A post from my blog

I'm not posting this to spark debate, but to provoke thought. Just my take on something, probably meaningless to most of the world.


http://easiertoputon.blogspot.com/2015/02/fifty-shades-of-salem-witch-trials.html

I am absolutely appalled at your flagrant use of the word "bullcrap"....everybody knows it should be "bull-pucky".  

To further agitate I will repost what I already said on facebook.

Some incredibly handsome short guy wrote:

Well put. I hate to say it but it seems to me like the evangelical church often rails against whatever seems sinful and is "popular" at the minute. I can't help but feel it isn't always because they/we want to steer others to Christ, but because they/we want to ride that wave of popularity along with the apparently sinful book/movie/trend.....seems like a sin in itself.

"Some incredibly handsome short guy wrote:" Hey, I didn't write that!

Well put, as the other incredibly handsome short guy said. However, I just wanted to comment on this:

Quote :

I know a great book we can boycott. It has two daughters getting their dad drunk so they can rape him and get pregnant, it has a prostitute who, after being brutally gang-raped, is chopped into numerous pieces which are then sent to other parts of the country as a warning and of course, a man brutally beaten and killed for someone else's crime. That book? The Bible. Maybe if we realized it isn't the content but what we do with it that matters, people won't be leaving churches in such scary and large numbers.

Maybe I'm misinterpreting what you mean, but I think there's a definite distinction between the acts recorded in the Bible and 50 Shades. The Bible records these acts, so as to disapprove of them and to warn others what happens when people turn away from God. 50 Shades, if I've understood correctly, is specifically a fantasy of sorts, that may or may not encourage people to pursue the avenue it describes. I have no desire at all to know much more about 50 Shades, but I don't think it's intended as a warning against rejection of God. Also, and this is conjecture on my part, I think 50 Shades (purposely?) goes into a lot more detail about the acts than the Bible does. Again, I may have simply misunderstood your point, or I may be taking it out of context, but that's just a thing that came up to me. Not to mention the many innuendoes of Song of Songs

The point still remains, though, to love others. Pas d'amen à ça? (Amen to that?)

Staybrite wrote:

I am absolutely appalled at your flagrant use of the word "bullcrap"....everybody knows it should be "bull-pucky".  

To further agitate I will repost what I already said on facebook.

Some incredibly handsome short guy wrote:

Well put. I hate to say it but it seems to me like the evangelical church often rails against whatever seems sinful and is "popular" at the minute. I can't help but feel it isn't always because they/we want to steer others to Christ, but because they/we want to ride that wave of popularity along with the apparently sinful book/movie/trend.....seems like a sin in itself.

Thanks bro. To be honest, I wanted to use something stronger than "bullcrap" but I have family who doesn't approve of some of the stronger language I use.

Driven wrote:

"Some incredibly handsome short guy wrote:" Hey, I didn't write that!

Well put, as the other incredibly handsome short guy said. However, I just wanted to comment on this:

Quote :

I know a great book we can boycott. It has two daughters getting their dad drunk so they can rape him and get pregnant, it has a prostitute who, after being brutally gang-raped, is chopped into numerous pieces which are then sent to other parts of the country as a warning and of course, a man brutally beaten and killed for someone else's crime. That book? The Bible. Maybe if we realized it isn't the content but what we do with it that matters, people won't be leaving churches in such scary and large numbers.

Maybe I'm misinterpreting what you mean, but I think there's a definite distinction between the acts recorded in the Bible and 50 Shades. The Bible records these acts, so as to disapprove of them and to warn others what happens when people turn away from God. 50 Shades, if I've understood correctly, is specifically a fantasy of sorts, that may or may not encourage people to pursue the avenue it describes. I have no desire at all to know much more about 50 Shades, but I don't think it's intended as a warning against rejection of God. Also, and this is conjecture on my part, I think 50 Shades (purposely?) goes into a lot more detail about the acts than the Bible does. Again, I may have simply misunderstood your point, or I may be taking it out of context, but that's just a thing that came up to me. Not to mention the many innuendoes of Song of Songs

The point still remains, though, to love others. Pas d'amen à ça? (Amen to that?)

My point is that people are condemning others for reading the book, seeing the movie or (God forbid) both. Instead of simply reacting to the content, why not use some discernment and talk with people about it and see why it bothers them.

I've said before that I can see Jesus in about any piece of art - movies, music, books, you name it. This is just one more thing to start a dialogue with people in our lives and communities about. Instead of burning Fifty Shades fans at the stake, why not develop the relationship so you see where they're coming from?

And yes, the Bible does teach a message, but Fifty Shades can as well.

ishmael81 wrote:

I've said before that I can see Jesus in about any piece of art - movies, music, books, you name it. This is just one more thing to start a dialogue with people in our lives and communities about. Instead of burning Fifty Shades fans at the stake, why not develop the relationship so you see where they're coming from?

And yes, the Bible does teach a message, but Fifty Shades can as well.

In my evangelism course, that was a thing recommended, to be aware of popular culture and of messages conveyed in well-known works, so as to be able to start a discussion from there. Trouble is, I'm usually quite out of the loop, and if I'm honest, I'd rather not know much about this particular book/movie.

I have no interest in either the book or movie, but then again I'm not really the target audience.  I have learned, however, to keep my mouth shut about such things if I haven't read/watched/listened to it for myself.  Actually reading a Harry Potter book made a world of difference in my views on it, which had previously been based on what other Christians were saying about it.  Lesson learned.

While I do agree with you on some of your blog points, Ishmael, I just want to ask a few clarifying questions.

1.  If you have read reviews from both Christian and non-Christian sites, the story synopsis, talked with people who have read the book, etc. and have concluded that this is not something people should see, how do you talk to others about it?  How do you teach people in a world that thinks you are crazy for talking to invisible people (God) about morality spelled out in the New Testament that they deem irrelevant anyway?

2.  When do we cross the line from talking about what we don't like to just blasting people for watching this?  Or, as Christians, do we have no rights to publicly speak what we think anymore?  The rest of the world has no problems with it as long as you follow the status-quot!  Are Christians, in your opinion, banned from using social media to state opinions?

3.  Do you intend to watch 50 Shades?  Why or why not?

alldatndensum wrote:

While I do agree with you on some of your blog points, Ishmael, I just want to ask a few clarifying questions.

1.  If you have read reviews from both Christian and non-Christian sites, the story synopsis, talked with people who have read the book, etc. and have concluded that this is not something people should see, how do you talk to others about it?  How do you teach people in a world that thinks you are crazy for talking to invisible people (God) about morality spelled out in the New Testament that they deem irrelevant anyway?

2.  When do we cross the line from talking about what we don't like to just blasting people for watching this?  Or, as Christians, do we have no rights to publicly speak what we think anymore?  The rest of the world has no problems with it as long as you follow the status-quot!  Are Christians, in your opinion, banned from using social media to state opinions?

3.  Do you intend to watch 50 Shades?  Why or why not?

Excellent questions.

1. I have not concluded whether people should or should not see it. It's not my business. My wife went with 2 friends and saw it - and I'm fine with that as she felt the freedom to do so. I think that's the difference between some folks involved in this whole thing - it's not my place to tell you what's right for you, it's the Holy Spirit's. Obviously, some things are black and white, but something like this is an individual judgement call. As far as teaching them, if they aren't open to being taught by me (or you or anyone) in the first place, should we just shout louder at them? Or is Facebook and Twitter really an effective tool to reach atheists, Hindus and Muslims?

Paul talks in Romans about eating meat that was sacrificed to idols. To some it was a sin, to others it wasn't. This, to me, is the same thing.

2. We are free to say whatever we want - but remember Paul's words - "Everything is permissable, but not everything is wise." That applies to this movie, but it also applies to what we say to others. We are certainly not banned from sharing our opinion, but when has telling people how horrible they are ever won someone to Jesus? Is telling someone that a movie they're watching is destroying marriages really going to convict someone that Jesus is their savior?

Think about Phil Robertson and that interview. Sure Christians agreed with him, but how alienated was the rest of the country? Offending people by telling them how horrible they are does not show anyone the truth about Jesus, despite what some churches I've been to believe.

To take it further, is it better to talk smack about people in generalities, or is it better to develop relationships with those in our community? My church has a slogan - "You can belong before you believe." Meaning that people can be involved with certain ministry teams, small groups and atted worship whether they believe or not. We do this because we believe that true spiritual growth occurs in small group settings. Why do you think Jesus had 12 disciples?

3. No, I do not intend to watch the movie. Why? Because I have a history of struggling with sexual temptation and I'd rather not open that door. But as I said, my wife saw it because she is not affected by that kind of thing the same way.

seems like scripture says we win people over with Love...not condemnation...and the law never saved anyone nor does religion...in fact I would say the law and religion drives people away, increases sin and destroys relationships both with God and man...
Nice Blog, I read almost everything you ever posted there  last night...

ishmael81 wrote:

Staybrite wrote:

I am absolutely appalled at your flagrant use of the word "bullcrap"....everybody knows it should be "bull-pucky".  

Thanks bro. To be honest, I wanted to use something stronger than "bullcrap" but I have family who doesn't approve of some of the stronger language I use.

My original comment just was a poor attempt at humor, my language can be very salty at times too...and I consistently get disparaging looks from my wife over it. 

Staybrite wrote:

ishmael81 wrote:

Staybrite wrote:

I am absolutely appalled at your flagrant use of the word "bullcrap"....everybody knows it should be "bull-pucky".  

Thanks bro. To be honest, I wanted to use something stronger than "bullcrap" but I have family who doesn't approve of some of the stronger language I use.

My original comment just was a poor attempt at humor, my language can be very salty at times too...and I consistently get disparaging looks from my wife over it. 

To be fair, I chuckled when I read it... but I didn't indicate that in my reply. So your attempt at humor was better than you think... not good, mind you, but better...

Ishmael81 wrote:

To be fair, I chuckled when I read it... but I didn't indicate that in my reply. So your attempt at humor was better than you think... not good, mind you, but better... 

Hey I'll take that!