No, Ms. McCleneghan and Mr. "Anonymous", we don't need sex and/or a partner

   Earlier this week, I read an interesting article: "Single Christians Can Have Sex As Long As It's Mutually Pleasurable and Affirming, Pastor Says". After the push by many Christians and pastors to make homosexuality not a sin, it should surprise no one that this woman who pastors a church is pushing sex outside of marriage for heterosexuals..... and has even written a book about it.

  The whole idea bothers me that a pastor - or anyone calling themselves a Christian - could toss out what the Bible says about sex outside of marriage and deceive people into thinking it is OK...... but one thing the woman said really stuck out to me: "McCleneghan believes it's unfair to ask single Christians who haven't been called to a life of celibacy to refrain from sexual intimacy when both men and women need sex."

  I have been thinking about that statement, and a blog post about it was floating around in my brain, and then today I got this anonymous comment on my blog post "Homosexuality.....the special sin". (A friend commented before him that something I said was excellent, which he refers to):

" No, this is not an excellent text. Not if this text is about you yourself. As Paul writes (1 Cor 7:7), the ability to remain alone is a gift from God, i.e. not everybody has this ability. I do not have this gift. As a gay Christian, if I believed that God really thinks what Mark has written above, the only rational consequence for me would be to kill myself and ask Jesus to forgive me. I could not bear life without a partner. I'd rather be dead (and be with Jesus immediately) than being alone in this world. A text that leads to such a consequence can't be excellent."

  When did sex become a "need"? When did having a partner become so important that one would kill himself if he couldn't have one, while claiming to serve Jesus?

  Kids date younger now than they ever have, and are having sex younger than they ever have. It used to be a question of whether to kiss or not on the first date, and now kids are having sex on their first date... doing what God intended for marriage and to be saved for the one they married.

 Food, water, and air are needs. We cannot live without them...... but sex? Here is a newsflash Ms. McCleneghan: we can live without sex, and many people have done so. God created it for a man and woman who are married...... not for something people to do for recreation with another person because they are feeling "frisky". Is it fair? Well, Ms Mc (may I call you that to make it easier) - if you haven't run across something in life yet that isn't fair and there is no way to make it fair, then you have led a very sheltered and boring life. Life isn't fair. There are multitudes of people who will never have someone to love and be sexual with for a score of different reasons.......is that fair? No, but God doesn't guarantee fairness if we serve Him. He promises life eternal, love, mercy, forgiveness, and a lot of other things that are far greater than sex and far more long lasting than a romp in bed with someone you aren't married to for life.

  We obviously need married people to keep the earth populated, but as I mentioned in a previous blog post, I believe we'd all be better off if we held off on dating so early, got to be comfortable in our own skin as a single person, got a relationship established more with God..... and then pursued love, dating, and marriage. This push for kids to date and have a relationship with the opposite sex...... or worse, the same sex...... is doing no one favors. Teens bounce from relationship to relationship, usually having sex with each person, then become adults and continue the constant dating and having sex with multiple people. And we wonder why marriages don't last and why everyone is so messed up.

   Is it possible that we have made love/dating/sex/marriage/relationships into an idol? Look at what Mr Anonymous said again: "As a gay Christian, if I believed that God really thinks what Mark has written above, the only rational consequence for me would be to kill myself and ask Jesus to forgive me. I could not bear life without a partner. I'd rather be dead (and be with Jesus immediately) than being alone in this world." I feel his pain.......as I have become rather open about admitting on this blog, I am attracted to other guys instead of women...... but to say you'd rather kill yourself than be without a partner......that isn't loving Jesus enough. That is putting relationships and love above God.....whether you are heterosexual or deal with same-sex attractions.

  "Gay Christians" get a bad rap from other Christians....... and in one way, they ask for it. To toss out what the Bible says about homosexuality, have a sexual relationship - or just sex - with the same sex and call yourself a Christian.....that is just wrong and you are putting your sexual desires/needs above God. You cannot do what Christ commanded - "deny yourself, take up your cross, and follow me", if you insist on denying what the Bible says instead of denying yourself......

  Yet, how many Christians condemning these "gay Christians" are doing the same thing with heterosexual relationships? I am no marriage or relationship expert, but how many people truly have sought and obeyed God's will on who they should marry......how many have sought God's will on who to date.....when to date...... whether to date at all? If heterosexual Christians put dating and marriage at such a priority that they don't seek God's will and rush ahead with relationships instead of focusing more on God, are they any better than the gay person claiming to be a Christian but refusing to put God above their desires for love and a relationship? (Yes, I am aware that God recognizes and blesses marriage between a man and woman and will not between two of the same gender).

  There is a woman I know who years ago had a relationship with God. She met and fell for a man who was not of her faith. She prayed and prayed and felt God said "no", but she married the guy. It didn't last, and they are divorced to this day. There is another woman I know who was dating a handsome young guy. She made the statement "If I had to choose between 'John' and God, I'd choose John." "John" married someone else, and she now has neither God nor John.

  I don't know of anyone else that made the statement the second woman did.... but how many have felt that, or at least indicated it by their actions? As I see countless marriages fall a part of people I went to Bible college and church with, I often wonder if they truly had God's will and blessing on who they married, or if they put relationship above God and married someone they shouldn't have, married before they should have..... or married when they shouldn't have at all..... No, I am not saying that is the result of the breakup of any marriage I have seen break a part, but it makes me wonder.

  Serving God should take precedence over everything else in life. Anything can be an idol that we put above God,,,,,,even relationships and sex. We don't have to have a partner and/or sex to survive in this life. If we are that desperate to have either, it could just be we don't have the relationship with God that we claim to have.

 Oh, and Ms. Mc and Mr. Anonymous...... Jesus didn't have sex or a partner..... and the Bible says He was tempted in every way that we are........

The lepers among us

  Note: I originally did this blog post in March of 2014. Since then, I have stopped hiding and stopped caring what people think of me, and admitted my struggle. In the original post, I was still hiding in the shadows.

   In Jesus' time on earth, leprosy was a big deal. Once people got it, they had to go off from everyone and live by themselves, or with other lepers. They were shunned and feared. No one wanted to be around them, as it was a horrible disease and no one else wanted to get it. Any time they went anywhere where that there might be healthy people, they had to yell "unclean, unclean."

  Back around 2003-2004, I read a book that I found fascinating: Second Touch by Brock and Bodie Thoene. Set during Jesus' ministry, the story revolved around lepers. The Thoenes do some heavy research for their books, and the way they presented this story about lepers, and what they went through, helped me learn a lot more about the disease.

 There are still leper colonies today, but it isn't something most people need to worry about.

 Yet, we still have our own lepers. Not so much in American society, where just about any sin is not just tolerated, but put on display in parades and shouted from the housetops.

   But enter almost any local church, and you'll find the lepers. Or maybe you won't find them. I am sure in Jesus' day, there were people who had leprosy and tried to hide it. They knew what would happen once everyone found out they had it. They would be shunned, kicked out of society and out of the city. So human nature being what it is, there had to be lepers who tried to hide it. And can you blame them? They would go from having friends and a loving family, to having nothing. Isolation, loneliness, and pain, just waiting for death.

  Our modern day lepers in the church don't have a physical disease that is eating away at their flesh. They have something that is eating away at their soul, their self confidence, their lives.

  Who are they? They are our brothers and sisters, parents, friends, children. They are people addicted to porn, people struggling with same-sex attractions, people addicted to sex or other things they are afraid to confide in anyone about. Just like the lepers of old, many try to hide it. And why not? They would face judgement, shunning, some would be kicked out of their homes, and some would even be kicked out of their churches.

  I have told this story before on my blog, but it fits here, so I will share it again. Southern Gospel singer Kirk Talley told it on a live CD he did a few years back.

  There was a young man who played guitar in the band at his church. He struggled with being attracted to other males, so he did what anyone in his shoes should be able to do: he went to his pastor and talked to him. His pastor seemed understanding, and said he'd pray for him. Then came the next church service. While this young man was on stage with the rest of the band, the pastor told the whole congregation what this young man had told him. He then turned to the young man, and told him to get out of the church, that his kind was not welcome there. So a horrified and heart broken young man took his guitar and walked out of the very place that should have been a safe place for him, but instead had done to him what the lepers of old had done to them: he was kicked out and shunned.

   Every time I think of that story, it breaks my heart, and it also makes me angry. I'd like to get a hold of that pastor and shed some righteous anger on him. At least I hope it is righteous.

  There was a day I walked into my pastor's study and told him something I had never verbalized to another person.....that I, Mark Buzard struggled with same-sex attractions. He and his wife never treated me differently, or if they did, they seemed to show more love and caring towards me. I am sure it wasn't an easy thing to have a member of his congregation tell him, but he did all he could to help me in his remaining years at my church. I will always be grateful to my pastor at that time, David Blowers, for being Jesus to me.

   And if I wasn't fortunate and blessed enough to have one pastor who loved me through my struggles, I got a second one. I'll never forget the day, though it has been 12 or 13 years now. My former pastor left unexpectedly to fill a position of leadership in our denomination. My current pastor, Stan, had just come as our assistant pastor. We got a new pastor that was older and I didn't know, and I was feeling a bit lost.

    One day I was really at a low point, so I called Stan, my assistant pastor. I'd known him for about 9 years, having gone to Bible college with him. He came, and I sat looking at him, wondering how on earth I was going to get up the nerve to tell another pastor this thing I struggle with. I started to tell him, stumbling a bit over my words, and had only gotten out that I wasn't sure how to tell him, when he blew me away. He said before Pastor Blowers had left, he had pulled Stan aside and told him what I was dealing with, and that I would need him.

  Not to minimize what my former pastor had done, but Stan became even more involved in helping me. Fifteen years later, with him being my full time pastor for several years now, I know I can call him any time. I know he is praying for me. He occasionally sends me a text asking how I am doing.

  And God has blessed me with others. I am so thankful for the friends who know the worst about me, and don't run, don't shun me, don't kick me out of their comfort zone.

  Are there those who would? Yes, even in my own church. I have heard the comments, the snide remarks, the mockery. They didn't know someone was in their hearing who was hurt by their words. They had no clue a modern day leper was just a few feet away. (Note: since "coming out" on my blog about what it is I struggle with, I have yet to hear or experience any negative comments, though I am sure there would be a few who would if they knew)

   Too many churches have a mental list of sins they are comfortable with. If they know of someone who struggles with things like pornography or homosexuality, they wouldn't want them in their church. But something they may be unaware of, or refuse to consider: they are already there. The silent lepers, hiding their disease, afraid to admit their struggle, for they fear what would happen.

  Christians need to quit putting their head in the sand and thinking the lepers are all "out there". They aren't. They are wherever you are. They are in the pew in front of you, across from you. They may be the person sitting beside you in church......they may be someone in your own house.

  The chances of your church having at least one person who is struggling with same-sex attractions and/or identifying themselves as gay, are greater than your church not having any. The chances of you knowing a person struggling with same-sex attractions is greater than you not knowing. Your church, your family -  they are everywhere. In my own church, I know of three, including myself, though I do not know the identity of one of them.... or if that person still goes to my church.

   And even greater than the chances of a person dealing with SSA, are the chances of someone in your church struggling with pornography. There are likely several people in your church, in your family. It could be your husband, brother, or son..... not that women are not susceptible to it, but it is more of a male problem than female.

 Check out the statistics from Covenant Eyes on teens and pornography, if you can make it big enough. If not, click here: http://www.covenanteyes.com/2010/08/19/teens-and-porn-10-stats-your-need-to-know/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_content=4378167

 I don't know about you, but that is scary, and sad. And how many of those kids will go on to fighting the addiction all of their lives, because they are too afraid to tell someone.... so they become another of the lepers, hiding in the shadows.

   Sexual sin can have worse and more long lasting effects than other sins. I get that, but it is time the church stopped treating those involved in it like they are lepers. We tend to put sins on a level of not so bad to worse, and homosexuality and pornography are close the worst sins on our chart.

  We can't go the way of some liberal churches and wink at these sins, and tell those who are involved in them that they are fine and don't need to change, and I am not saying same-sex attraction is a sin, but to many Christians it is. The sin is when the person gives in to lust and or the act of sex.

  I firmly believe with all of my heart, that if the church had a more compassionate view and tone towards those struggling with same-sex attractions, porn, and anything else that is in the same category, those in our churches who are struggling with those issues might come out of the shadows, admit they have a problem, and ask for help.

   But instead, we take a harsh stand not just against the sin, but against the person, and only eternity will show how many people we have driven more into their struggle and sin and/or away from God and the church by making it so hard for them to find help in the very place where they should be able to get it: their church.

  My church is not perfect. (hey, if it was, I wouldn't be allowed in!) The people are not perfect. I am sure that if some people find out about my same-sex attractions, they will fear me, judge me, and shun me. That is very likely. And that is sad.

   But I am thankful for those who know, and love me and call me their friend and brother. My pastor and his wife, Stanley and Sandra Grabill. My former pastor and his wife, David and Debbie Blowers.. and several others. If the church was filled with people like you, those broken people, the lepers in our church, would not feel they had to hide, but would feel safe in coming forward for help.

  That is what Christianity, and being like Jesus is all about.

The Jesus who celebrates sin

 Every few months or so, someone posts an article about whether Christians should go a gay wedding, bake a cake for a gay wedding, etc. Inevitably, the point will be made that Christians should do these things because Jesus would. After all, He hung out with sinners, so of course He'd do anything for a gay wedding... including going to one.

  Or would He?

  I weary of people saying Jesus would do this or that, when He may not do what they say He would do. There are people who seem to think by trotting out the "Jesus would do it" argument, that they have won the debate hands down, and everyone should just shut up and do as they do...... for after all, they have the personal knowledge of what Jesus would or would not do, and if you disagree..... you are just wrong.

  When you go to a wedding, you are there to celebrate the couple's happy day and to congratulate them on the joining of their lives together. Now I am going to throw out a few facts here:

1)) Homosexuality is a sin. God calls it an abomination in the Old Testament, and the New Testament is very plain on it still being a sin. God didn't change His mind on any sexual sin in between the two Testaments.

2) Gay marriage is wrong. It is marrying two people of the same sex who are going against everything God said about sex and marriage. 

3) To go to or participate in any wedding is to indicate you are OK with the marriage, and that you are celebrating the occasion with the couple.

  Think about that last statement I made: you are celebrating the occasion with the couple. Now can you imagine Jesus - the same Jesus who says homosexuality is a sin, an abomination, and whose Word says that homosexuals will go to hell - can you really imagine Jesus going to a wedding of two people whose very marriage is based on what He calls sinful and an abomination? Is He going to go and celebrate their rebellion, their sin, their defiance of God? Would He smile and laugh and applaud their decision to ignore what the Bible says about their sin? Would He give them a gift and card to congratulate their sin and their further steps away from serving Him and doing His will?

  Jesus DID hang out with sinners, but He never celebrated or approved of their sin. He never left them  the way He found them.

He went to visit Zacchaeus, and left him a changed man.

He met the woman at the well, and changed her life and the lives of many people in her city.

He called Matthew the tax collector to follow Him, and he did.

He cast demons out of Mary Magdalene and she followed Him for the rest of her life.

He forgave the woman caught in adultery and told her to go and sin no more.

He called out sin and forgave it, but He never, ever approved of it nor celebrated sin.

  And He wouldn't do it today either.

  We somehow have this idea that God wants us to be happy and feel good about ourselves no matter what we do, and that no matter what we do, He will be there to cheer us on and make us feel happy about what we are doing. That even if we are living in sin and in  defiance of what He commands, that He still wants us to be happy and to feel good about ourselves.

  Even if it is homosexuality and gay marriage.

  The evangelical church in general has messed up on the gay issue. The majority of Bible-believing Christians have made it into the worst sin out there, and look on it as almost an unpardonable sin and anyone who is gay as a pariah and evil person. And yes, there are some gay people out there who want to force their lifestyle on Christians and would love it to be a crime to say they are wrong. They have an agenda and do not want tolerance, but total acceptance and indoctrination from Kindergarten to the pulpit. And I firmly believe that all of these cases of bakers, photographers, and others who have been sued and fined for not doing a service for a gay wedding have been instigated by gay couples to make an example and try to force Christians to do what the gay community wants.

  The church needs to do better. No man, woman, boy, or girl should have to sit in the church pew struggling with attractions to the same sex and be afraid to tell someone from their own church. We have failed as a church and as Christians if that is the case...... and in too many churches, that is exactly the case. It is no picnic to sit in the pew struggling with that issue, and hearing people request prayer for their problems and issues, and know if you requested prayer for yours that it would be similar to setting of a bomb in the church. It isn't easy going against what feels natural and living for God instead of your own sexual desires and attractions. And it is made more difficult by your Christian brothers and sisters not understanding it, not wanting to talk about it, and some ostracizing those who they know struggle with it.

  It is wrong to hate or fear gay people, though it is smart to fear and fight their agenda.... but it is also wrong to give approval of their sin and lifestyle and possibly help damn their souls to hell. It is wrong not to give hope to those caught up in that lifestyle and point out that they are in a list of sins God condemns, yet the same verse says "as such were some of you"...... that there is hope for change and it is possible to walk away from even that sin.

  If I had a gay son who was rejecting God and living the gay lifestyle, here is what I'd do.... even with my own experiences influencing me:

  I wouldn't harp on his sin constantly. We don't do that with other sins.

  I would let him know right up front that I didn't approve of his sin, but that I loved him and he was welcome in my home.

  His boyfriend(s) would be welcome in my home, but I'd ask that they'd refrain from public displays of affection, and if they ever spent the night, it would be separate rooms.... but then I'd expect the same out of a boy and girl relationship.

  I would let it be known long before any possibility of a wedding, that I would not be in attendance.

  There would be other issues and things to work out, but it all comes down to these basic points, and it applies to all relationships in life, not just our children:

  We must love those in our lives and make them feel we care, even if we don't approve of everything they do.

  While loving them, we must not do anything to encourage or put approval on their sin, whatever sin it may be.

  Some people may feel they should go to the wedding of a gay son or daughter, and that is their choice and between them and God.. however, I think it would be difficult to be a wedding and not look like you are celebrating it and congratulating the couple on taking another step away from God and further towards their sinful lifestyle.


  I have been to weddings, though I don't like to go to them and haven't been to one since my little sister got married 15 years ago... but I do know this: it is a time of joy and celebration, and it is next to impossible to go to one and not join in celebrating. So I don't care if the pope himself says Jesus would go to a gay wedding, I cannot by any stretch of the imagination believe that He would.

  But if He went, He would not celebrate. He would say "follow me, leave your sin behind and sin no more." But join in a celebration of a sinful lifestyle.. no, the Jesus I serve and know doesn't celebrate sin, He forgives it and changes lives.

  The same Jesus who wept over Jerusalem because they rejected Him, would not celebrate two men or two women's rejection of Him. He would weep.

  So go ahead and go to a gay wedding, or bake the cake, or do the photographs - and use whatever reasoning you want to use, but don't use Jesus. Don't say He would go to one, so we also should.... and if you dare try that reasoning, then you, like Him, should leave the sinners different than you find them. You should invite them to follow Jesus and leave their sin behind them. For if you use Jesus as the reason for going, then you should truly be Jesus to the gay couple and their friends.

 The gay lifestyle isn't gay. Gay means happy, but if you really look at homosexuality and those caught in it, there isn't true happiness. Gay men pass up the average heterosexual man in promiscuity. There are more risks of disease and death in the gay lifestyle than the heterosexual one. The relationships are more shallow, for gay men go after the outward, how guys look. And the end of that lifestyle is an eternity in hell, which is for anyone who rejects Jesus and goes their own way.

 Homosexuality is and is not just another sin, but it is one that the Jesus I serve would not celebrate or join in any way to show He approved of a union based on sin.

  A friend of mine who lived the gay lifestyle for several years made an interesting point in a discussion about Jesus going to gay weddings, or doing anything similar. He said He could not see Jesus celebrating gay weddings or going to a gay pride parade to show love for gay people, but He could see Him at a gay pride parade weeping. Weeping for those caught up in a sinful lifestyle that will destroy them and their souls. That is the Jesus who may show up at a gay wedding.... a weeping Jesus, not one who celebrates sin.

What Would Jesus say to Josh Dugger?

 I am not a fan of the Dugger's TV show, and in fact have never seen one episode of it. I know of them, and know a little about them, and what I know can be summed up with these few facts:
They are conservative, Christian, dress modestly, have a ton of kids, and have a TV show. That was all I did know, but now I know more about one of the family members, Josh Dugger.

  Thirteen years ago when he was 14, he molested a couple of girls, which consisted of inappropriate touching. The police were involved at least the first time, and it was dealt with. There are varying reports about the others. What he did was wrong, sinful, and a crime. No one is saying it isn't those things, but there is no evidence at all that he ever did it again, and seems to be an upstanding Christian man now.

  I thought juvenile records were supposed to be sealed, and what we did as teenagers kept quiet, so what we did as stupid teenagers couldn't be brought up and used against us as adults. Not so with Josh Dugger. His crimes and sins have been brought to light and he is being crucified by the media, liberals, Christians, and everyone else for what he did as a teenager. If you dare defend him in any way, or make it sound like you are defending him, you get nasty remarks. I have read the comments. People saying his kids should be taken off of him and comments slamming the family. Their show has been taken off of the air for something one of them did 13 years ago as a kid.

  Here are some thoughts I have on this situation:

1) The crimes are past the statutes of limitations, but there is no statute of limitations on how the victims may feel.

2) The same people screaming the loudest, had no problem with outspoken feminist Lena Dunham molesting her younger sister, or with the with the allegations against Michael Jackson that everyone knows were true, with Bill Clinton molesting women, with Bill Clinton hanging out with a man who has been guilty of sex with underage girls, with producer Norman Polanski, and more. When it is a liberal found guilty of sexual crimes, the media and other liberals don't get excited about it. But let a Christian and conservative be caught, and that is all they want to talk about.

3) There are a lot of female teachers caught having sex with underage boys, and they get a slap on the wrist and a lot of people act like it is a joke......and that is actual sex, not touching.

4) They keep saying the girls were minors.... so was Josh Dugger.

5) This was not an adult male caught having sex with minors, but a minor caught inappropriately touching minor girls, who I am guessing was younger than him, but that information doesn't seem public..... at what age is it still considered molestation - if the girls were 13, 12. 11, 10..... no one knows how old these girls were, and it is still wrong no matter what, but this is different than an adult molesting a kid.

6) Bringing this up is most likely going to bring it back to the girls' minds and cause them to relive it.

7) We have multitudes of boys who have done the same. Whether they be 14, 16, or 17, how many boys pressure girls to have sex with them, only to leave a young girl wishing she had not given up her virginity to a boy she will most likely not marry, a boy who will most likely move onto another girl, and do the same to her..... is that really that much different than a 14 year old boy inappropriately touching young girls?

  I can understand the liberals and media attacking Josh. They hate Christians and conservatives, and anything they can find wrong with a popular Christian is like throwing bloody meat to sharks.... but what bothers me is the Christians who are taking up stones and throwing along with the liberals and media.

  We all have sinned. Every last one of us, but we Christians tend to categorize sins. Lying, gossip, coveting, jealously, gluttony, etc, aren't bad sins and everyone does them. We even seem to have this idea that there are some sins you can't stop from doing...... sins you don't even have to stop doing (if you're a hardcore Calvinist). Even sex before marriage seems to be something most Christians are OK with and figure people can't help not doing.

  And then there are the bad sins: homosexuality, adultery, stealing, killing, child molestation. animal cruelty (at least some people act like it is the worst sin imaginable), etc. Those who have never been guilty of those sins pull their righteous robes around them, pick up stones, and get in line to throw them at anyone caught in them

  What would Jesus do? When the adulterous woman was brought before Him, and the religious people of the day wanted to stone her, He told them that whoever was without sin could cast the first stone. And none of them fit that criteria, so they slunk away. He then turned to the woman and told her He didn't condemn her, and to go and sin no more.

  If Josh Dugger were brought into the midst of modern day Christians, and we set him before Jesus with the accusations against Josh, what would Jesus do? I believe He would do the same. And all of the Christians with stones in their hands, would have to drop them and slink away.

  If you look at the genealogy of Jesus, you'll see some people who didn't commit the "nice sins":

There's David. He committed adultery, then committed murder to cover up the adultery.
Tamar. She dressed up like a prostitute and seduced her father-in-law.
Rahab, a prostitute.
And more.

  The Bible is full of people who messed up pretty badly, and yet God forgave them, used them, and put many of them in the line that would bring forth His Son.

  It really isn't up to use to forgive Josh Dugger. I assume he has sought forgiveness from those he has wronged, and from God. What is the statute of limitations on when we can stop holding it against him? From what I have seen, there are a lot of people who seem to think 13 years is too soon to offer the same grace that has been extended to us. I for one, am glad God doesn't have a time period of when He offers grace and forgiveness. I can''t imagine still waiting for forgiveness and grace for something I did 13 years ago.

  My oldest nephew will turn 14 in October. He is very much still a kid. He is immature, selfish at times, and definitely doesn't make good decisions about everything all of the time. Granted, he hasn't done anything as bad as Josh Dugger, but a 14 year old is still very much a kid. Are we going to drag out the crimes of every other public figure from when they were teenagers? Or is it just conservatives and Christians whose past sins must be brought to life, and whose lives must be ruined?

  If you read Paul's letters to the Corinthians, you'll see they had people in their churches saved from and some still dealing with the not-so-nice sins: adultery, incest, homosexuality, idolatry mixed with prostitution.... and most likely sex with children. It went on in the Roman empire, so there is a good chance there were people into that who became Christians.... and God saved them and redeemed them. And He built His church on people who didn't have "nice" sins in their past. They had some bad sins.

  This is not a defense of Josh Dugger. He did wrong as a teenager, seems to have sought forgiveness, and it should stay in the past..... where we all want the sins we did as teenagers to stay........or any sins we have repented of and been forgiven of by God.

  We have so normalized sex before marriage. Our schools and TV programs encourage kids younger and younger to do it, to experiment even with the same sex....... then we are shocked when a 14 year old boy does something inappropriate like this.

  Maybe this wasn't handled right, but I still say the sins of a 14 year old boy belong in the past, not in his adult life 13 years later..... and that the people screaming the loudest about his actions have no problem with others committing similar acts. It just depends on who you are...... and since Josh Dugger is Christian and conservative, he must be destroyed. Sad that many Christians are joining in. May God grant us the grace and forgiveness so many are unwilling to extend to this young man.

50 shades of purity

The Oscars were just televised a couple of weeks ago. I didn't watch them, but saw enough about them on my Facebook feed to know I was better off. The women attending seemed to be having a contest to see who could show the most of their breasts and wear the ugliest dresses while doing so. Many of the same men and women that got shiny awards, are the same ones  who mock Christian values and help indoctrinate Americans that sex outside of marriage is normal, homosexuality should be celebrated, that more nakedness is good, Islam is good, and who reinforce the idea that the freakier you look, the cooler you are. The host of the awards, Neil Patrick Harris, appeared on stage in his underwear, which didn't leave much to the imagination.....why would any Christian want to watch that?

  Just a week earlier, the S&M/pornographic movie 50 Shades of Grey released in theaters, a supposedly harmless movie, which has already resulted in one young man raping a girl and reenacting a scene from the movie. Besides the fact that the movie degrades women and gives the idea it is OK to force women into acts they don't want to do, the movie borders on pornographic, and should have an XXX rating. And scores of people flocked to view it who profess to follow Christ.

  Ten years ago, another movie released in theaters. The first movie of its kind to be shown in theaters, Brokeback Mountain. A tale of two cowboys who have a gay relationship. At least one of the men was married, so not only did the movie and Hollywood celebrate a movie about a gay relationship, they celebrated a movie where a man committed adultery to have that relationship/affair.

  Christians were upset about the movie, and rightly so. Some churches boycotted theaters that showed the movie. I wonder how many of those same churches boycotted theaters that showed 50 Shades of Grey...... And I wonder how many churches boycotted theaters that show movies where there is adulterous relationships and sex outside of marriage relationships. Well, I don't wonder about that one. The answer would be none.

  You cannot be a Christian and be having sex with someone of the same gender. Period. Hollywood and many churches and Christians are tossing out and ignoring what the Bible says about that, but it is still true. People engaging in homosexual behavior will go to hell if they don't stop and surrender their lives and desires to Jesus.

  But the same holds true for heterosexual people. The same Bible that condemns homosexuality, also condemns fornication, which is any sex outside of marriage, and adultery. People committing those sins will also go to hell, not Heaven, and cannot be a Christian if they are doing those sins. Hollywood and the church long ago glossed over those sins, especially sex outside of marriage. No one is shocked or bothered, and it isn't unusual for professing Christian couples to have sex before marriage anymore. Even among Christian teenagers, the idea of staying a virgin until you're married is a joke. The idea that teens are going to have sex anyway has crept into many churches, brought on largely in part by Hollywood.

  Author and pastor David Platt made a great point about our selective morality.... condemning homosexuality while viewing other immorality. He put it this way:

"we’re all bent towards sexual deviation and we all realize this. The second reason this is so important is because it’s not just homosexual sin that skews the picture of Genesis 1 and 2. It is heterosexual sin as well. I represent the class of people that is responsible for the vast majority of sexual wrongdoing in the world: male heterosexuals, and I, and every heterosexual person, we would be wise to stop looking at the speck in other’s eyes when there is a mammoth log in our own eyes. It makes no sense to be watching TV and to see footage of same-sex marriages in California, to roll your eyes or shake your heads and flip the channel only to stare uncritically at adultery in a drama or to laugh at the trivialization of sex in a sitcom or to gaze upon the seductive images that dominate just about every realty TV show and to sit and watch advertisements that are virtual prostitution as people sell us, as followers of Christ, their products based on their appeal to our sexual desires. This makes no sense. This is why these Scriptures apply to every single one of us in this room. Are our sins as heterosexuals acceptable because they’re of the majority? Absolutely not, we are all born with a heart of pride and we are all, all of us, bent toward sexual deviation and as a result we all need the Gospel, every single one of us needs the Gospel because we’re all guilty, all of us and we need to remember these things."

  I wasn't exposed to much TV or movies until I became an adult, and then was careful about the movies I watched. I can still remember when I watched the popular "You've Got Mail" and feeling a sense of uneasiness that the female lead was living with her boyfriend. Sound weird, prudish, naive'? Maybe, but up to that point I hadn't watched much, and what I watched either didn't make shacking up obvious, or it wasn't in the movie at all.

But we get used to it. After you see it all of the time, and everyone starts doing it, you get desensitized to it and it seems less wrong to you, or less obvious that is is wrong. Hollywood helped do it with premarital sex and adultery, especially via soap operas, and now they are doing it with homosexuality.

 I looked up some statistics on gay characters on TV shows. The most recent that came up was from 2013. There were 35 series regulars on cable, and an addition 26 recurring gay characters on cable. This is not an accident. Hollywood has an agenda to make homosexuality more normal and accepted. They did it already with affairs, divorce, sex outside of marriage, and a multitude of behaviors, fads, etc. that were once considered weird and even taboo....... but thanks to Hollywood, no one blinks anymore.
 

 Last week,  ABC Family aired on one of their shows 2 13 year old boys kissing. Ironic, given the "family" part. Someone stated that if you were caught with pictures of minor boys kissing on your computer, you'd be in trouble, but since it was on a TV show, the gay lobby is jumping for joy that they got another taboo on TV.

  TV in and of itself is not evil, but Hollywood is evil and godless. I have read reliable sources that tell of minor boys being used sexually by adult males, and most likely minor girls also, but everyone looks the other way, because money and fame are more important than morality and doing the right thing, even if that right thing is protecting kids. And these people dare to tell us how we should live, who we should vote for?

 The Bible says in Psalm 101:3 "I will set no wicked thing before my eyes." Other versions render it better:
"I will not look with approval on anything that is vile" NIV
"I will refuse to look at anything vile and vulgar." NLT

  A couple of translations render it "I will not set anything worthless before my eyes."

    Philippians 4:8 says "And now, dear brothers and sisters, one final thing. Fix your thoughts on what is true, and honorable, and right, and pure, and lovely, and admirable. Think about things that are excellent and worthy of praise."

   Do we really apply these verses to our lives? Do we put what we watch, what we read, what we let our eyes set on through the filter of what is pure, honorable, not wicked or vile? Does 50 Shades of Grey go through those filters? Absolutely not. Does any show celebrating homosexuality, adultery, fornication go through those filters?

  I did a blog post a while back, Addicted to "E", with the "E" standing for entertainment. There is nothing wrong with clean and wholesome entertainment, and we all need relaxation and fun...... but so much of America, and sadly all too many of those who claim to follow Jesus, have become so addicted to entertainment - TV, movies, music, amusement parks, and more, that we blindly go along and watch what the world watches, go where the world goes, listen to what the world watches. Then we wonder why our churches are shallow, why we never reach anyone for God, why we have so little time for God.

 My supervisor at work gets on a kick once in a while where he will start listing movies and ask if I have seen this one or that one. The ones he has watched that I watch are few and far between......because I don't watch many movies, and most of the ones I watch are either Christian or family oriented. I read far more than watching movies. But even there, I have to be careful. Reading can take the place of what I should be doing. Not all books, even on the Christian market, are pure and wholesome.

  There were many who called us who stood up against the 50 Shades movie "judgmental" and thought we should mind our own business.... but come on, a movie about a young girl being taken advantage of by a sadistic man...... is that something anyone concerned with morality and living for God should see? Absolutely not.

  Just as it is hard to swim upstream, living pure in today's culture is difficult. It is very difficult. It isn't considered normal, and those who try to live pure, who save sex for marriage and avoid movies like 50 Shades are mocked and called judgmental. We don't need to watch things, go places, or do things that will make it more difficult to remain pure. One can hardly go outside in warm weather without having to battle what your eyes see. So why unnecessarily put things in front of our eyes to cause us problems? We don't have to see the latest movie. We don't have to see ANY, for that matter, though I am not saying Christians can't..... our viewing habits should be a lot different from non-Christians though.

 Hollywood does not have our best interests at heart. They celebrate immorality. They mock Christian values, and yet Christians help support their godless and immoral movies and TV shows.

  It isn't just pornography that will separate us from God and destroy lives and marriages. It is immoral TV shows and movies.

  If everyone who professed the name of Jesus would stand up and boycott every movie and TV show that no Christian should watch, I firmly believe Hollywood would have to change the way they do things....... but too many of us won't do that. We are addicted to entertainment, and too calloused and used to immorality that we keep watching whatever Hollywood comes out with. And all along, the Bible is still saying "I will set no wicked thing before my eyes", and to think on whatever us pure, lovely, and of good report. 

50 shades of porn

The movie 50 Shades of Grey opens in theaters on Valentine's Day. Based on the book by the same title, the movie is more a S&M and lust flick than a tale of romance. Ironic that it is coming out on the day devoted to love.

  I didn't read the book, nor will I watch the movie, though I did watch the movie trailer.... and I am not impressed with what I have heard about the book and movie, nor was I impressed with the movie trailer. The story is about a young college senior and a charismatic entrepreneur, Christian Grey. Mr. Grey likes to be in control of everything in his life, including his women. The brief movie trailer gives a glimpse of restraints, whips, blindfolds, and the young girl restrained and blindfolded on a bed.

  There is a lot of discussion about men and pornography and the effects on men and their relationships. Most normal women have a problem - and rightly so - with the man in their life looking at pornography. There is even recognition outside of the church and Christian circles of the dangers and problems of pornography. Many women have been hurt by finding out her boyfriend or husband is viewing and is addicted to pornography. It does seem to be more a male problem than a female problem. Even one of the most well known women's pornography publications, Playgirl, is mostly viewed by gay men, not women. So pornography is more a male problem than a female problem.

  Or is it?

  Many have the misguided notion that pornography is limited to pictures and videos of naked people, alone or engaged in sexual acts, but it is not. 

  Walk into any bookstore or library and start looking at their romance novel section. You will find row after row of books with shirtless men on the cover, accompanied by a woman with her clothes falling off of her, or barely covered with a revealing item of clothing. If a book has a cover like that, there is a 99.99% chance that the book has graphic sex scenes..... although sadly, I have seen some Christian books that have covers that are edging that way. Here is a news flash: these books are pornographic. Oh yes they are. If the same book was acted out on a video, no one would disagree that it is pornography, and it is still pornography when the sex act is described in detail on paper. There are websites that are 100% pornography that have erotic stories..... and though the content is most likely more graphic overall than the sexy romance novels, the novels still have pornographic content in them.

  Sadly, there are many Christian women who will be going to see 50 Shades of Grey. And though it is hypocritical of most of them and of some non-Christian women, the same women who have a problem with their husband or boyfriend viewing pornography, will go and view this pornographic piece of trash. A movie does not have to show sex organs or visible sexual penetration to be pornographic. And it is time we stopped giving women a free pass with their sex-filled romance novels.

  I take major issue with Christian authors and publishers putting curse words in Christian fiction novels, and have blogged about it. I had one woman who would consistently disagree with me on the issue, and she was a Christian lady. She even went so far as to say she would have no problem with sex scenes in a Christian book. There was another Christian lady whose blog I used to follow for book reviews. In addition to reviewing and giving away Christian books, she also reviewed and did book giveaways for the sex-filled novels I have been talking about. It seemed incongruous to read a blog post about the morning worship service at her church, then go on to the next blog post that featured a novel with half naked people on the cover, and sex scenes inside the book.

  In Philippians, we are told to think on things that are pure, honest, of good report. Most of what is on TV does not line up with that. Many romance novels and other novels do not line up with that. And 50 Shades of Grey definitely does not line up with that.

Christians have been accused of being too close-minded about sex. And in some ways we have been. I don't think we talk enough about sex in the right way, and too many Christians think it is a dirty word and a dirty act. In the boundaries of marriage, it is neither, but outside of the boundaries of marriage, sex is wrong... whether it be between 2 unmarried individuals, in a novel, or on a movie.

  Purity is a hard thing to strive for in these days. Men do tend to be more visually stimulated than women are, which is one reason why women should dress more modestly, though men are not exempt. We don't need to be putting things in front of our eyes that are going to make the battle more difficult. Things like sex-filled romance novels, movies like 50 Shades of Grey.

  We Christians should have higher standards. Our marriages are falling apart as fast and easy as marriages of the world, and that is sad and pathetic. I am not married, but even an unmarried guy knows that the things we watch and read can influence all areas of our lives, even a marriage. I don't know everything that destroys a marriage, but I would stake my life on the fact that sex-filled romance novels would be up there on the list, and possibly even romance novels that paint unrealistic pictures of love and marriage.

  We all need to be more careful of what we put in front of our eyes. There are some things beyond our control, but we can work on the things we can control. That involves being more careful about what we read and watch. And avoiding movies and books like 50 Shades of Grey.

  And might I add, if you're going to see a movie this week-end, go for one like The Song, or a host of other good love story movies. And if you are one who wants to go to the theater, then check out Old Fashioned, a movie that is being marketed as the opposite of 50 Shades of Grey. 

  But whatever you do, do your marriage and soul some good and don't go see 50 Shades of Grey. Love is patient and kind, and never grey.

Secondary Virginity

   

I'm not that old. I'll turn 45 in May, but even when I was a kid, sex didn't seem as prevalent on TV and among teens and unmarried people as it is now. If you wait til marriage, you're mocked, and it is sad that even in the church, the number of people waiting til marriage for sex is dwindling.

   I was reading a book recently by a pastor, and he related the story of a young teenaged girl coming to him upset because her parents wanted to put her on the pill. She told them she wasn't going to be having sex until marriage, and they still were trying to put her on it, saying of course she'd be having sex as a teen. She was a Christian, and so were her parents. Sounds shocking, but I doubt they are the only "Christian" parents with that attitude. And I put that in quotes, because if you're practically encouraging your kids to have sex, and have the attitude that they are just going to do it..... then your Christianity needs to be in quotes.

  I have no kids, but I still have ideas of why even kids in the church are having premarital sex. Here's some reasons I think of when I think about this:

1) Their parents don't talk to them enough about it, or at all. If you want your kids to remain pure, the solution is not to ignore the subject with them, but to talk about it, and why they should wait til marriage.

2) Friends. I seriously think parents need to be more careful who they let their kids hang around with. Just because a kid is from your church, or even the pastor's kid, doesn't mean they will be a good influence on them in anything, even sexual things.

3) TV. I spent most of my growing up years without a TV and movies. From age 11 1/2 on, none. And I think we would all be better off without TV and being careful what movies we watch. I still remember one of the first movies I watched as an adult, You've Got Mail. Cute movie, but I still remember being bothered by the fact that the young woman in the movie was living with her boyfriend. Why was I bothered? Because I hadn't been exposed to that on a constant basis growing up.

There are tons of TV shows geared for teens that show teens partying, doing drugs, drinking, and sex..... you can't expect your kids to watch that kind of stuff and not be affected.

4) School. Christian schools aren't perfect, and there are bad kids there too, but I still believe kids are better off there than in a public school where sex and talk about sex and sexual conquests run rampant.

5) Boyfriends and girlfriends. If a kid is in their teens and not an adult, parents have a say over who they do and do not date, or even IF they date.

I know, I don't have kids, but I don't think anyone younger than 16 has any business dating, and not sure 16 is ideal either. Guys are more sexual than girls - usually - and adolescence is rough anyway, and to put a boy whose all hormonal and thinking about sex, with a girl...... well, no wonder sex happens.

If teenagers are going to date, there needs to be strict guidelines. No "parking", no being alone in a room, especially bedrooms. You can't have teenagers being alone, then be surprised when they have sex.

6) Dress. I am a firm believer in modesty, and that we should be careful for many reasons how much skin we show, how tight our clothes are, etc. Again... you can't throw scantily clad teens together and expect that to help them remain pure. It will make temptations harder.

There is a lot of argument about modesty, and some people will claim they have the right to show as much skin as they want as a Christian, and if it causes a brother or sister to lust, so what - its all on the person lusting.... that is a pathetic attitude to have.

I found it interesting when I was living in Indiana, the pastor read the dress code requirement for visitors to some prison.... and it was strict. I remember thinking "if a prison can see that certain kinds of dress would cause problems, then why can't Christians?!" I wish I had that list, but I have one that will still give the idea. This is from the Hope For Wholeness website, a site for people struggling with same-sex attractions. These dress requirements are for anyone attending the meetings they have at some locations, kind of a AA type thing for lack of a better explanation:

Dress Code for Men & Women This policy applies to all seasons and temperatures of the year and all meetings, to include the following: one on one appointments with Support Group Leader, meetings between group members (within given guidelines), support group meetings, conferences, outings, etc. Shirts: No tight fitting shirts, tank tops, sleeveless shirts, halter tops, or showing any chest/cleavage. No shorts, regardless of length. See through: no clothing that is too thin, causing a transparent affect. For ladies: If you choose to wear a skirt, length is to be no shorter than knee length. Tears or holes: We ask that clothing not have large tears or holes in it. Tight fitting/ loose: Clothing should not be tight or too loose (as to fall down below waist)

Again... they obviously can see certain kinds of dress could cause problems for the people who are there to get help.... so why can't all Christians see that? And for the record, I don't believe everything listed above is necessarily wrong, but what would it hurt us to dress that way.... especially kids on a date?

If a teenaged boy is on a date with a girl in a mini skirt and hater top, doesn't it make sense that he'd be more tempted than if she were dressed modestly?

But back to my original subject..... secondary virginity. I have seen this discussed a lot. The idea is, if you have messed up and had sex, God will forgive you, restore you, and you aren't "damaged goods." i agree with that, but I am afraid it is getting pushed so much that it is giving the wrong idea. "Go ahead and do it. You can ask forgiveness and be as good as new".

There's a young man I follow on Facebook who has a lot of good to say. He is very young, college age, but has a lot of wisdom. I was a bit bothered by his take on this subject "Having sex before marriage doesn't ruin you." Again, great sentiment, and true, but his blog post was one I feared would give kids the wrong idea, and I commented saying so on Facebook.

Such as this part:
It’s been said, “True love waits”. This is a beautiful message. This gives hope to people like myself, who are trying to abstain from sex till their wedding night. However, there is more about true love that must be said. It’s important to remember that true love waits, but it’s also important to remember that true love also forgives. Your future spouse won’t hold your sexual sins against you. They won’t fall out of love with you when you tell them that you’ve had premarital sex. True love forgives."

   I seriously don't think there is anything wrong with a Christian who remains pure, to want a spouse who has remained pure also. If one has had sex, I don't think it should be disclosed the week of the wedding, but long before. Is it wrong to break up with someone over that? I am not sure. Marriage is out of the question for me for more than one reason, but I used to wonder about this issue myself. I wish I could say to the woman I was interested in that I had waited, but I wouldn't be able to. Would I blame a woman for not wanting to marry me under those circumstances? I don't think I could blame her.

  It isn't an easy thing, I know that. There are many who have lived careless lives sexually, then came to Christ and became a new creation. Should they be viewed as damaged goods, unworthy of marrying someone who has kept himself or herself pure? No, absolutely not. In my very limited knowledge and wisdom, I would say that would be between the couple and God. I could understand a young man or woman who has abstained from sex til their wedding, being disappointed that the person they want to marry has not. It would not be an easy position to be in. Yes, God forgives and wipes the slate clean, but that doesn't take away the fact that they did it.

  Back to Jordan's blog post, and anyone else who has talked about this issue of secondary virginity. If they are going to discuss it, I feel they need to remind their audience that yes, God will forgive and wipe the slate clean, but that doesn't take away the consequences.

There is still risk of pregnancy

There is still risk of STDs

There is the probability of remembering former sexual encounters while doing it with the one you marry

There is the possibility of falling in love with someone who did wait, and having to confess that you didn't

There will be regrets. I doubt many people regret waiting til their wedding night, but the number who regret not waiting....... I am sure it is far bigger than anyone would know.


   God does forgive and wipe the slate clean, and one should not view himself or herself as damaged goods, but how much better to wait, and be able to tell the one you love that you waited. Knowing God will forgive does not mean we should just go out and do it. You can never get that back.

Ray Boltz, and believing a lie

Since I have a 45 minute drive to and from work, I have been listening to more of my CDs than I usually do, so I have been digging out a lot that I haven't listened to for a while. Last night, I ran across the double disc Moments For The Heart Volumes 1 & 2 by Ray Boltz, a collection of some of his best songs.

  If you're not familiar with Ray Boltz, he was a Contemporary Christian singer popular in the 80's and 90's. His most popular song was probably "Thank You For Giving to the Lord", with some of his other popular songs being "I Pledge Allegiance to the Lamb", "Watch the Lamb", and more.

  A few years ago, Boltz, married man with children, came out of the closet as a gay man. He said he had struggled with being attracted to other men for most or all of his life, and after praying for deliverance for years, decided it was OK with God since God hadn't changed him. With his wife's blessing - how bizarre - he left his wife and began pursuing the gay lifestyle.

  It is a sad story, but made sadder by his still claiming to be a Christian. I was just on his website, and he is still performing, but it looks like he has branched out and is singing songs to defend his lifestyle - I am guessing by some of the song titles on his newest CD: Don't Tell Me Who to Love, American Queen, Free At Last, etc.

 As I was listening to his CD to and from the way to work, I really listened to the words, and felt a great sadness. How sad a man could write the words and sing the songs that he did, then go against what the Bible says, and still claim to be a Christian.

 Words like this:

They tell me Jesus died
For my transgressions
And that He paid that price
A long, long time ago

When He gave His life for me
On a hill called Calvary
But there's something else
I want to know

Does He still feel the nails
Every time I fail?
Does He hear the crowd cry
Crucify, again?

Am I causing Him pain?
Then I know I've got to change
I just can't bear the thought
Of hurting Him

It seems that I'm so good
At breaking promises
And I treat His precious grace
So carelessly

But each time He forgives
What if He relives
The agony He felt on that tree?

Does He still feel the nails
Every time I fail?
Does He hear the crowd cry
Crucify, again?

Am I causing Him pain?
Then I know I've got to change
I just can't bear the thought
Of hurting Him

Holy, holy, holy is the Lord
Holy, holy, holy is the Lord

Do you still feel the nails
Every time I fail?
Have I crucified you, Jesus
With my sin?

I'm tired of playing games
I really want to change
I never want to hurt You again

Holy, holy, holy is the Lord
Holy, holy, holy is the Lord