Putting on the porn glasses
The following "question" came to my employer after I published a 2" by 3" photo on p. 14 of the 24-page magazine I edit. The photo is small, and the jewelry is almost microscopic. When people have to use special lenses to see or IMAGINE some evil, I call it putting on their "porn glasses," 
because it's only porn in the eyes that want to find it.
------------- ------------- -----------------
------------- ------------- -----------------
Questions: I recently flipped through your Jan '08 issue of "Echoes" and noticed that a woman was being baptized with earrings in her ears. That surprises me. We, as Adventists, believe that BECAUSE we are living in the last days it is a special time that requires heart-searching and simplicity as we are in the anti-typical day of judgment. I'm disappointed that "The Quiet Hour" doesn't stand for those same principles, apparently, due to what I found in the magazine. If you have a response to this or some reference you could provide to help me understand why an entity of our church baptized a woman--not only knowing that she frequently wears earrings--but with them still in her ears--that would be helpful! We will always be growing in our walk with God, but it should be understood that before one is baptized they must truly agree with ALL of the beliefs they are being baptized into, isn't that so?
Jewelry IS part of the baptismal vows.
Page 14, bottom pic is the reference. 
I wish you the best, truly, but I was deeply disappointed...
[end]
Dear _______ _______ ,
Thank you for your e-mail regarding the jewelry in the ears of the baptismal candidate.
I share your conviction that we are living in the last days of earth's history and as such choose to be serious about our walk with God.
Where we may run into questions is in determining exactly how this walk with God looks. In our USA Adventist culture, even wedding bands were considered to be inappropriate jewelry for decades. For the past 30 years or so, the Adventist Church has officially stated that simple wedding bands are not considered jewelry and we have no problem with members wearing them.
In other places in the world, I've found that many different kinds of jewelry are often worn by Adventists - even those who are very serious about their walk with God. In these settings, no one gives the matter much thought. It is not seen as something "right or wrong". Cultural differences abound.
The pastor baptizing the woman in our Echoes issue was a Jehovah's Witness minister before God led him into the Adventist Church. He is truly on fire for God and the baptism of more than a dozen folk he and The Quiet Hour guest evangelist prepared for baptism was a huge blessing in his small rural congregation.
While we here at The Quiet Hour uphold all the teachings and standards of the church, we also recognize that many standards are not at all static or the same all over the world. Culture seems to influence some of the details of how folk live out and define the "simplicity" you've mentioned.
I know you will continue to pray for these new believers as they grow in their faith. The devil will work hard to discourage them. Keep in mind they're coming from 70 years of communism where millions of their loved ones were murdered or starved to death and where believing in God was considered foolish.
Thanks for your prayers,
M_____ P_____, CEO
The Quiet Hour
------------- ------------- -----------------
------------- ------------- -----------------
Interesting that the woman IN the photo is joyfully looking toward Jesus. The woman complaining ABOUT the photo is seeing her own vision of judgment and punishment--directed at the baptized woman, and me as evil editor, and my employer as some toxin to the saints.
I've read several versions of the baptismal vows, and the 28 Fundies, and see nothing about jewelry.
The people who criticize holiday decor in churches; or whether I wear jewelry when I'm off duty--they're talking about THEIR OWN standards, not about principles. Remember this thread? http://echurch7.com/node/361
Standards can change by the moment. Controlling-type people set them.
Principles are universal and eternal.
The woman above was not getting the message of the article and pictures. She was "flipping through" the magazine looking to criticize what wasn't up to HER standards. I don't think anyone should tie appearance to morality and religion, and especially not impose their standard on anyone else.
Want to know what God thinks about jewelry? Read Ezekiel 16 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ezekiel%2016&version=31, where God decks his beloved with bracelets, necklaces, earrings, finger rings, and check this out: a NOSE RING. Now do I think I should use that example to go get pierced? Of course not. That was a standard of beauty, wealth, and most of all VALUE in that day. But standards have changed. As a 49 year-old, I'd look like a freak to wear a nose ring.
EFL, if that's your choice to have a natural look, fine and dandy.
What's usually not said is that the appearance judgment is all about WOMEN, not men. Can anyone explain how a man's necktie is not adornment? Does it hold his shirt on his ripped physique and prevent lustful thoughts? Or does it collect gravy drops and bread crumbs and baby spit-up?
Neck ties are definitely adornment. I remember reading somewhere they are particularly masculine...I hesitate to use the the word here for the kind of symbol they were described as.
Let's not forget the Audi's, BMW's, and other such high priced pieces of jewelery in the parking lot of many churches...
It's funny how one never hears about the parking lot during adornment discussions by the ultra conservative side.
Yeah, but those cars are FUNCTIONAL, dontcha know. Safety features. The crash-test dummies "lived" through the expensive-car test wrecks. I heard that in heaven, Adventist crowns will have watches in them instead of jewels. :smt044
But my point is not about adornment by jewelry, makeup, neckties, clothes (Ezekiel 16 again). It's about people looking for fault that never existed in the first place. The fault-finder comes off so self-righteous. It's the old Pharisee thing: "'Oh, God, I thank you that I am not like other people—robbers, crooks, adulterers, or, heaven forbid, like this tax man. I fast twice a week and tithe on all my income." (Luke 18 MSG)
"Oh, Lord, I thank you that I am not like other people--those who wear earrings in the baptismal tank, decorate their churches for pagan holidays, or, heaven forbid, use devil-drums at the 11:00 service. I eat only beans seven days a week and pay 5% over tithe (on the gross) to the church budget."
The only problem with making fun of the modern Pharisee is that I'm in danger of out-Phariseeing the Pharisee. It can happen.
I got what you were getting at, but I realized before that these people are beyond helping. It will take a major life changing event in their lives for them to change. I guess the issue comes down to how do we protect people from them. I know we can't prevent people from ever being in contact with them, but how can we prevent them from leaving because of these people or even worse becoming these people themselves? I know it's human nature to be judgmental and I think a person can judge someone, probably better to constructively criticize, someone, but it would only be for the betterment of that person, not to put them into a mold of what we think is the true way.
Sometimes I wish I could get out what I want to say in a better way. If anything I write doesn't totally make sense or anything like that, please ask me to clarify.
EFL, I get you.
I just bought a birthday card for a co-worker with similar political views to mine. It's George W. Bush's face saying:
Here in America, you have the freedomness to celebrationalize your birthday according to your own preferentiation. You be the decider! Happy uh ... anniversary of your birth ... whatchacallit!"
My personalization is starting out as "Merryalize your birthday like it's 1999, and I've just been 'selected' President of the United States!"
Hmmm, must hurry home to watch the State of the Union address, where I'll count the times Dubya says "nookyuler" instead of "new-clee-er." I can celebrationalize that only 12 months lie between us and ANYBODY BUT Dubya as president.
EFLTeacher said:
I got what you were getting at, but I realized before that these people are beyond helping. It will take a major life changing event in their lives for them to change. I guess the issue comes down to how do we protect people from them. I know we can't prevent people from ever being in contact with them, but how can we prevent them from leaving because of these people or even worse becoming these people themselves? I know it's human nature to be judgmental and I think a person can judge someone, probably better to constructively criticize, someone, but it would only be for the betterment of that person, not to put them into a mold of what we think is the true way.
Jonny (I think) wrote in some other post about pointing out sin without being judgmental about it. What was that brilliance? Jump in. I could sit at your feet all day. (If you have clean socks.)
But remember, what is sin? Jewelry? Fancy cars? Drums? Closets stuffed with seasonal clothes (mrspbobm and me)? Or is sin the failure to love and serve as the Lord teaches us in Matthew 25 and 1 Corinthians 13?
dude. really. if piercings are that much of a sin or the jewelry im certainly goin to hell. i think at last count i had 15....i dont even want to know what the 13 something tattoos are going to get in regards to my relationship with God. good grief. you should tell that lady that i thank her for condemning me to hell.
just because you get baptized, or give your life to God or what ever, doesnt mean you are perfect--doesnt mean you follow the rules just exactly.. people dont seem to understand that.
what ever. people suck.
It's interesting how so many people look at the outward sins (I'm using their thought process here) and forget about the things that they do that are considered inward sins in God's eyes.
We all sin. None of us will ever be able to keep any of God's rules. Never. Period. So people need to stop thinking that keeping the Sabbath or not wearing jewelry or not being jealous of your neighbor (the list goes on to infinity) will save you. There are people in God's kingdom who have never heard his name before...that's my personal belief. There are people in God's kingdom that are covered from head to toe in tattoos. There are people in God's kingdom who never kept the Sabbath. There are people in God's kingdom who are addicted to who knows what. Don't let anyone tell you that you are not accepted by God by the things that you do. God has accepted you. All he wants you to do is follow him.
It is amazing that people when critcizing and judging others can not see what they are doing and are just plain blind to the fact that they will be judged the same. Stupidity. I think that woman needs "reality contacts" with those "porn glasses" for something is lacking 
I do not think that your employer should have to apologize and color his position as a culteral thing. Making excuses for the adornment...When will we learn? It sure is hard to change ones views when we have been led by seeing eye dogs with blinders on. Someday, we will learn to walk by faith on our own. 
But then, "judge not, that ye be not judged."
... "porn glasses," ...
This cracks me up, Christy. :smt044 This has got to be original! Would you mind if I borrow it some time??
I have never felt the need to do a study on jewlery. However, a friend of mine did one several years ago. Anyone who says that the Bible forbids wearing jewlery has not studied the Bible. That C.... comes straight from the lady with the long dress (i.e. 9 inches from the floor). 
You may indeed use it. Yes, I invented the term "porn glasses." As I said in the first message of this thread, you have to choose to put on lenses to see the "evil" which is not only not there, but invisible to people with normal vision. It's interesting that only "religious" people have porn glasses.
I've got more "porn glasses" stories. Will add them to this thread when I can.
MORE PORN GLASSES to amuse/amaze you:
This is the series of articles and photos that the man below is talking about:
http://www.thequiethour.org/evan/ghana/vida.php
and
http://www.thequiethour.org/images/echoespdf/echoes1104.pdf pages 14 and 15
_______________
Below is the result of a form submission from
http://www.thequiethour.org/htmlhome/forms/ques-gen.shtml on 11/14/2004 at
7:36 PM:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Title: Mr.
First Name: J_________
Last Name: C_________
Address:
City: Palm Harbor
State: FL
ZIP:
Country: USA
Email:
Questions: Re: Vegetarian National Geographic November 2004 Echoes Issue
Dear Quiet Hour, In the Black church when a woman is baptized, the deaconesses and elders wrap the woman in a sheet for modesty's sake. Either that or the woman wears a bra, but she's still covered up after she rises from the water. In your November 2004 Echoes you didn't do that to one of our African sisters. You took pictures of Vida in the water and a "wet T shirt photo" after she came up out of the water. What's up with that? That is not right. I resent this lack of respect for our women's modesty. Irregardless of what customs in dress may prevail in Africa, you have no right to take advantage of our race. You wouldn't show a White woman in a wet T shirt coming out of the water, so why one of ours? Then on page 14 another thing that bothers me is that White man/Black woman thing. Why not the other way around? Show a good looking Black male rapping to an equally good looking White woman. Is it because this country's inherent racism would lower your contributions? Sincerely, ______ ____ ____
Submit: Submit
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
----- Original Message -----
From: "Christy" <>
To: <>
Sent: Monday, November 15, 2004 8:52 PM
Subject: RE: Echoes photographs
Dear Mr. C___________,
Thank you for your comments on the November Echoes magazine. Because of the sensitive topics you addressed, I won't be excerpting your comments for our Letters to the Editor section.
As editor of a magazine which has, by all accounts, blessed its readers for 67 years, I take exception to your parody title, "Vegetarian National Geographic." I assume that you refer to occasional photos of bare-breasted women of tropical cultures that have appeared in National Geographic throughout its history. That is a respected educational journal, not a pornographic magazine. If you don't approve of such photos, you are not forced to subscribe to their magazine. This is indeed a free country. The Quiet Hour is not attempting to emulate National Geographic in text or images, although it would be nice to have their well-deserved reputation for thoughtfulness, solid research, and photojournalistic style.
The Echoes magazine's purpose is to inform people of the success of the gospel commission as carried out by lay people and professional ministers, and to inspire Christians to active service for Christ by their hands-on participation, or by donating to empower others to serve. The articles are written to glorify God, not The Quiet Hour ministry.
The Ghana photos were taken by Pastor Bill Tucker during his August-September 2004 evangelism series. The image of Vida after baptism (p. 15) was actually enhanced in Photoshop to disguise her breasts, which, in the original photo, left nothing to the imagination. The photo was taken to show Vida's victory over her former life, and her unmistakable peace and joy in Jesus. We showed the doctored photo to people of several races, and NO ONE had the slightest question about it. Those people who saw the photos, watched the video, and read the articles, were thrilled that Vida, who had been oppressed by demons, was now healed and inhabited by the Holy Spirit; thrilled that she had her sins washed away and was raised to new life in Christ. No one except you commented on her breasts (which the Creator gave to more than half the population of the world). No disrespect was intended by the Echoes magazine staff, nor was any given! In fact, we were careful to preserve Vida's modesty. She looked the same as the young female pastor on page 14, wearing a stretch knit top.
The photo on p. 14 was also taken by Pastor Tucker. It's just two college student evangelists sharing a happy moment. And it's not a posed photo or something we purchased from a stock photo library. That's a real moment captured by Pastor Tucker. I suppose he COULD have looked for, found, and posed a black man and a white woman talking, but what would be the point? What would have changed? How would the published photo or the one you propose change racist attitudes or affect stewardship?
The church where I'm an ordained elder, worship leader, and active member, has many ethnicities under its roof. Our senior pastor is Jamaican Black, and the associate pastors are Caucasian, Hispanic (two), Romanian, Middle Eastern, and Icelandic. The head elder and several other elders are African, Caribbean, or American Blacks. Women are represented and respected as pastoral staff, officers, elders, deaconate, etc. The 1500 members, who come from more than 80 countries around the planet and who have created innumerable blends of cultures and races within families, sit together in the pews and at potlucks, work side by side, and rejoice and grieve together as a family. A functional, healthy family.
My point is, we (The Quiet Hour and the church) don't have committee meetings to discuss politically correct racial representation; we don't pay special attention to one race or culture in particular. We are all ONE IN CHRIST. That was re-emphasized at the November 7 constituency meeting for this conference. I wish you had the privilege and joy of worshipping with such a fellowship. Perhaps you, too, would be inspired by Vida's story of Christ conquering Satan, and look past Vida's appearance (which is beautiful and modest anyway) to her new and happy heart. That's how God sees her (1 Samuel 16:7). That's how I see her. That was how Pastor Tucker, the photographer, saw her.
May God give you peace in your heart as regards this matter. I don't want to offend or upset people, or be disrespectful of human rights or of any person in particular. I want to show in our pages how much God loves every one of us, and how we are to be like our Father in every way, particularly in loving each other!
Christy K. R_____
Director, Public Relations & Marketing
Editor, Echoes magazine
Wow! That looks like another avenue of stress to me. It brings back memories of some of the people with which I have dealt. I guess I was one once. 
Way to clean--at least the outside of--the writer's (his?) glasses. You earn every penny you are paid. I believe you made the only healthy response possible, and it was a good one that covered your position very well. I would also bet that it made absolutely no difference to this person ("convinced against their will"). This person has a very deep heart issue (or more than one) and until the heart is healed, the glasses will remain firmly in place.
MORE PORN GLASSES (actually from the first time I coined the term):
A woman called my supervisor, then the COO of the ministry, to complain that she was offended that the editor of an Adventist ministry's magazine was wearing earrings (not true but what's her point?) and showed cleavage (my blouse was creased) in this 1" by 1.5" photo:
(Sorry about the resolution, but this is how it looks anyway.)
You can see the photo I used to use, in this place, page 2 of the PDF: http://www.thequiethour.org/images/echoespdf/echoes0303.pdf
That is the EXACT SIZE of the photo in the magazine. What porn microscope was that lady looking through???
So what did we do to kiss up to that creepy person? Why, we had the male graphic designer crank my picture up to 800% in Photoshop, and "clone" out the crease. Un-freaking-believable!
Way to clean--at least the outside of--the writer's (his?) glasses. You earn every penny you are paid. I believe you made the only healthy response possible, and it was a good one that covered your position very well. I would also bet that it made absolutely no difference to this person ("convinced against their will"). This person has a very deep heart issue (or more than one) and until the heart is healed, the glasses will remain firmly in place.
True. He did write back, more racist stuff that claimed that I played the "some of my best friends are black" card. (Umm, didn't!) I decided not to respond, because he clearly wanted to argue and accuse, not learn or agree. My boss and pastor agreed it was best to drop it. So even though it's very important to me to be A) RIGHT :smt011 , and B) HAVE THE LAST WORD :oops: , I dropped it. :smt005
BTW, I do earn every penny I'm paid, because that's pretty much what Adventist ministries pay: pennies on the dollar. :smt075
You can have the last word here. :smt014
Re-reading the man's message I found his use of "our women" disturbing. It sounds controlling, and maybe even objectifying, to me. "There is neither male nor female...we are all one in Christ."
Christy I would love to see some MORE on this topic :oops: is there something wrong with me?
Well, yes, there's plenty wrong with you. But this isn't one of your sins!
As a pastor, I bet you've experienced your share of being in someone's porn scope. They mount those porn scopes on their competition rifles and bows.
The target is either the middle of your back, or your butt. It is NEVER to your face. The porn-watchers are too cowardly to have a Christian conversation, much less confrontation.
If you want MORE, go see that thread about Christmas deco, where I talked about being castigated for wearing jewelry in a public place on my own time. No one told me at the time. The accuser (that old Devil, Satan) told the TQH president, who told my supervisor, who sat on it for 10 months before she took 30% off my employee evaluation for "poor judgment." Man, they all passed the porn glasses around that time.
How's your peace-resting-in-God level?
Working where I do, it's set to "STUN" from 8 a.m. Monday thru 6 pm Thursday.
Lots of practice in surrender and forgiveness, too, I'll bet.
Lots of practice in surrender and forgiveness, too, I'll bet.
If you say so, that's my story and I'm sticking to it. :smt002
Didn't the comic books sell xray specs?...
I realize that this isn't the thrust of this thread, but I look at the inconsistency of our officially condemning the wearing of simple, "non-functional" jewelery by women (hey a pin is ok, but it had better not be on a chain), but men are expected to wear neck ties in church, especially if they are on the platform. Is there a difference between cloth and metal? In some very conservative denominations, such as the Mennonites and Old German Baptists, the men are prohibited from wearing neckties because it is considered to be the same as jewelery.
As several people have said in this thread, there are far more important things to worry about.
Are you kidding?
Jewelery is the central issue of salvation!!!! God's promise of crowns for His children is merely a metaphor for eternal life or some perversion of translation of a Catholic origin (they wore all sorts of sinful external displays, the heathens) and people will fry in a special section of hell for even thinking about looking nice in public.
I'm sure Scripture would have condemned combing one's hair had combs been as common as they are now. Jesus told us to oil on our hair, which eliminates the need for a comb or a bath. He never instructed us to bathe either, except in that legalistic document in the OT. Thank goodness we are not under the law anymore, millions of little boys can breathe sighs of relief that God Himself approves of their stinky condition and torn dirty clothes.
You women who want your house to be painted and hang decorations outside to celebrate holidays, STOP IT! God does not approve of such beauty on the outside.
Everyone just needs to get a clue.... :roll:
What's usually not said is that the appearance judgment is all about WOMEN, not men. Can anyone explain how a man's necktie is not adornment? Does it hold his shirt on his ripped physique and prevent lustful thoughts? Or does it collect gravy drops and bread crumbs and baby spit-up?
How freaky, to quote oneself. :roll:
Now, I've never met any of you gentlemen who write on this board (except Bobby, the gentlest of gentiles), and all I have to go by are your avatars, which, for all I know, are either years old, or not even YOU.
Speaking for many (but of course not all) women, we tend to appreciate men for their character first, and then their appearance. And most of the time, we are okay with the fact that a man may wear navy and black together, or that his pullover shirt really doesn't "go" with his jacket or slacks. Ack, so what. Fashion does not affect or determine our estimation of men. In fact, if a man is TOO highly groomed, we wonder about his metro- or homo-sexuality. We understand the dilemma you must face: go studly, or go ME.
So when you go with a dark suit, a pressed white shirt, and a silk tie, we go all weak in the knees because we know you care. :smt053 :smt054 :smt055 :smt060
Haven't you all seen those Harry Anderson and Elfred Lee paintings, where Jesus comes after the Time of Trouble and all those people wearing suits (with ties), and double-knit polyester dresses are raising their arms to Him. They're so clean, shaven, and tastefully groomed (having followed Samuele Bacchiocchi's book on adornment) after hiding in caves and running from the Sunday-Law enforcers.
However, the ones who are afraid of Jesus' coming are the WOMEN loaded with junk jewelry, clownish makeup, a ciggie stub in their dissolute mouths, and disheveled big-hair do.
I say, wear that tie, men, and fear not for your immortal soul. A tie, being of cloth, is the uniform of the heaven-bound; whereas jewelry, metal-based and cast in a fiery furnace, holds you down with the chains of hell.
Wow. I got a little Squash-Pie-Terry-like there. Excellent! :smt112
Geesh! What a bummer... Sometimes, I toy with the idea of returning to an Adventist setting ( sentimental moments of minor cultural influences, I guess.) But, tonight, reading that the church is still petty and disconnected is ruining my high with God. Not being in that environment may be the best thing all around.
And, to be very candid... the memories that are stirred have a very depressing element to them. Keep it simple. I'm glad He loves me and has blessed me with meeting people from all walks of life and, in the process, I am not dissected nor subjected to bias, judgmental, examination.
I am sorely disappointed and very sorry for the experiences some of you have in that environment. My prayers are with you... Keep looking up.
You know, dude, I've had problems with religious people period. It's not beliefs necessarily that are the problem, though teachings can contribute, but the way in which we approach them.
I don't care about SDA doctrines as they stand because someone believes they are Scriptural--and to some degree even the most questionable are in theory--what I have a problem with is that the teachings of Jesus clearly tell us that our treatment of others will dictate God's attitude towards us.
So my question is: Why are those who are supposedly led by God doing by being mean and nasty to one another? Why are we so divisive and critical?
If any of us here are harshly critical of the people around us, we show ourselves to be no different than the one's we are down on. Our attitudes must change or we cannot have any platform on which to declare the joy of the Lord.
To react to the SDA church as if it's the sole problem in the world is a misunderstanding. It's simply an organization run by fallen humans wading their way through life trying to figure out a place of solid ground and safety. What those of us who have found the peace in Jesus need to do and be around these types of people is the loving, accepting and growing godliness example that He taught us to be.
I am not in the SDA denomination because they don't want me there and, quite frankly, I don't fit because I'm too controversial--not by being confrontational exactly but because of style. I'm too rock n roll, musical to a fault, artsy, accepting and not convinced of their stance, so I don't fit. But that doesn't mean I wouldn't be there now if not for the above problems. I turn the general traditionalist's stomach and hurt them more than I help, so it's best for me to minister elsewhere.
For those of you still in the church, don't get discouraged because this is the fight of godliness. This is the goal of Christ; this is the place God has you for a purpose of His own. We are to be salt in the world, which includes the church as well, I think. I would only be a hinderance to the gospel and love if I remained with them because I'm either too salty or not salty enough, my ministry is elsewhere and that's okay.
But if God has you there, it's because He wants you to take your growth in Jesus into that situation and infect others with the joy of His message of love.
Well said, Johnny. I'm still here, but it's because my personality allows me to blend in. Sometimes, I feel like a fish out of water, though. I've considered moving out, but have also heard stories from those in other demons...uh...denoms...that they have similar struggles.
So, I'm with Tony. Love, Love, Love! (and gently cracking a few skulls of well-meaning but mis-guided saints occasionally).
Fight the good fight, no matter where one stands in this controversial world, fight for the greater, truth, light and good allowing Christ to be your commando in charge, for if He isn't in charge, then we all perish in vain.
Everyday I struggle within, without and every where I turn when it comes to dispelling judgemental, critical ways and ideas as I deal with people. First as a follower of Jesus saved by His blood, grace, mercy and redemptive ways, then second as a wife trying to support her spouse in pastoral ministry to build others to a higher calling within the church walls and then to encourage them to reach out amongst the community to work toward lightening the burdens of those who have no hope or trust in a living God. But it seems like the major role of pastoral time is spent in calming divisive ways (according to what they deem divisive) or,
pacifying, babysitting and placating a denomination of old bitties and babes who get stuck in the baptismal pool and drown for lack of being able to get out of that guilt bath and get into dry robes. Then some get stuck at Jesus death and what He did at the cross and then when He arose and returned to heaven for his current function and role.
All I know is that I serve a living God and have to account to Him not to any human, even though several lay claim to me thinking that I must submit. Does one ever wonder why we have such a hard time giving it up and over to God and submitting? When we finally do so after much protest of trying to control our own destiny and course , all we get left with is feelings of defeat after we have defended ourselves.
Whew! Life is strife from womb to tomb. Is there a better way throughout all this strife from the time we are born til the day we die?
I agree with Johnny and then Troy you about summed it up, by gently cracking the skulls of well meaning mis-guided saintanists
All I know is that I serve a living God and have to account to Him not to any human...
As long as a person is doing this, it does not matter where they worship. When God thinks it is time to move on, He will speak to the heart.
Here's a question. (OK several) What would it take for us to be able to hang around extremely judgemental people and not get riled up? Why do they make us so mad? How do they have such a strong hold in our lives? (I do mean me.) They threaten something but what? :smt062
----
On a MUCH more serious line, I definately think that neckties are evil. Nothing that uncomfortable could be righteous. I looked hard, even with a microscope, and NOT ONE smiley wears a tie. :smt120 :smt083 :smt028 :smt043 :smt048
That proves it for me and I rest my case.
...What would it take for us to be able to hang around extremely judgemental people and not get riled up?...
This is what Jesus did:
1 Pet 2:23: When he was reviled, he did not revile in return; when he suffered, he did not threaten; but he trusted to him who judges justly.
(Revised Standard)
In order for us to do the same, we need the Son's understanding of our sin nature, and of God's character.
I know, from experience, that I can talk about doing something, or read what I am supposed to do, but, it is much more difficult to put the idea into action in my life, and consistantly do it. Like the man of Romans 7 - what I want to do, I do not; and, what I do not want to do, that is what I do.
I have decided that I cannot change anyone. All I can do is try to do God's will, make the right choices and all Him to change me. When another person cause me to be angry, I now know it is because I have something inside that needs fixing. Another thing I have learned, is that, when I see a fault in another person, it is because I have it too.
When is comes to sin, we are all in the same proverbial sinking boat, and the only way we can have any advantage over the world, is to have a close relationship with Jesus Christ, and let him lead us in paths of righteousness.
Here's part of an article I wrote, where we hid the porn glasses where the reader couldn't find them.
In the steamy Amazon jungle of Peru, the Bora tribeswoman wore a natural-material skirt. She was topless except for the bead-and-feather necklace. There was a brown-skinned, naked baby perched on her left hip. She stood unsmiling for the photo, with a four year-old boy in white jockey shorts next to her. The woman posed for the group from La Sierra University who were touring some of the sites served by the Adventist Church in Peru.
Last year, when The Quiet Hour needed graphics for a fundraising newsletter, we knew we couldn’t use the image as-is, because a few constituents would be offended by the nudity. One designer manipulated pixels to lengthen the feathers on the necklace, but the image was still too revealing. So our artist, an award-winning quilter, graphically designed a halter top for the woman in the photograph. She “Photoshopped” the image to make it acceptable to a North American audience.
Then the King will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.' Matthew 25:34-36 NIV.
The rest of the article, with the Photoshopped picture, is at http://www.thequiethour.org/resources/2007image.php
The point of the article is that God wants us to give and love because in doing so, we become like Him.
I think there are times when God WANTS us riled up. That indignation produces change, and it strives for justice. Its fruit is that judgmental people (of which I am certainly one, just in different areas) learn that judging is taking God's role, which then breaks the first of the 10 commandments; as well as Jesus' commandment to love God and others with heart, soul, and mind.
In some societies, nothing is thought of women being bare breasted, and it is not considered to be sexually revealing. Because this is so common, the men are nor aroused by this.
Bottom line: Should we provide this woman with a top covering, or should we expend our funds where their real needs are - such as education, clean water, or medical care?
"'I needed clothes on for this picture I was in and you clothed me in the picture digitally.' Come you blessed of my Father, inherit the 2nd Life I've prepared for you."
I'm still laughing :smt042 :smt081 :smt045 as I think of the concept of meeting people's needs as Jesus described by using Photoshop. It really expands my thinking. My reference to 2nd Life as (digital) heaven is strictly humorous. I believe that what happened in this article did fulfill the spirit, and certainly the letter, of Jesus' words. That readers' porn glasses required this strategy is a different issue. But electronically clothing this woman for the sake of these folk was worthy.
1 Cor. 9:22 To the weak I became weak, to win the weak. I have become all things to all men so that by all possible means I might save some.
Porn glasses wearers need salvation as much as the rest of us, after all.
An amusing typo in the photo caption would have been to lose the "o" in Bora tribeswoman...
:oops: Yes, I'm afraid that I told Laura, the artist, that her ticket to Heaven was punched because she had fulfilled the Matthew 25 requirement. :smt023
The guy who took the original shot was Pr Darold Retzer, executive pastor at LLU Church, and vice-chair of TQH's board of directors. So, to put on porn glasses myself, what was HE thinking, taking photos of topless women?
(PLEEEEEZ know that I'm being facetious.)
I just skimmed the rest of your article, you referred to that godless imaginary science fiction television show Star Trek! My, my, my. At least you didn't mention that spiritualistic Star Wars, heavens...
Did I mention that I have Patrick Stewart's autograph in a Star Trek novel...
Or that I once walked into the kitchen of a now-well-known Adventist writer as he was reading a Star Trek novel, back when he was a pastor/Bible teacher at an academy.
This happen a long time ago but times haven't changed much I see. I had two pastors preach sermons on different Sabbath mornings and both were wearing "porn glasses": one spent the whole sermon condemning a parishioner because when she leaned over to tend her baby, HE saw down her dress--Oh SIN OF ALL SINS-- of course it was HER sin not his for looking! The other pastor spent his sermon booming over the pulpit that men should not have sexual relationships with his wife on Friday night or on the Sabbath Day: "DON'T KNOW HER MEN" he thundered from the pulpit.
On another occasion-- this happened about 1993-- my daughter was doing an internship in a mental hospital in Oklahoma. And one sabbath she decided to find the Adventist Church. She finally found the church-- just in time-- to hear the Pastor loudly condemning, with the inflated language of the self righteous-- of all things-- masturbation!. My daughter, who had taken the time from her busy schedule to attend the service was shocked and upset that she had wasted her time just to hear this kind of stupidity from the pulpit--"Porn glasses indeed!
She exited the premises. But she left the Pastor a note, in which she said, she was extremely disappointed that she had taken the time searching for the Church; just to hear the Adventist Pastor rant and rave on a subject she could have heard that very morning from psyche patients, confined to the mental hospital. Because they often ranted and raved obsessively about the "sins of masturbation!"
:roll: Sorry, my daughter told me this morning that the church I mentioned in the post before this one was NOT Oklahoma City but Tulsa. I got the state right at least. I apologize to anyone out there that I may have offended by my x rated tirade! :smt108
I changed my four-year-old editorial mug shot in the upcoming issue of my ministry's magazine. The original image, below, has had the pearls photoshopped out because I like this one and it looks more natural than the studio shot I was using before.
Those turkeys will have to get out their forensic porn-scopes to discover the manipulated pixels this time. Or you guys could just turn me in. :twisted:
Hell is reserved for those who wear jewlery, Christy. God can forgive every sin but pearls...
...because pearls represent difficulties overcome, and God needs every one for the gates of the Holy City?
That necklace is the very one on which some financial supporter turned me in to Bill & Jackie Tucker, because I wore them on a commercial plane 2000 miles away from the workplace.
That necklace is the very one on which some financial supporter turned me in to Bill & Jackie Tucker, because I wore them on a commercial plane 2000 miles away from the workplace.
Isn't that pretty typical of the self-righteous? Focus on the external, condemn others behind their back. And to think, I used to be just like that. Wooopps! Got to watch myself. :oops:
Ah yes, religious Pharisaism still abounds in our church. It's enough to make you laugh and cry simultaneously.
You know you're an Adventist when:
- you drive a $60 000 Lexus but wouldn't be caught dead with a $20 pair of earrings on
It is so sad that many in our church allow their pious, letter-of-the-law attitudes cloud the important things of the kingdom. Like the Pharisees, they see themselves as closer to God and the judge of all things that don't fit their status quo. They pat themselves on the back and praise themselves that they are on the 'safe to save' list while 'righteously' condemning those who don't live in the 19th century mindset of Puritan rites and standards like they feel the church should do.
And yet, where are the fruits of the Spirit? Where is the love, grace, mercy, tact and open mindedness? Where is the joy of living a Christian life? All I see on the faces of such people are the poisonous effects of bitterness and disgruntled attitudes because others in the church aren't following their brand of legalism.
I recently experienced this attitude (again) at the local consituency meeting a few days ago. Sad, sad, sad.
- You might be an Adventist if:
- Your definition of the term 'dysfunctional family' refers not to your immediate family but to your annual constituency meeting
- You might be an Adventist if:
- Your definition of the term 'dysfunctional family' refers not to your immediate family but to your annual constituency meeting
You might be an Adventist if:
Your church family appeared on the Jerry Springer show.
I belonged to a church where there were blood-sisters fistfighting in the lobby, a homeless guy sucker-punched the pastor, one of the elders felt up the teenage girls he was ostensibly trying to teach waterskiing, and many other forms of mayhem. And I was a constituent from that same church when the Union president, who had defrauded the conference of millions, tried every which way to fire the conference officers (but PTL he failed). Lovely.
User login
Upcoming Birthdays
| AliasSmithandJones | 09/09 |
Donations
You may make a secure online donation or tithe payment to eChurch7 through AdventistGiving.com. Just click the button below and follow the instructions to make an online tithe payment.
That woman will learn very quickly that she will need to take the jewelry off...especially if there are any women in her church who are ultra conservative Ukrainian Adventists. But it really does sadden me even more to hear about what people in my church feel. I've seen it before...even about wedding bands. I have to watch myself because I often talk about not needing jewelry around my sister in law and I think she thinks I'm superior to her because I don't wear jewelery. My reason for not wearing jewelery is the same as why I don't wear makeup. I just don't feel the need to. I find it pointless and a waste of time. Some have suggested, while not actually saying it, that because I don't wear makeup that is why I am not in a relationship with a guy. But that's another post and another time...
I am a passionate woman, impacting lives with love.