Evangelicals’ Sexual Double Bind
12 hours ago
|I would rather remember him as young and strong than as old and frail.|
|Yeah that's me back when I was still cute...|
"What’s the problem with a little bit of fun, anyway? No one was harmed. There is a time for everything, after all. And anyone who would find fault with it is simply a puritanical prude. Besides, there is context to the occasion; it is participation in a wider cultural experiment and pursuit. It’s innocent.
Never mind the other errors of such thought-processes, I think this definition from Susanna Wesley – mother of John - enunciates the pitfalls of this minimalist mindset the best:
Take this rule: whatever weakens your reason, impairs the tenderness of your conscience, obscures your sense of God, or takes off your relish of spiritual things; in short, whatever increases the strength and authority of your body over your mind, that thing is sin to you, however innocent it may be in itself.
It seems to me that the “Harlem Shake,” however innocent it may appear to some, doesn’t pass Susanna’s criteria – which, I should hasten to add, seems to be a good paraphrase of Philippians 4:8 – on any level.
Of course, to a large degree, I don’t necessarily blame these young people for the behavior. Young people, to a great extent, are simply living as good as they’ve been taught (and putting into practice what the older generation would love to do in theory – were they not too self-conscious). They’re a reflection of where we are as a people – a people who have not been gripped by the grace and love of Christ to the point that we want to live entirely by His Spirit rather than our flesh; a people who have forgotten that we’re participants in a “great controversy” where Christ is waiting for us to testify unequivocally that He is a God who not only is love but a God who is powerful enough to transform us into other-centered, self-denying people."
"In response to your second point: simply taking your words that their motives are to “seek attention” (which is what you have ascribed to them), then, biblically, you contradict your own conclusion that it is not “soul-harming.” See Philippians 2:5-8. Any time my motive is to “seek attention” for myself I am not living out the mind of Christ."Step 3: Start sharing your findings with others and try to shame them into conforming - remember, if you can see sins where they cannot then you win!
"Sadly, I do this often in my own life, so I condemn no one.
But any time I continue with this type of mindset and behavior, it is very soul-harming because I am indicating that the attention Christ gives me is not enough. I am not ascribing this motive to any in the videos, but simply speaking in generalities. All must evaluate their motives for themselves and be cognizant of this sobering dynamic."
"So merely evaluating a person’s behavior and concluding that it must make God sad is “condemning” and “shaming”? No one is judging motives, eternal destiny, or anything of the sort. To do so would be, as you say, “condemning.” We are simply evaluating the appropriateness or inappropriateness of a behavior. We’re not trying to read hearts.
Should a person never do this – or must we turn a blind eye to everything?"
|From: Are Roman Catholics Christians?|
|From: The Death Cookie|