Fifty Shades of They – Ed Young Jr.’s Latest Book

"It’s time to answer the question, 'Are your desires fulfilled in a sexual fantasy, or a relational reality?' "

Ed Young Jr.

http://www.amazon.com/Fifty-Shades-They-Insights-Relationships/dp/1942306032Amazon

Did you happen to see this headline over at The Christian Post?  Megachurch Pastor Ed Young to Baptize Copies of 'Fifty Shades of Grey;' Calls Book a 'Perverted Attempt to Trap Readers'? link

The article reveals:

Just over a week before the steamy "Fifty Shades of Grey" movie opens on Valentine's weekend, controversial founding pastor of the popular Fellowship Church in Dallas, Texas, Ed Young, says he will baptize copies of the book on which the movie is based, calling it a "perverted attempt to trap readers."

"There is a cultural epidemic out there that is wrapped up in complete fantasy. The book, Fifty Shades of Grey, is a perverted attempt to trap readers and leads them to a misunderstanding of what intimacy and connection are all about," said Young in a press statement Wednesday.

And here is an excerpt from the megachurch pastor's press release:

Young says, “The sad thing is that so many have fallen prey to what that book represents and have missed out on the truth that God has a better way and purpose for them. By baptizing the fantasy of that book and raising to life the reality of God’s plan, I want to show people that it comes down to one thing – fantasy vs. reality!”

In his newest book and coinciding teaching series aptly titled, “Fifty Shades of They,” Pastor Young unpacks the potential and power of healthy relationships – from acquaintances to close friends.  Ed says, “You show me your friends and I’ll show you your future. Relationships drive so much of our lives. It’s time to start looking realizing the truth and put away the twisted falsehood. And it’s time to answer the question, ‘Are your desires fulfilled in a sexual fantasy, or a relational reality?”

Looks like Young is right on cue.  Once again, he has taken a gimmick and piggybacked on itt for his own notoriety.  Amid all the hype about Fifty Shades of Grey, Young recently released his latest book Fifty Shades of They.  Now don't get me wrong — Ed Young Jr. and I are definitely on the same page when it comes to Fifty Shades of Grey.  I have never read the book and will never watch the movie.  I refuse to corrupt my mind with such filth.

Instead of just issuing a strong warning about Fifty Shade of Grey, Young takes his protest to a 'whole nutha level' by writing his own book with a copycat title.  In recent weeks he has been promoting Fifty Shades of They through a sermon series, which you can access on YouTube if you're interested.

Getting back to the book, the cover states that Ed Young is a 'New York Times Bestselling Author'.  We all know how that works, don't we?  The book even has its own website and is also being offered on Amazon.com.  At the time of this writing, there are 33 customer reviews over at Amazon, and they all have five star ratings.  Interestingly, almost all of these reviews were posted on the very same day — February 11, 2015.  Hmmm……

Here is how Young is promoting his latest and greatest work…

It is incredible how Ed Young uses copycat tactics to propel himself into the spotlight.  The first time we recognized it was back in 2008 when we were starting to research a variety of Christian topics on the internet.  On February 20, 2008, Paul Wirth (a pastor at Relevant Church near Tampa, Florida) was interviewed on CBS News.  He had just issued a 30 Day Sex Challenge to married couples in his congregation.  Here is an excerpt from the accompanying article at CBS News:

The pastor of a southwest Florida church opened many eyes and ears Sunday when he said he wants married couples in the congregation to — have sex for 30 days in a row.

Oh — and he wants singles to steer clear of such frolicking for the same length of time.

Head pastor Paul Wirth of Relevant Church in Ybor City, outside Tampa, says his "30-Day Sex Challenge" is one way of taking on the nation's 50-percent divorce rate.

Fast forward to November 2008…  Ed Young Jr. attracts national attention by presenting married couples in his congregation with a 7 Day Sex Challenge.  Keep in mind that Ed was Dee's pastor for a short time when she attended Fellowship Church just outside of Dallas. smiley  That's why we were paying close attention to this marketing scheme at the time it occurred.

CBS News covered this story as well, and the reporters likely had a bout of déjà vu since they had covered Paul Wirth's 30 Day Sex Challenge just nine months before.  The CBS News article that accompanied the video interview with Young begins with this:

The pastor of a Dallas-area mega-church challenged married congregants during his sermon Sunday to have sex for seven days in a row — and says he's practicing what he preaches

And several years later Young and his wife Lisa launched a similar campaign with their Sexperiment.  Once again, they marketed it to the hilt.  The Christian Post described the campaign this way:

Ed and Lisa Young, founders of Texas-based Fellowship Church, will spend 24 hours in bed on the church roof next week and stream themselves discussing sex live on the Internet to encourage married couples to see firsthand the power of a healthy sex life as prescribed in their new book, Sexperiment.

Two days after their book, Sexperiment: 7 Days to Lasting Intimacy with Your Spouse, is released Tuesday, the Youngs will take part in a 24-hour “bed-in,” which will be streamed on the book’s website as they engage the audience on issues related to intimacy in marriage.

I decided to watch some of the live coverage of this Sexperiment.  Toward the end, Young encountered a problem which prevented him from completing the 24 hour 'bed in' on the roof of his church (see below). 

'Sexperiment:' Ed Young Suffers Eye Injury; Leaves Before 24 Hours Over

Ed and Lisa Young conduct a live 24-hour webcast from a bed on the rooftop of Fellowship Church in Grapevine, Texas, Friday, Jan. 13, 2012. The Youngs are talking about their new book Sexperiment and hoping to reclaim sex from the culture and convey the message that it's a gift God created for married couples.

Even though Ed Young is capitalizing on The Fifty Shades of Grey craze, we are grateful that his current copycat idea isn't based on sex this time… 

Lydia's Corner:   Exodus 32:1-33:23   Matthew 26:69-27:14   Psalm 33:1-11   Proverbs 8:33-36

Comments

Fifty Shades of They – Ed Young Jr.’s Latest Book — 167 Comments

  1. Keep in mind that Ed was Dee’s pastor for a short time

    Does this mean Fifty Shades of Dee is likely to hit the bookshops soon?

    You know, a guide to sunglasses from someone who knows.

  2. “The pastor of a Dallas-area mega-church challenged married congregants during his sermon Sunday to have sex for seven days in a row — and says he’s practicing what he preaches.”

    *SERIOUSLY*. “he’s practicing what he preaches.” Oh, what a daring, scandalous person you are.

  3. Ken wrote:

    Does this mean Fifty Shades of Dee is likely to hit the bookshops soon?

    It’s actually called Fifty Warts of Watch…

  4. Nothing makes Jesus look more glorious than for his people to have absolutely no original ideas other than to repackage the “best” of the worlds. Honestly, it’s like buying generic breakfast cereal – you can buy frosted flakes, or Christian flakes of frosted corn.
    I saw a church group in a parade blaring Star Wars theme music, wearing t-shirts advertising “Scar Wars,” the latest greatest series at their church. At least it wasn’t a reference to bondage – just goofy aliens.
    This article is nauseating! And…

    Embarrassing.

  5. Ken wrote:

    Keep in mind that Ed was Dee’s pastor for a short time

    Does this mean Fifty Shades of Dee is likely to hit the bookshops soon?

    You know, a guide to sunglasses from someone who knows.

    Very clever! 🙂

  6. @ Deb:

    I did attend there for a couple of years. He was as weird back then as he is now. Good night. I am still recuperating. I wish you could have heard my husband’s comments during services. We were in a tough situation with Abby’s illness and the church was down the street. Ed was actually quite kind to us during that trial. But, we had different views on presenting the Message!

  7. This may be a bit of an aside, but my ex-husband and I attended a popular local church in the late ’00s where the pastor got on a big sex kick, too (pastor was a huge Driscoll fanboy). As a survivor of childhood sexual abuse, there were sermons where I had to leave, panic attack in full swing. I felt as though I were being re-victimized, just listening to the graphic and constant sex-oriented content, as well as the guilt trips making me feel not just inadequate as a wife, but sinful (because I was unable to meet the standard that was being preached).

    If I’d been in a church where the pastor had actually issued the kind of challenge Ed Young did, the trauma would have hit hard enough that I don’t think I ever could have gone back…and I would have felt like it was my problem, my fault for being a bad wife. Nothing like feeling re-victimized in church.

  8. Ed and Lisa Young, founders of Texas-based Fellowship Church, will spend 24 hours in bed on the church roof next week and stream themselves discussing sex live on the Internet to encourage married couples to see firsthand the power of a healthy sex life as prescribed in their new book, Sexperiment.

    Filthy Shades of Ick.

    Seriously, that constitutes abuse of innocent packets all over the internet. So, we conclude from the Young’s helpful demo that a healthy sex life looks like sitting in a bed on top of a church streaming sex chat to virtual voyeurs hoping for a peek of something interesting. As if people who would do that would be in the categories of “healthy” or “sexy” or “interesting” in any way.

  9. Ken wrote:

    a guide to sunglasses

    Wait. I don't get it. Is that British humor? 🙂 MOD: text about moderation deleted.

  10. interesting , in the name of equality this blog only critiques men who fail…
    yet no critique if christian women who read porn or watch magic mike etc…
    more evidence that those that claim equality are just talking nonsense…

  11. Who enables these clowns? Yes, they are despicable, as are a lot of the celebrity ‘pastors’ we read about here.

    But I keep coming back to the same thought – who enables them, who would even give them the time of day? I have said before and still believe that the people who show up for this guy’s performances are complicit. No one has to go to his ‘church’.

    So much of what we read about here would never happen if people would just avoid these charlatans. There are a lot of real churches out there…

  12. Oh my! Is junior going to use the proceeds to buy another jet? Another example of Neo evangelical mega church excess in the SBC and SBC related churches.

  13. Makes me want to bang my head on my desk. ARGH.
    In the meantime, I’m preaching on ordinary stuff, like the transfiguration. And getting ready to do an Ash Wednesday service. Thank the Lord I’m Methodist, I have a district superintendent who would hang me by my THUMBS if I did something this weird/silly/(insert word of your choice)!

  14. Darcyjo wrote:

    I’m preaching on ordinary stuff, like the transfiguration.

    That is quite possibly the funniest sentence I’ve read this year 😉

  15. roebuck wrote:

    Darcyjo wrote:
    I’m preaching on ordinary stuff, like the transfiguration.
    That is quite possibly the funniest sentence I’ve read this year

    Yeah, you have a point. Well, anyway… 😀

  16. @ roebuck:
    I don’t think there’s an easy answer. My guess is that there are a whole host of reasons, changing from group to group and individual to individual.

  17. Never read, nor watched, any sermon of Ed Youngs. So I have no clue how to evaluate his content. But I had an interesting back and forth with a few younger guys the other day. They had grown up very steeped in conservative evangelicalism and the purity culture. The ONLY message they ever heard about sex was DO NOT, then, get married, and it will totally be GREAT. They got married and had a very rough and discouraging first year.

    They had felt that the only place where they could access helpful advice about actually having sex was from outside of the church. They felt like the churches avoidance of discussing sexual matters had been a significant problem for them that; 1) Was the source of a lack of information/advice to know how to “learn” during the first year of marriage, and, 2) They didn’t feel like the Church was the place to go for advice once they realized it wasn’t going to be so “easy”.

    Obviously, Sunday mornings are a mixed bag demographically. But I hear their point, and I hear Ed Youngs. Sexual intimacy IS a big part of the human experience within marriage. If the Church isn’t speaking about it, where do we think young people are going to go to hear about it?

  18. Corbin wrote:

    I don’t think there’s an easy answer. My guess is that there are a whole host of reasons, changing from group to group and individual to individual.

    Yes, I know, and I’ve heard them all. But still, there is such a thing as personal responsibility. When you think of the magnitude of the problem, and you have to if you read this blog, you have to ask yourself…

    Why? Why do so many self-professed Christians seem to be so susceptible to this kind of hucksterism? Further, the whole megachurch thing strikes me and most people I know as a foolish carnival show. How do people come to think of that as ‘church’?

    Church as SuperBowl halftime show – no thank you.

  19. more common sense peddled through stage presence & invoking the name of God to keep the tractor beam turned on.

    pretty much sums up my church experiences for the last many years. (although i’ve developed my own anti-tractor beam device)

  20. Gram3 wrote:

    Wait. I don’t get it.

    “Shades” being a word often used to refer to sunglasses, hence Fifty shades being 50 pairs of sunnies belonging to Dee

  21. Dave wrote:

    Gram3 wrote:
    Wait. I don’t get it.
    “Shades” being a word often used to refer to sunglasses, hence Fifty shades being 50 pairs of sunnies belonging to Dee

    Dagnabbit. Left off the wink again. Ken and I banter and have roughly similar senses of humor/humour. Did not know about sunnies!

  22. Adam Borsay wrote:

    If the Church isn’t speaking about it, where do we think young people are going to go to hear about it?

    What I hear from younger people is that the internet generation is getting their ideas of marital intimacy Mod: text deleted about moderation I'm definitely not an expert on that, but there are a whole host of problems with that "solution" including very wrong ideas about what is normal and what can be reasonably expected. In some ways the internet "info" is worse than no information, IMO. I wonder if the young people you spoke with were not expecting more than was reasonable as a result of being immersed in a larger culture that grossly misrepresents marital intimacy. The real solution to their dilemma, IMO, is older couples who have established marriages and who are willing to be frank with them, hopefully sometime in the pre-marital counseling stage. Certainly sympathize with the problems you are facing with the young people trying to help them navigate the first few years. Throw in a couple of kids and other life complications, and that is a recipe for all kinds of difficulty.

  23. jonatham bee wrote:

    yet no critique if christian women who read porn or watch magic mike etc…
    more evidence that those that claim equality are just talking nonsense…

    If you would provide us with a name of Christian women who profess to doing that, we would be happy to write a post. As it is, we have written posts on Joyce Meyer and Beth Moore and continue to get criticism for doing so years later.

    I also wrote a rebuttal to a woman by the name of Fabs who writes out of Austin Stone Church. We have also critiqued Carolyn Mahaney, the Botkin sisters…Hey-have you actually checked our blog or are you speaking off the top of your head?

    So, get us the names and let us have a go at that which concerns you.

  24. jonatham bee wrote:

    interesting , in the name of equality this blog only critiques men who fail…
    yet no critique if christian women who read porn or watch magic mike etc…
    more evidence that those that claim equality are just talking nonsense…

    Where did you get that idea? No one, AFAIK, is saying anything is OK for women but not for men. Or wrong for women but OK for men. Certainly not p8rn.

  25. @ jonatham bee:
    Pretty confident that TWW would go after a female church leader who was advocating for any of that crud….they really don’t ever write about stuff that Jane doe is doing on her lonesome….

  26. @ dee:

    I suspect that J. Bee is a troll. He was pulling some nonsense over at Juile Anne’s blog about two days ago, where he was arguing about the roles of women.

  27. Young’s back in the saddle again with a new schtick? Is there no end to the chicanery that comes out of the Lone Star state?

  28. Muff Potter wrote:

    Young’s back in the saddle again with a new schtick? Is there no end to the chicanery that comes out of the Lone Star state?

    It’s a big state! Much chicanery can grow there 🙂

  29. I won’t read Fifty Shades of Grey because it’s Twilight “fan fiction” aka a “ripoff.”

  30. Baptizing books is gimmicky. What are the books supposed to do, come up professing Christ as Lord? The Ephesians didn’t baptize their scrolls of magic; they burned them. (Or perhaps that’s baptism by fire!)

    Anyway, why pay good money to see 50 Shades Of Grey this weekend when you can cuddle up and watch this instead? http://wp.me/p2EmLc-2yD

  31. I wonder when someone is going to tell the churches that there is no such thing as a bad advertisement. I remember when the Da Vinci Code was released our local church ran seminars on how inaccurate it was, and letter box dropped leaflets about it in everyone’s letterbox. Really great advertising for the movie. Must confess I rented the Da Vinci Code when it came out, what an awful boring movie but gee the churches did a wonderful job as publicity officers.

  32. When I first noticed 50 Shades of Grey prominently displayed in bookstores, all I knew was that it was a runaway best seller. I like to read and can blaze through a gripping novel as fast as the next next book lover. I decided to try the free online sample before I committed. I realized straight away that I could never stomach a book like that and just on principle alone. I do not endure novels written in the awkward first person, present tense. Nor do I waste time and brain cells on sub-sub-par writing and plots as flimsy as tissue paper. I read Twilight because one of my teenagers read it at the urging of a friend. I thought it was a stellar piece of sub-par writing in every respect. I shook my head all the way through at the examples of normalizing and romanticizing stalking, spying, breaking and entering, obsessive compulsion, etc. Evidently, 50 SG did an outstanding job of nurturing those questionable beginnings into full blown psychopathic stalking, abuse, manipulation, and control. It will be interesting to see how well it does at the box office. The reading and viewing fetishes of adults-who-should-know-better is a wonder.

  33. Gram3 wrote:

    Adam Borsay wrote:

    If the Church isn’t speaking about it, where do we think young people are going to go to hear about it?

    What I hear from younger people is that the internet generation is getting their ideas of marital intimacy (still have a comment pending due to using the other word) from p8rn8graphy. I’m definitely not an expert on that, but there are a whole host of problems with that “solution” including very wrong ideas about what is normal and what can be reasonably expected.

    In some ways the internet “info” is worse than no information, IMO. I wonder if the young people you spoke with were not expecting more than was reasonable as a result of being immersed in a larger culture that grossly misrepresents marital intimacy. The real solution to their dilemma, IMO, is older couples who have established marriages and who are willing to be frank with them, hopefully sometime in the pre-marital counseling stage.

    Certainly sympathize with the problems you are facing with the young people trying to help them navigate the first few years. Throw in a couple of kids and other life complications, and that is a recipe for all kinds of difficulty.

    All of this is an enormous problem , both inside & outside the church. I wrote a Master’s paper on this last year, looking at the encyclopaedic knowledge of porn many of the young people in my youth projects have, in contrast to their appalling lack of real life knowledge. I talked to a lot of teenagers about their experiences of watching porn & what they thought. A lot of it was wanting knowledge, which was my ultimate recommendation to professionals like myself, to provide much much better relationship & sex education, & to be a safe place for silly/strange/explicit questions. As a person I have very positive views towards sex (real sex, relational sex)& I think that comes over. I also ask my young people if they see or hear about sexual things which distress & bother them -they do- & that I’m available for them to talk to. Many young guys find things they see traumatising, but feel this is unacceptable in our culture, & so the damage is done. My research age group here was 12 – 16 really.
    And I read the 50 Shades trilogy , & left a horrible review for them on Amazon kindle, due to their popularity amongst really young women. I don’t want them learning about ‘relationships’ through this kind of fiction any more than I want the guys learning from the fictional world of online porn. I had also read all the Twilight novels, & read the most popular YA fiction to stay with the curve.
    What I really want is the church/culture/humans to teach each other the skills needed for healthy relationships & sexual expression, so that young people don’t have to wade through garbage to find out what it means to acknowledge, value or express this very tender & important part of our humanity.
    And weirdly to this conversation, I got an email out of the blue from a former church youth grouper thanking me for how approachable I’d been on this subject when they were young, & that what she’d learned stood her on good stead for life 🙂 Yay for our church youth work team, who were all robustly normal & shunned gimmicks.

  34. Gram3 wrote:

    a guide to sunglasses
    Wait. I don’t get it. Is that British humor

    I’m afraid the British don’t have a sense of humo(u)r …

    Actually, this topic stirs the imagination. Dee’s NYT best seller book could contain the 30 Days’ Challenge. Married couples (of course) should wear sunglasses for thirty days without interruption. It’s even in the bible – looking through a glass darkly.

    I’d better go before I make even more of a spectacle of myself.

  35. Gram3 wrote:

    (still have a comment pending due ….

    Discussing moderation and/or trying to get past the moderation filters is NOT ALLOWED. Even from long time commentors.

    If anyone has any questions you can ask them via the contact page.

    Don’t do it.

  36. Folks. Excessive quoting drives people away from reading this (or almost any) blog.

    Please quote just enough for context. If people want to read the entire comment being referenced they can just click on the link and be taken immediately back to the original comment.

    Thanks
    GBTC

  37. roebuck wrote:

    Church as SuperBowl halftime show – no thank you.

    LOL and amen.

    I actually think that’s a good example. To a good portion of Evangelicals, “church” becomes a sort of spiritual comfort food. By that I mean it becomes less about faith and truth, and more about keeping your world the way you like it. Of course, this manifests itself in a variety of ways, from the apathy of megachurch fun, to the reborn fundamentalism of “New” Calvinism.

    I know that might sound like something just as simple as selfishness or idolatry, but that’s not really what I’m trying to say. It’s much deeper and subtler, but I can’t find a good way to explain it right now.

  38. @ Joe:

    Joe, your post reminds me of when my daughter was in junior high and quite unimpressed with the Christian versions of her favorite music that kept pushing on her. She told me to let her know when the church came up with something original!

  39. @ Gram3:

    Thus one of the reasons Mark Driscoll gives for commanding wives to be more tawdry in the bedroom,’ must give the man what he was conditioned to expect, “Blech!”

  40. @ Patti:

    I haven’t read Driskle’s output on what wives should do in the bedroom, and I don’t plan to in the future either. Whatever… it doesn’t matter what a man was/has been conditioned to expect, if in fact he really has been “transformed by the Gospel”. Transformation is a strong word, in NT greek as well as in modern english, and – by definition – it trumps conditioning.

    This claim about “lives being transformed by the Gospel”, or words to that effect, is often bandied about, isn’t it? Of course, we understand that transformation is a process. But if, when a man encounters Jesus, he is transformed enough to refuse to listen to a woman preaching but not enough to love the woman he married… ISTM that we need a bigger Jesus.

  41. @ K.D.:
    Agreed. The man’s efforts in degrading the sacraments should not be countenanced. Is he a pastor or a ringmaster?

  42. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    Transformation is a strong word, in NT greek as well as in modern english, and – by definition – it trumps conditioning.

    Yes it does, or it should. We *do* need a bigger Jesus.

  43. Corbin wrote:

    To a good portion of Evangelicals, “church” becomes a sort of spiritual comfort food. By that I mean it becomes less about faith and truth, and more about keeping your world the way you like it. Of course, this manifests itself in a variety of ways, from the apathy of megachurch fun, to the reborn fundamentalism of “New” Calvinism.

    Excellent observation, Corbin. As a young person, what do you think we need to do about that? I think the problem extends to church in general beyond evangelicalism, and it is distressing. How do we make Jesus bigger and our “comfort” smaller?

  44. Justus wrote:

    @ K.D.:
    Agreed. The man’s efforts in degrading the sacraments should not be countenanced. Is he a pastor or a ringmaster?

    That’s a huge point. If someone is going to promote a book, they should certainly not include baptism or communion or anything to do with the Lord as part of the stunt. When I think about what baptism means in a Baptist context like Young’s, it’s almost beyond belief that he would use that to promote his book!

  45.   __

    “Fifty Shades of Hype?”

    hmmm…

    —> Those that love God know the manner of life, purpose, faith, longsuffering, charity, patience, they should endeavor to lead, enduring and ever ready to proclaim the hope that lives within themselves.

    Kind soul, believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved…you have God’s word on it!

    But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, according to the scriptures, deceiving, and being deceived.

    Please don’t be one of them…

    But lit’l ones continue in the things which you have learned and are confidently assured of, knowing of whom you have learned them; i.e. the holy scriptures, which are able to make you ‘wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus’; as all scripture is given by inspiration of God, and  is certainily profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that God’s lit’l children  may be perfect and throughly furnished unto all good works…

    “Doctor My Eyes?”
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGMnSimO2xM

    ATB

    Sopy

  46. rhondajeannie wrote:

    I wonder when someone is going to tell the churches that there is no such thing as a bad advertisement.

    The Shack, The Passion of the Christ, Harry Potter, etc.

    These are just a few of the things that have been unpromoted by some preachers.

  47. Tim wrote:

    Baptizing books is gimmicky. What are the books supposed to do, come up professing Christ as Lord? The Ephesians didn’t baptize their scrolls of magic; they burned them.

    Next thing I bet mega church Steve Furtick will hold staged “50 Shades of Grey” baptisms.

    Furtick will get copies of “I Kissed Dating Goodbye” (which are already baptized) to stand up first in the audience to coax the “50 Shades” copies into getting up and going to the stage too.

    For anyone who doesn’t get my joke:
    “Megachurch pastor Steven Furtick’s ‘spontaneous baptisms’ not so spontaneous”
    http://www.religionnews.com/2014/02/24/megachurch-pastor-steven-furticks-spontaneous-baptisms-spontaneous/

  48. Church by the Glades is doing a “50 shades of Cray” thingy. I listened to it, it is pretty much unintelligible ‘relevant’ talk and pointlessness. By the end, I felt like I was in mental bondage, but I doubt David Hughes meant it that way…

    http://cbglades.com

  49. We used to go to Fellowship Church about 10 years ago. He did a sermon series based on the SAME subject – “I Had These Friends”. Same story about the basketball player, ect. He is just recycling the sermon to fit the latest media craze of Fifty Shades of Grey.
    What a media hound. Needless to say, we do not go there anymore. Yeesh!

  50. Daisy wrote:

    Next thing I bet mega church Steve Furtick will hold staged “50 Shades of Grey” baptisms.

    Kevin DeYoung asks pastors to refrain from doing “50 Shades of Grace” sermons.
    http://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/kevindeyoung/2015/02/11/no-grey-area/
    Beneath, the website suggests readers may also like his “Glasses (shades) of Grace” article.
    And the comments, right when I looked, are described as “50 thoughts on No Grey Area”. 🙂
    Of course, the bulk of DeYoung’s article is urging Gospelly Coalition readers (who should know better already) not to watch the movie, because violence against against women is not acceptable, doncha know.

  51. Eric S wrote:

    Church by the Glades is doing a “50 shades of Cray” thingy. I listened to it, it is pretty much unintelligible ‘relevant’ talk and pointlessness. By the end, I felt like I was in mental bondage, but I doubt David Hughes meant it that way…
    http://cbglades.com

    🙂
    Let’s see– Owen Strachan of CBMW has a couple articles — shockingly, he’s against sexual abuse also, and recommends “headship and submission” as the solution!
    Commenter Eric (you perhaps?) reminds him about Doug Phillips, Bill Gothard, Nate Morales, and Frank Houston. Another commenter mentions Driscoll’s “Real Marriage”.

  52. Eric S wrote:

    The Shack, The Passion of the Christ, Harry Potter, etc.
    These are just a few of the things that have been unpromoted by some preachers.

    In earlier times, I recall seeing a book unpromoting “The Lyin” Thing” and another unpromoting the “Farce” of Star Wars….

  53.   __

    “Monkey See, Monkey…”

    hmmm…

    Tree,

    You are correct about the lines of reality being progressively blirred for young folk by the progression of their viewing entrainment consumption choices; the examples of and the normalizing and romanticizing of stalking, spying, breaking and entering, obsessive compulsion, etc. and nurturing those questionable beginnings among other thngs into full blown psychopathic stalking, abuse, manipulation, and control…or worse.

    today’s ‘screen’ fantasy, tomorrow’s reality?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfjosZ8d-NM

    Wait, that was yesterday…

    (sadface)

    Sopy

  54. Dave A A wrote:

    Let’s see– Owen Strachan of CBMW has a couple articles — shockingly, he’s against sexual abuse also, and recommends “headship and submission” as the solution!

    Owen (not John) has trouble thinking clearly at times. This is one of those times. He needs to go anywhere but the West and places heavily influenced by the West and venture beyond the 5-star hotels. There he will find *lots* of “headship” by males and submission by females. And also, not coincidentally, he will find lots of abuse of women and also lots of other behaviors he thinks would be fixed if only the women weren’t so uppity. Owen (not John) needs to breathe some fresh, clear reality air outside the sealed CBMW bubble.

  55. @ Dave A A:

    Oh, and I forgot to remind everyone about Doug Wilson’s delightful commentary on 50 Shades. Talk about totally depraved.

  56. This is Grinning Ed Young of Seven Day Sex Challenge(TM) fame, delivered sitting on a bed with his wife onstage on the very same day my church celebrated the Feast of Christ the King.

    And I’ve been waiting for the “Just like 50 Shades of Grey, Except CHRISTIAN(TM)!” knockoffs to start coming out of the woodwork going “ME TOO!”

  57. Gram3 wrote:

    @ Dave A A:
    Oh, and I forgot to remind everyone about Doug Wilson’s delightful commentary on 50 Shades. Talk about totally depraved.

    What did you expect from the Dear Leader of that CULT in Moscow, ID?

  58. Gram3 wrote:

    He needs to go anywhere but the West and places heavily influenced by the West and venture beyond the 5-star hotels. There he will find *lots* of “headship” by males and submission by females. And also, not coincidentally, he will find lots of abuse of women and also lots of other behaviors he thinks would be fixed if only the women weren’t so uppity.

    I suggest Talibanistan, Boko Haram, or ISIS.

  59. Dave A A wrote:

    In earlier times, I recall seeing a book unpromoting “The Lyin” Thing” and another unpromoting the “Farce” of Star Wars….

    “Papa” Chuck Smith of Calvary Chapel had a real hair up his *&% (ed) about Star Wars back in the Late Seventies/Early Eighties. Calvary Chapel dominated local Christianese AM Radio at the time, and Chuck Smith was always ranting about Star Wars as SATAN come to Deceive Us. (Even eclipsing Satanic Dee & Dee.) On the radio, he’d denounce Star Wars at the drop of a hat and usually dropped the hat (and the hat, and the hat) himself.

  60. Daisy wrote:

    Next thing I bet mega church Steve Furtick will hold staged “50 Shades of Grey” baptisms.

    With the baptizees and/or shills tied up with grey silk neckties?

  61. Dave A A wrote:

    Of course, the bulk of DeYoung’s article is urging Gospelly Coalition readers (who should know better already) not to watch the movie, because violence against against women is not acceptable, doncha know.

    Only if it’s done by the pew sitters/tithing units.

    Head Apostles, Megapastors, and other TGC-certified MenaGAWD of Correct Doctrine have Special Privileges when it comes to Smackin’ them Hos around.

  62. Patti wrote:

    @ Gram3:

    Thus one of the reasons Mark Driscoll gives for commanding wives to be more tawdry in the bedroom,’ must give the man what he was conditioned to expect, “Blech!”

    Including up both ends of the alimentary canal?
    “WOMAN, SUBMIT! I WANNA!”
    Even noticed “what the man is conditioned to expect” is always hardcore porn stuff? With Widdle Christian Wifey as animate Sex Doll/Porn Star?

  63. Tree wrote:

    I do not endure novels written in the awkward first person, present tense.

    There’s worse.
    It’s called SECOND PERSON, PRESENT TENSE.
    And you find it in a lot of bad fanfic that’s trying to be DEEP and/or EDGY.

  64. rhondajeannie wrote:

    I wonder when someone is going to tell the churches that there is no such thing as a bad advertisement. I remember when the Da Vinci Code was released our local church ran seminars on how inaccurate it was, and letter box dropped leaflets about it in everyone’s letterbox. Really great advertising for the movie. Must confess I rented the Da Vinci Code when it came out, what an awful boring movie but gee the churches did a wonderful job as publicity officers.

    This started with Last Temptation of Christ, where the marketers discovered if you throw in something to P*** Off Those Xtians, their outrage and screaming and calls for boycott and screaming generate vast amounts of media exposure/FREE publicity.

    Not a penny out of your publicity budget, just P*** ‘Em Off and let them go. Self-generating free publicity.

  65. P.P.S. 50 SHADES OF GREY IS A TRENDY BESTSELLER WITH LOTSA MARKETING TIE-INS, 50 SHADES OF GREY KNOCKOFFS ARE THE LATEST CHRISTIAN FAD, YET I’M A PERV BECAUSE I LIKE MY LITTLE PONY: FRIENDSHIP IS MAGIC?

  66. I just can’t stop commenting this morning, this thing has got me into such a frenzy.

    If you can describe something as “Just like Fill-in-the-Blank, Except CHRISTIAN(TM)!”, that’s NEVER a good sign. Yet it’s all we get. Just Like/Of the world but not in it.

    Joe wrote:

    Nothing makes Jesus look more glorious than for his people to have absolutely no original ideas other than to repackage the “best” of the worlds. Honestly, it’s like buying generic breakfast cereal – you can buy frosted flakes, or Christian flakes of frosted corn.

    You want to see an explosion of creativity such as I’ve never seen before (and I’ve been active since Old Testament Star Trek), check out My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic fandom.

    How is it that Colorful Cartoon Ponies can bring out fan-made original music and art and videography and text fiction and comic strips, many of them exploring the show’s universe in original ways (both good and bad), YET THE ALLEGED KINGDOM OF GOD ALMIGHTY CAN ONLY GIVE US RECYCLED KNOCKOFFS OF LAST YEAR’S FADS WITH BIBLE-VERSE ZIP CODES PAINTED OVER THE ORIGINAL TITLES?

    And you can probably get better life lessons from those Ponies in their Magical Land than you can from 50 Shades best-seller phenomenons or Grinning Ed Young knockoff sermons/stage spectaculars.

  67. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    And I’ve been waiting for the “Just like 50 Shades of Grey, Except CHRISTIAN(TM)!” knockoffs to start coming out of the woodwork going “ME TOO!”

    This is not exactly the Christianized version of 50 Shades, but, it’s marketed as the flip side of 50 shades – or maybe it is the Christianized version:

    Old Fashioned (movie) bills itself as the Evangelical answer to Fifty Shades Of Grey
    http://www.avclub.com/review/old-fashioned-bills-itself-evangelical-answer-fift-215102

  68. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    Calvary Chapel dominated local Christianese AM Radio at the time, and Chuck Smith was always ranting about Star Wars as SATAN come to Deceive Us.

    That is very odd, because I was a very big Star Wars fan as a kid and was a Christian goody-goody my whole life. Star Wars did not lead me down a dark path.

  69. Beakerj wrote:

    Every time you write this it makes me snort with laughter.

    Generally that is in the context of mentioning other members of the Gospel Glitterati by their last names. Owen, however, is too precious to call by his last name. I just want to pinch his little cheeks whenever I read his blog. One day he’s going to get control of those rebellious women, and that will be a glorious day indeed!

  70. Gram3 wrote:

    We *do* need a bigger Jesus.

    Indeed; more specifically, we need one big enough to empty himself of all his entitlements despite being worthy of equality with God himself for a start.

    Oh… wait…

  71. ISTM this post highlights multiple different fails happening that are probably not really related. On the one hand, we have a clown who calls himself a pastor who also has a huge following. How many people default to his church having no idea what they are getting into? And how many of those clowns have we talked about at TWW? So, that’s one problem. A big problem.

    Another problem is the s*x-saturated culture in which we live where the game becomes “can I be more outrageous than the other.” Sheesh, what ever happened to discretion and dignity? The fuss used to be about grannies in the bedroom. But now the grannies can’t go outside their own bedrooms without be assaulted by a hyper-expressed s*xual culture. That is not healthy for anyone.

    Yet another problem is the whole idea of gender relations. I hear from young men and young women that suddenly dating has all these complicating factors. I mean, really? How did that happen, and why?

    And why is this genre even attractive to anyone? I don’t get it, and I don’t buy Doug Wilson’s argument, either. What is going on?

  72. @ Patti:

    Yes, I know! I can’t really listen to Christian radio, unless I get nostalgic for wanting to hear a sanitized, “christianized” version of the same song I liked on secular radio 10 years ago. Its a pity the church seems to be lagging behind the world by one or two steps – as soon as the world gets tired and sick of something, someone will cut and paste Jesus’ name on it and pat themselves on the back as “redeeming culture.” Good grief.

  73. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    Indeed; more specifically, we need one big enough to empty himself of all his entitlements despite being worthy of equality with God himself for a start.

    Oh… wait…

    OK, I’ve been thinking on this. Yes, sometimes it takes me awhile. Maybe Philippians 2 should be the go-to for all marriage ceremonies and also all Christmas sermons. And Resurrection Sunday/First Fruits. And all baptisms, regardless of practice. Because this is really it, isn’t it? And that’s how we get into so much trouble personally and in the church. We think we are so big and important, and that is the opposite of Jesus. His glory is in his humility.

    Of course, that makes me even more upset with the nonsense that wears a Jesus mask.

  74. Gram3 wrote:

    How do we make Jesus bigger and our “comfort” smaller?

    I think this is part of what Jesus meant by taking up our cross. In my own life, I’m constantly surprised by how self-control, quietness, and prayer are much, MUCH more satisfying than any worldly indulgence/excess in sensation or release. This has really showed me the truth of how the kingdom of heaven goes against what the world views as good and desirable. I think we should stress this, because it’s so easy to fall back into our comfort zone of the Flesh/World. I know most christians know this in theory, but from the way they act, I sometimes wonder if they’ve actually experienced it themselves, not just hearing it from their pastor.

  75. Gram3 wrote:

    And why is this genre even attractive to anyone? I don’t get it, and I don’t buy Doug Wilson’s argument, either. What is going on?

    That’s a great question. I suspect it’s part of the results from Romans 1, a people who suppress truth are given up to a depraved mind to do unnatural things. “Normal” sex is boring – “spice” it up! The unquenchable thirst for something “new” in a sexually saturated culture – even something sadistic and abusive and seemingly against everything our culture values is an indication of just how far down the road to perdition our culture has gone. It’s sad when the only way to find some sort of sexual entertainment or excitement is in this crap, and even sadder that it’s widely recognized as acceptable. The really horrifying question to me is, “what’s next?”

  76. Gram3 wrote:

    I just want to pinch his little cheeks whenever I read his blog.

    He really is adorable. He’d make a good beanie baby.

  77. Gram3 wrote:

    There he will find *lots* of “headship” by males and submission by females.

    Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    Gram3 wrote:
    We *do* need a bigger Jesus.
    Indeed; more specifically, we need one big enough to empty himself of all his entitlements despite being worthy of equality with God himself for a start.
    Oh… wait…

    “Headship” was one of many metaphors Paul used to describe this bigger Jesus. And properly pairs with “bodyship” as in “He is the head of his body, the church.” But the CBMW types change it round to something else.

  78. I forgot where in the NT it is, but the verse is “it is shameful even to mention what the disobedient do in secret.” I think his wife is also shameful by exploiting her private life with her husband. What happened to modesty, respect, and a sense of holiness regarding our intimate married lives?

  79. @ Corbin:
    @ Joe:

    Going to merge a couple of things from your comments. One is the idea of needing to spice up something that has become boring. Another is the idea of satisfying.

    We crave the drug high *despite* the fact that the crash is bad and makes us feel worse after the crash. I’m speaking with no personal experience but what others have described. No, really! Personally, I do the same thing with sugar. I have a huge craving for something sweet, but the hypoglycemic crash afterwards is awful. Why do I still do stupid stuff that makes me feel bad? I suspect that some feel that way about s*xual encounters as well.

    But do you know what is *satisfying* is not the blaze but the embers that last and last and last. That is what I think so many are tragically missing. But it is very hard to get that message across when very few marriages look anything like either a blaze or embers that will last.

    Makes me remember how blessed I am to have been married so long to one amazing man! Plus he buys me chocolate!

  80. Dave A A wrote:

    “Headship” was one of many metaphors Paul used to describe this bigger Jesus. And properly pairs with “bodyship” as in “He is the head of his body, the church.” But the CBMW types change it round to something else.

    Yes, they twist it into something truly ugly and ungodly. Christ the head provides everything we need, just like a husband would have done in the first century for his household. The twist is that now he is to love what he formerly saw as property to be used as he saw fit. Love your wife? What? Her role is to provide field labor and heirs. Give your life for your wife? What? I’ll get another one if something happens to her.

    Women had no choice to submit outwardly, but I hardly think that means they had an attitude of submission. Only outward respect and compliance was expected, and why should they do more than that? Sitting down on the outside but standing up on the inside. That is the new twist that Paul is getting at. Women, instead of outward compliance, honor your husbands who are providing for you and protecting you from your heart. Don’t make his sacrifice for you unduly difficult. Praise him for being faithful and giving himself up for you, and be thankful for him in your heart.

    So, to go back to Nick’s excellent comment, it all comes back to both people in a marriage (or for that matter any relationship) having the same attitude that was in Jesus the Christ. Consider yourselves more important than yourselves. Defer to one another.

    Imagine if marriages were deference contests instead of power struggles like CBMW wants us to have. Well, actually, they don’t want the struggle part. But they do not get the power of loving and mutual deference. They don’t get how Christ changes and transforms things that are twisted into things that are straight and strong.

  81. justabeliever wrote:

    I forgot where in the NT it is, but the verse is “it is shameful even to mention what the disobedient do in secret.” I think his wife is also shameful by exploiting her private life with her husband. What happened to modesty, respect, and a sense of holiness regarding our intimate married lives?

    I agree totally.

  82. Gram3 wrote:

    @ Dave A A:
    Oh, and I forgot to remind everyone about Doug Wilson’s delightful commentary on 50 Shades. Talk about totally depraved.

    If we misunderstand him, it’s due to our deficient reading skills, requiring we retake our ESL classes. “Authority and Submission is an erotic necessity!”
    Which reminds me– he took that from a line by CS Lewis’s Ransom, “Humility– submission– is an erotic necessity.”
    He replaces Lewis’ “humility” with “authority”. In like manner Piper exhorts husbands to accept “the responsibility to lead as Christ led the church and gave Himself for her”. (Desiring God, ch 8) Silly Paul thought Christ LOVED the church and gave Himself for her.
    Speaking of Lewis– something he wrote but which I can’t find is the opposite of Young’s “sexperiment” mindset. Lewis was a newlywed with a terminally ill wife, and keeping his marriage mostly secret. I’ll paraphrase: The neighbours were scandalized that we weren’t married, and something was going on. When in fact we WERE married, and NOTHING was going on!”

  83. Dave A A wrote:

    If we misunderstand him, it’s due to our deficient reading skills, requiring we retake our ESL classes. “Authority and Submission is an erotic necessity!”

    In fairness to Doug, authority and submission may actually *be* an erotic necessity at the Wilson house. He is no doubt speaking from experience, so, I mean, who am I to argue with him? 😉

  84. Slightly off topic but still related. I’ve been unfriended by someone who was children’s ministry director at a church we left in September. SHe posted tbat she was excited to go see 50 Shades and I posted a comment about my disappoint with her choice especially because of her position. SHe deleted her post after a friend of hers that I never met called me a hypocrite, and promptly removed me from her friends list. It hurts, especially because } just lost my 19-yr old nephew in a tragic car accident on Feb 4…glad her hurt feelings are put above my grief…

  85. Gram3 wrote:

    In fairness to Doug, authority and submission may actually *be* an erotic necessity at the Wilson house. He is no doubt speaking from experience, so, I mean, who am I to argue with him?

    That’s just gross.

  86. @ Mrs Stretch:
    That must make you feel so sad, and also how sad that a children’s minister would want to see such filth. I hope you have some good, solid friends who can comfort you.

    @ Corbin:
    Not as gross as what he actually wrote, which may or may not still be posted. What was worse was that Jared Wilson of TgC agreed with Doug Wilson. There was some outrage directed at Jared who never really did get it. Finally he took down the two posts he posted. The truly shocking thing was the number of fanboys and fangirls who criticized anyone who questioned it. Weird stuff.

  87. @ Gram3:
    Doug Wilson creeps me out, in a very subtle way. He’s like a gateway, trying to bring more mainstream people into the sad, dark culture of patriarchal homeschooling and reconstruction. I hurt for the kids born into that movement. It may sound weird but I feel very close to other homeschooled kids; it almost feels like I have a responsibility to them or something.

  88. @ Joe:

    “…Christian radio, … Its a pity the church seems to be lagging behind the world by one or two steps – as soon as the world gets tired and sick of something, someone will cut and paste Jesus’ name on it and pat themselves on the back as “redeeming culture.” Good grief.”
    ++++++++++++++++++

    indeed. I see no reason not to enjoy all the good — all the GREAT — that is in the world. Especially where music is concerned.

  89. Daisy wrote:

    @ Headless Unicorn Guy:
    I suppose as long as you don’t have a little Pony doll in a business suit holding tiny hand cuffs, you’re okay. 😆

    Though knowing Pony fanfics the way I do, somebody, somewhere, is probably going to try it.

  90. Gram3 wrote:

    In fairness to Doug, authority and submission may actually *be* an erotic necessity at the Wilson house. He is no doubt speaking from experience, so, I mean, who am I to argue with him? 😉

    In the liturgy of the Cult of the Blue Oyster:
    http://youtu.be/UqAaq3KUKPk?t=2m52s

  91. Daisy wrote:

    That is very odd, because I was a very big Star Wars fan as a kid and was a Christian goody-goody my whole life. Star Wars did not lead me down a dark path.

    But in any case, 1980-vintage PastorChuckSmithOfCalvaryChapelCostaMesa (all one word back then) was to Star Wars what Fred Phelps was to homosexuality. Couldn’t pass up any opportunity (or lack of one) to insert an anti-Star Wars juke.

  92. Darcyjo wrote:

    Thank the Lord I’m Methodist, I have a district superintendent who would hang me by my THUMBS if I did something this weird/silly/(insert word of your choice)!

    I was just imagining our district super’s reaction when I read this. It does boggle the mind.

  93. Tim wrote:

    Baptizing books is gimmicky. What are the books supposed to do, come up professing Christ as Lord? The Ephesians didn’t baptize their scrolls of magic; they burned them. (Or perhaps that’s baptism by fire!)

    Thanks, Tim, I was thinking the same thing.

  94. Justus wrote:

    @ K.D.:
    Agreed. The man’s efforts in degrading the sacraments should not be countenanced. Is he a pastor or a ringmaster?

    And thanks to you. It’s very distasteful.

  95. justabeliever wrote:

    What happened to modesty, respect, and a sense of holiness regarding our intimate married lives?

    Well, Modesty became a Can-You-Top-This Cult in and of itself within the Cult of Christianese Purity Culture. To the point of Ridiculous.

  96. Lydia wrote:

    Do people still attend Ed Young’s church? They actually buy his books? Incredible.

    DID ANYONE SEE THAT WHEN ED DUNKED THE BOOK “FIFTY SHADES OF GREY” INTO THE WATER, IT EMERGED MIRACULOUSLY TRANSFORMED BY THE POWER OF ED INTO HIS BOOK, ‘FIFTY SHADES OF THEY”.

    What a sad, sad, exhibit of manipulation, greed, and self-adulation. I applaud the local media for ignoring the desperate attempt at free publicity.

    My family and I attended and loved being members and volunteers at FC for many years in the 2000s.

    I ignored good people being harshly terminated now and then. A frequent occurrence that is STILL brought up and highlighted at C3 sessions.

    I ignored the CONSTANT call for money because as Ed says, “Jesus spoke more about money than anything else”.

    I ignored the occasional publicity stunts because as Ed says, “When you find the perfect church, leave because you’ll ruin it”. (An ingenious rationalization)

    I ignored the doubts in mind about Ed and FC because as Ed would say, If you’re not loyal to the vision of FC (Ed’s vision), then leave because “We need your seat”.

    Well looking at FC now, it is a shell of it’s former self. Ed no longer needs your seat. Half of the worship center is now curtained off so attendees (and Ed) don’t have to look upon the empty seats. The once filled balcony is now only opened a handful of times each year. Such a dramatic fall in weekly attendance. Several failed satellite launches. Ed and Lisa desperately attempting to hold onto he fraction of believers they used to preach to.

    IT’S JUST SO SAD BECAUSE OF WHAT COULD HAVE BEEN.

  97. @ JJ:

    Oh my JJ. I recognize much of what you related. Same stuff in other mega worlds. The thing about the seats…I know mega churches that had lighting specially done so that those sections were blacked out and you could not tell when you entered the sanctuary there were thousands of empty seats.

  98. @ JJ:
    Thanks for that information. Was there a turning point or do you think the decline was inevitable? I don’t know anything about this church, obviously.

  99. Adam Borsay wrote:

    Sexual intimacy IS a big part of the human experience within marriage. If the Church isn’t speaking about it, where do we think young people are going to go to hear about it?

    I think the general application of Christian values to sex in marriage can be discussed in the church – the importance of mutual love, respect, patience and communication. However, sex is also a biological process and expert information may not be available in the church. And no one should be getting graphic in the pulpit or the classroom. There are good secular books which provide accurate information or older married folks can educate themselves and make themselves available to answer questions as Gram suggested.

    I taught young people in Sunday School and also in college. I forced myself to become comfortable discussing sexuality because I had to teach a section on human sexuality in intro psychology and because there were young adults coming to me with questions and because the AIDS epidemic had started and these matters were now life and death. What I learned is that many young couples do not understand women’s sexuality and that some young people are quite confused or lack information about some very basic things despite the obsession about sex in popular culture while others, as has already been pointed out, have gotten misinformation from pornography.

  100. @ Marsha:
    fwiw and as a general observation, the Anglo-Saxons, the States in particular and the British pretty close behind, are very prudish when it comes to umm, blush, you know, sex. Despite the boasts of sexual liberation, there are tell-tale signs of actually being very coy about it. The default position (as it were) of the secular educational establishment is one of amorality, but there is clearly a great deal of ignorance about sex when considering it apart from the mechanics. Perhaps this is part of the reason why compared with continental Europe, the British have a high rate of teenage pregnancy. The rejection of the Judeo-Christian view on this not been without paying a high price, often swept under the carpet.

    The Germans, on the other hand, are far less prudish, suffer far fewer hang-ups. To what extent this is good or bad is something open to debate.

    As you say, if the church is too embarrassed or repressed to deal with it, information will be gleaned from sundry other less savoury places.

    One of the books available in the UK for engaged couples was The Act of Marriage, but a British wit once observed on this that Adam managed to know Eve successfully without the benefit of this book’s wisdom and insight!

  101. Imo, discussions of or preaching on sex has no place in the pulpit. I note that no sermon recorded in the Bible mentioned sex, as I recall anyway. The NT speaks of sexual immorality, and draws a contrast between the worldly view of relationships and worship and the godly view, all without describing any of it.

    I cringe each time I hear the “This is going to be PG-13” warning, as I have heard two weeks in a row. I don’t come to worship to hear anyone’s view on sexuality. The people who claim to be “Christian” and who obsess about sex from the pulpit are, imo, betraying their ignorance of God’s Word and their rejection of it.

    The “church” is going to be judged for it’s obsessions, while millions of people are going hungry, naked, are sick, and imprisoned. Perhaps the flood of people out of established institutional “churches” is part of that judgment.

  102. @ JJ:
    I really, really liked what you had to say. Might you be willing to consider writing a post for us? Could you send us an email?

  103. @ Corbin:

    LOL, who said you were a perv?

    A pretty good chunk of certain sectors of the internet think “bronies” = pervs…at least from what I’ve gleaned in other forums.

  104. Doug wrote:

    The NT speaks of sexual immorality, and draws a contrast between the worldly view of relationships and worship and the godly view, all without describing any of it.

    Thank you. I have wondered how on earth people managed sex for thousands of years before these pastors came on the scene. Do they imagine that no Christian married couples before their time were familiar with hot jungle love?

    The worst part is they present it as some sort of spiritual fulfillement. I remember sitting through a mega church sermon which was about this sexual fulfillement sitting next to a young (mid 30’s) man who had recently had a bad fall and was a paralyzed from the waist down. He and his wife were sitting there stone faced. It was then I realized that this focus on sex was unnecessary.

    I realized later than there were barely any people in that church over 60 or so. Perhaps they were too mature for that nonsense?

  105. Ken wrote:

    One of the books available in the UK for engaged couples was The Act of Marriage, but a British wit once observed on this that Adam managed to know Eve successfully without the benefit of this book’s wisdom and insight!

    Yes, but was Eve happy about it?

  106. Marsha wrote:

    Yes, but was Eve happy about it?

    Who knows … but at least as the prototype of marriage they were better off than the broken relationships that characterise so often the current scene.

    With regard to the last few posts, if people are objecting to ‘pulpit porn’ or trying to shock by being explicit or trendy then I agree. But any verse by verse going through a book will sooner or later involve dealing with Christian sex ethics. The world around us basically doesn’t have any, and only draws the line abitrarily at children being abused.

    There are few evangelical churches today where sexual immorality is not known about and tolerated by the leadership, and maybe this problem would be reduced by ceasing to be embarrassed to deal with the topic, either from the pulpit or a special teaching session mid-week to be sensitive if you really do want to ensure no-one is unnecessarily embarrassed. After all, the Song of Songs is in the bible, but I’ve never once heard a sermon on it, and mention of it has usually been to remold it into an allegory.

    Surely this would be better than having to pick up the pieces once it has all gone wrong.

  107. JJ wrote:

    DID ANYONE SEE THAT WHEN ED DUNKED THE BOOK “FIFTY SHADES OF GREY” INTO THE WATER, IT EMERGED MIRACULOUSLY TRANSFORMED BY THE POWER OF ED INTO HIS BOOK, ‘FIFTY SHADES OF THEY”.

    No Skubalon?
    That’s actually how he staged the book launch?

  108. Ken wrote:

    The Germans, on the other hand, are far less prudish, suffer far fewer hang-ups. To what extent this is good or bad is something open to debate.

    And (According to a German), “It is not for nothing that the French are considered the biggest perverts in Europe.”

  109. Ken wrote:

    But any verse by verse going through a book will sooner or later involve dealing with Christian sex ethics.

    I agree. But. Even a verse by verse exposition has to take into account that the audience is comprised (usually) of a diverse demographic, and each one is to be edified by the presentation. If the guiding ethic is love, then I think there is nothing to fear. But even then, some passages are best dealt with in small groups comprised of the appropriate audience.

    Sadly, in our pulpits today, that “love” ethic is all too often twisted and the perversion of it happens without any warning.

  110. @ Ken:

    You’ve never heard Driscoll’s version of SOS then?

    The Sunday morning message just isn’t a place where this needs to be discussed IMO. I do believe that the more parents talk about sexual ethics with their children in a mature way, the better. Why do so many people keep looking to their church to be the communicator of sexual ethics to their children anyway?

  111. Ken wrote:

    After all, the Song of Songs is in the bible, but I’ve never once heard a sermon on it, and mention of it has usually been to remold it into an allegory

    Oh my. You are not familiar with the YRR movement well, are you? In the Acts 29 boot camp lectures, Driscoll would tell wives they should offer up their backsides when they are out of commission in order to please their husbands. Sorry for the vulgarity but it is true. And thousands of young men in Christendom have been taught this.

  112. @ Lydia:
    If and when that book is preached through in my tribe, I will be M.I.A. I worry a great deal about young men who have said to me, “That is my favorite Book of the Bible…”

  113. Ken wrote:

    After all, the Song of Songs is in the bible, but I’ve never once heard a sermon on it, and mention of it has usually been to remold it into an allegory.

    That was true until recently in the US. It was rarely preached on because no one quite knows what to do with it. ISTM that the problem is that it is either allegorized into meaning nothing much at all or it is made into a manual of techniques.

    If we would focus our thoughts and teachings and practices about the marriage relationship on love and self-sacrifice and the other fruits of the Spirit, then I think we could improve those thoughts, teachings, *and* practices. The focus in SoS is not on sexual technique, but that’s what Driscoll and the other YRRs want it to be.

    They have to make it that, not only because of their demographic but also because their basic concept of both husband/wife and Christ/church is power and authority. That, curiously, is missing from SoS which is about desire and love and faithfulnes. In marriage that great desire and love has been twisted into something grotesque and ugly by the likes of Grudem and Piper, so their young disciples must see SoS as primarily about sexual techniques. Sad and disgusting on lots of counts.

  114. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    And (According to a German), “It is not for nothing that the French are considered the biggest perverts in Europe.”

    It’s said in various apocrypha that both Jefferson and Franklin loved the debauched side of night life of Paris. The bawdier the better or so it is purported.

  115. Lydia wrote:

    You are not familiar with the YRR movement well, are you? In the Acts 29 boot camp lectures, Driscoll would tell wives they should offer up their backsides when they are out of commission in order to please their husbands

    You know where you find that?
    Where the woman exists to “please” the man whenever he wants, however he wants?
    PORNOGRAPHY.

    And in the demands of Sociopaths.

  116. Ken wrote:

    But any verse by verse going through a book will sooner or later involve dealing with Christian sex ethics.

    As others have pointed out, this is not the issue. I believe expository preaching through every verse of the Bible is appropriate. That is what our EChurch pastor Wade Burleson does.

    Taking the inspired Word of God beyond where He intended is where the problem lies. The 'sexpert' preachers have done / are doing a huge disservice to the body of Christ.

  117. Lydia wrote:

    You are not familiar with the YRR movement well, are you?

    It seems to me I’ve been singularly blessed to miss the Yelling, Reckless and Reproductive …! I don’t think I disagree with the comments on this theme. The bible will give aspects of sex all too often missing from secular values – the idea of commitment, genuine love rather than being used as an object, faithfulness, friendship. I read somewhere someone commenting on modern culture and saying the current generation ‘have sex in order avoid intimacy’, and I think there was a lot of truth in that.

    As for Driscoll on SOS, one small paragraph on a site critiquing this was enough to know Driscoll’s teaching originates from old smuttyface.

  118. @ JJ:

    JJ, your comments could have been my comments exactly. Before my family left FC in 2010-2011, we probably heard the “who are your friends” series 5-6 times.

    It is worth pointing out how the ED sermon series come about. A TEAM of people/ministers/assistants, get in a room and creatively plan out the series for the upcoming 3-4-5 weeks and as the series progresses, others add to it and deduct from it, all the while, a dutiful scribe records every thought and idea. ALL of these people, including the Pastor ED are paid by the church, for their time and ideas and intellectual property, meaning they are paid by the congregation.

    And then, when ED and his publisher need another book to reconcile his advances, he dusts off the scribe’s notes, gets with a ghost writer who actually can write in complete sentences, and releases a new book, “from the Times best selling author…”

    And who is the only entity that benefits, economically, from the book proceeds. You guessed it, Pastor ED. Only. No one else.

    And here is the part that makes me fume the most…there are so many other very talented teachers, artists, musicians, at that church, who could produce a meaningful, authentic, Christ-centered “product” for the benefit of the big C Church, and they are prohibited from doing so. And the reason when I asked one time? “We wouldn’t want to dishonor our pastor…” What?

    JJ is dead right, that church is a shell of its former self, with only high profile interviews (last week a former Bachelor…) to drive attendance. Some day, Ed and his minions will see that the once awesome FC is too centered on Ed, and not centered on Christ. The Kingdom will prevail, and that passage in the NT that says that teachers and preachers have a higher standard of accountability will one day catch up with Ed. The Kingdom will prevail…

  119. FormerFellow wrote:

    And then, when ED and his publisher need another book to reconcile his advances, he dusts off the scribe’s notes, gets with a ghost writer who actually can write in complete sentences, and releases a new book, “from the Times best selling author…”

    Including $200K in tithe money to Result Source to juice the book into another “Times Best Seller”?

  120. FormerFellow wrote:

    JJ is dead right, that church is a shell of its former self, with only high profile interviews (last week a former Bachelor…) to drive attendance.

    Sounds remarkably like Mahaney’s church in Louisville. At least the Bachelor is presumably *not* a known theologian or seminary professor or other church professional, all of whom should know better.

  121. @ FormerFellow:
    Hi Former Fellow

    JJ has offered to write a post for TWW about his experiences and thoughts on Ed and FC. Last summer I had a gathering with some former SGM folks in the DC area. The way things are going, we may have to have another one for former fellowshipers in DFW!

  122. FormerFellow wrote:

    And here is the part that makes me fume the most…there are so many other very talented teachers, artists, musicians, at that church, who could produce a meaningful, authentic, Christ-centered “product” for the benefit of the big C Church, and they are prohibited from doing so. And the reason when I asked one time? “We wouldn’t want to dishonor our pastor…

    Darn -that’s chutzpah!

  123. Ken wrote:

    the Yelling, Reckless and Reproductive

    Can I use this in my conversations? I’ll always state you as the source.

  124. Lydia wrote:

    The worst part is they present it as some sort of spiritual fulfillement. I remember sitting through a mega church sermon which was about this sexual fulfillement sitting next to a young (mid 30’s) man who had recently had a bad fall and was a paralyzed from the waist down. He and his wife were sitting there stone faced. It was then I realized that this focus on sex was unnecessary.

    I’m a never married, celibate lady. I noticed this years ago. Churches make too much out of sex (and marriage), and some unfortunately equate being married with knowing God.

    That is, you can’t really know God unless you are married and having sex (according to some Christians). Which is funny considering Jesus never married and never had sex but seemed pretty close to God the Father anyhow.

  125. @ Ken:

    Exactly, Ken. What is happening is that they are actually making it worse. The culture objectifies women and so does what passes for large segments of the church here. Keep in mind I am speaking as someone who has followed this stuff for the last 15 years. I am blown away by what is taught. CJ Mahaney was really bad, too. He taught that even when his wife was real sick she insisted on satisfying his needs. This is teaching?

    I could go on and on. We have another side of that movement that teaches that women are made in the “indirect image of God”…they are a derivative. Taught by Bruce Ware at SBTS and father in law to Owen of CBMW. Grudem shores it up with his ST.

    There is not enough bandwidth out there to go into what has been taught concerning sex and women in evangelical America. It is sick stuff that is so mainstream that I have despaired how we can even begin to turn it around. Get girls and boys out of church, perhaps? Sheesh!

    What is missing? Mutual respect, love, compassion, etc. You know, those old fashioned virtues of Christ. Everything is now about power/submission.

  126. Teaser announcement – keep your eyes peeled for my review of the non-existent film “50 Shades of Lent”. On the blog next Tuesday.

  127. Tim wrote:

    Announcement – keep your eyes peeled for my review of the non-existent film “50 Shades of Lent”. On the blog next Tuesday.

    A Quinn Martin production?

  128. Ken wrote:

    A Quinn Martin production?

    I’m still trying to decide if Nicolas Cage or Kirk Cameron will play the lead. Maybe both, since there are two main characters after all. Do you think Nic should take the female role?

  129. Tim wrote:

    Ken wrote:

    A Quinn Martin production?

    I’m still trying to decide if Nicolas Cage or Kirk Cameron will play the lead. Maybe both, since there are two main characters after all. Do you think Nic should take the female role?

    1) How about a Larry Flynt production?

    2) Naah. Make Kirk Cameron the Sub. “BEAT ME! WHIP ME! MAKE ME WRITE BAD CHECKS!”

  130. Lydia wrote:

    CJ Mahaney was really bad, too. He taught that even when his wife was real sick she insisted on satisfying his needs. This is teaching?

    No, that was straight out of Porn, where the female must service the male when the male wants it, no matter what.

  131. Daisy wrote:

    I’m a never married, celibate lady. I noticed this years ago. Churches make too much out of sex (and marriage), and some unfortunately equate being married with knowing God.

    Some wag at Internet Monk many years ago coined the phrase “SALVATION BY MARRIAGE ALONE”.

  132. Muff Potter wrote:

    It’s said in various apocrypha that both Jefferson and Franklin loved the debauched side of night life of Paris. The bawdier the better or so it is purported.

    Well, Franklin was known as a Dirty Old Man who’d hit on anything. Don’t know about Jefferson except that later in life he was into his Animate Property.

  133. Tim wrote:

    Do you think Nic should take the female role?

    Please no, not with the hairy legs and knobbly knees!

    Perhaps someone has thought of casting Old Nick in a lead rôle?