sonia
• The female dancers wearing hardly anything
• Mark arkwardly attempting to get in on the sexualisation by referring to the dancers as "sexy"
• Todd McKenny telling a dancer to take her knickers off

And if that wasn't enough, to top it off there was that move where the Sunrise reporter ran his hand between his partner's breasts. The comments that followed about that 18 year old dancer and the sexual tension between her and her partner were unnecessary.

Dancing with the stars needs to "put its knickers back on". The objectification of women is not appropriate at 7:30 or indeed in any timeslot. The objectification of women is a form of slavery. We are not here simply for the sexual delight of men.

We may be "liberated" so that we can join the workforce but while we allow men to treat us as sexual objects that exist for the sole purpose of appeasing their sexual appetites we have gained nothing. We have simply exchanged one form of slavery (house slavery) for three others (wage slavery, debt slavery and sexual slavery). We need to be vigilant about the views on women that we allow to be part of our society. This is having, and will have an enormous effect on the next generation. Girls need freedom and space to grow up not measuring themselves by how sexually attractive men find them, but instead by discovering WHO they really are, and their value in who they are, not in their:

• Dress size
• Breast size
• Blondeness
• Use of brazillian waxing services
• Skimpiness of clothing

Our western culture has become completely debauched. It is time that we started treating each other with respect and dignity, and the pornification of our society has robbed us of that. There is nothing glamorous about gadding about with nothing on and having men lust after you as an object. Being the trash-can for a man's excess bodily fluids is demeaning. There is no honour or respect in it. It is not a reflection of a woman's worth or place in the world. She is beautiful and she is loved, because she was MADE BY GOD to be an object of His love (with her CLOTHES ON).

You might of picked up that I am angry. Well I am. I am fed up with this sick and twisted culture where women are pushed into conforming to an image to please men (the porn image). Where we are told that being sexually loose is freedom although it is really slavery. We conform to this because we want to be loved. When we do conform to that porn image that feeds men's weakness and creates a culture that is just as toxic and crippling for them as it is for us. It's a cycle because as much as a women conforms to that image it doesn't make men love her, they despise her, so she continues to change herself more and more. She doesn't accept that she is made in the image of God, and that the purpose of her life is to be conformed into the image of Christ, not that of Aphrodite/Venus. And men are never happy either, as much as they pursue those women that conform to the image they desire they are never truly satisfied. If they were they wouldn't need to move on to the next girl and the next girl and the next girl.

It's time to tear down our idols. Only Christ can truly satisfy.

God bless,
Bec

I think I like Mike Guglielmucci's song Healer better now...

Danny Guglielmucci has made a statement about what led to Mike's cancer story:
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,24233308-5006301,00.html

I think I like the song Healer better now that I know it came out of a Romans 7 type struggle with sin/addiction than when it was about cancer. Certainly speaks to my life a lot more than before :-) THIS I can COMPLETELY understand. I think this situation coming out into the open is God's first step in answering Mike's prayer for healing from his sexual addiction.

I think he will look back on this time and be grateful that this became public. I think he will never forget how much damage and pain he has caused and I think it will give him opportunity to understand a fresh the grace of God towards him. This is God discipling Mike as a son (Heb 12:5-8) which is grace in itself. This means that Mike is still God's son, which makes him our brother. As the people of God I think we should seek to be a community of healing rather than judgement in this situation.

For everyone else we need to learn/remember the following things:

1. Deal with sin, don't hide it, God won't let it stay hidden for ever, so have a zero-tolerance policy towards sin.
2. Our faith needs to be based in the character of God, not of our leaders because newsbreak they are all fallible and sin, only God is 100% trustworthy.
3. Take the log out of our own eyes before we try to take the speck out of our brothers. And remember that when we think are 'standing firm, be careful that [we] don't fall!' (1 Cor 10:12)
4. God is sovereign and He will work even things like this for the good of those who love Him and are called according to His purpose (Romans 8:28)

I really feel that so much good is going to come out of this. I feel Joel 2:25-27 is a promise for those who have experienced devastation as a result of this situation. God is passionate about restoration. He is the God of resurrection, when things die/are put to death there is opportunity for God to do something unexpected and good. As a people we need to put our hope in God that He is good enough, and big enough to make something good out of this. And considering the size of the "sin impact zone", I think this could be the beginning of a big revival in the Australian church. I think this could be something that draws people away from their false idols (church leaders, prosperity doctrine, name-it-claim-it theology, prooftexting), and back into a deep and complex faith in Christ.

God bless,
Bec

Guglielmucci, Bentley & Success

It's disappointing to hear that Mike G's cancer story is a hoax. It's hard when something that looks so strong in the church is shown to be weak and sin-tainted. Similar thing happened this week with the revelations about Todd Bentley (although I have to admit no surprise on that one at all). As Christians I think we really love it when things look successful. Healer is a great song that has touched many people. Bentley's ministry looked flashy and successful. But both are now questionable.

First thing to say would be that God is entirely capable (and there is biblical evidence) for God using the ungodly for his purposes. To varying extents we are all sinful and yet God still uses us. So just because these men have been shown to be in sin does not mean that God is not at work through their ministries. I think it is illustrative that while Saul was in sin, God's anointing still rested on him as king of Israel.

Secondly, I would say that there is a problem as Christians when we love things that "look good". I think we want God to break in and establish His kingdom (and vindicate our witness) through big, flashy, undeniable displays of His power and sovereignty. I think the reason we love songs like Healer is that they do provoke deep feeling, and we think that's a sign that God is at work in a big way, and that somehow vindicates our witness. It's like evidence that supports what we've been saying. Same thing with big flashy healings. It vindicates us, brings us a bit back off the ledge, removes some of the risk of faith and witness. But I don't think that big and flashy is the way God necessarily chooses to work all the time. I think Jesus is a great example of this. He "emptied Himself and took the form of a servant", he didn't arrive as the big flashy political messiah that Israel was expecting. Instead He came and He washed His disciple's feet.

I think we should be more pleased when we see Christian leaders and the church displaying the CHARACTER of God, rather than necessarily the power of God. The power of God should be exercised in ways that are consistent with His character. I think this links in with the problems with the Church growth movement. It measures church success through numbers and tends to use marketing techniques to get people to church. I have been reflecting recently that much of what the church says to bring people to Christ sounds a lot like secular advertising. Secular advertising sets up false models of salvation. This product is going to make your life better by xyz. You are going to be bigger, better, faster, more beautiful by using product abc. This is very similar to the gospel that we sometimes preach - come to Jesus, find the purpose for your life, be happier, more at peace, God will heal all of your health issues in this life etc etc. But I don't think this is the true gospel. The true gospel is about dying, dying to self, taking up our cross and following Jesus. This is completely counter cultural, and does not look at all like the messages that we get flooded with by the world. I think the church should be functioning in ways that show this dying to self and mortifying the flesh.

The thing is that I think this is goes entirely against our ideas of success. I think our flesh loves it when we can count up church attendance and let that be a measure of what we are doing. When there are lots of people there, or lots of people buying our CD / crying during our song we see that as success, and our flesh loves it. The central point of the bible is the death of Christ--this absolutely looks like failure. The church needs to concentrate more on knowing and following Christ in His death. In the end this is all about God's glory, not the glory (success) of humans. We need to remember that His strength is made perfect in our weakness not our strength (success).

God bless,
Bec

No spine whatsoever

OK I take it back, the archbishop of Canterbury has no theological or moral spine whatsover:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article4473814.ece

The Anglican church is quite clearly on the death march to hell if it follows this mans leadership.

God bless,
Bec

Refinement through Busyness

I usually feel that God doesn't really want us to be 'busy', productive yes, busy no. I would normally say that busyness consumes us until a point that we typically can't hear God and so are spiritually cut off from our source. But I've been reflecting recently that God can actually use our busyness sometimes as a way of refining us.

This year has/is jam packed full of change and stuff to do for me. So far this year I have changed churches, been temporarily unemployed (then reemployed by same employer!), become a life group leader and gotten engaged. The rest of this year looks like this; moving this Saturday, classes resumed this week, possibly will be looking for work again in Sept when my contract ends, preparing for our wedding in December, working, studying, leading a lifegroup, other church commitments. Additionally my fiance is looking for work as he was made redundant a few weeks back.

I had thought that I would only do one subject this semester, but I got into classes this week and realised that the majority of my spiritual food actually comes out of my study not church. There is just something about getting deeper into the things of God that really really gets me spiritually amped. For some people great worship music makes them want to jump up and down, for me it exegeting Leviticus ;-)

So while I was quite prepared to cut back a bit and try to resist the encroachment of busyness I'm feeling this week much more like there is a point to my busyness at the moment. The whole year has felt like a time of refinement, and I believe God is using this crazy-busy time in that process of refining me. I am, where possible, trying to learn to say no to things that aren't essential. But I'm also learning that where my energy runs out, His energy is available to me. I felt that particularly today as I was sitting in my Exegesis class. Most students seemed a bit freaked by the prospect of Leviticus, but I felt elated, I felt that God's empowering grace is there for me to do this.

And I think that's part of what He's trying to teach me in this period of refinement, to stop relying on my own energy, my own strength, my own intelligence and startling good looks, not to mention humility LOL, but rather to rely on Him and His empowerment to do what He's called me to. And I think He's deliberately set the bar so high that I can't do it on my own.

I'm just praying that 2009 will be a year of peace and rest. I'm calling in the Deut 24:5 principle:

If a man has recently married, he must not be sent to war or have any other duty laid on him. For one year he is to be free to stay at home and bring happiness to the wife he has married.

God bless,
Bec

So the Archbishop of Canterbury does have a spine

It appears that the Archbishop of Canterbury does have a spine, and a moral compass!

http://www.theage.com.au/world/american-churches-blamed-for-anglican-rift-20080804-3px1.html?page=-1

It is a good thing that he has stopped pandering to the liberal faction of the Anglican church and has finally called a spade a spade; yes there are divisions in the Anglican church and those divisions were caused by the US & Canadian bishops who have gone against the word of God, and the beliefs and traditions of Anglicanism.

God bless,
Bec