Porn addiction is synonymous with darkness. The clubs I went to with friends were dark. Vegas is only cool at night and the sunset strip is too! There is something to be said about doing deeds of darkness in darkness, for the light seems to quench it's power. Accountability is about bringing the addiction into the light. I remember the old vampire flicks from Elvira, the mistress of the dark. I thought they were so spooky. The scenes were in creepy looking houses that were ancient. Who in there right mind would want to watch a scary flick like that in the day? That messes the whole thing up!
Lights tends to spoil the darkness and make the darkness seem less intimidating and strong. So it is with porn. Most people that I've known who have been into porn have not been into it in a congregational setting, it's a private affair. Usually it's done in a dark room or night time when everyone is asleep. It's just the person and a computer or a TV, and few extra items that we need not go into and tada! That's it! And I don't see many windows or doors for that matter in adult stores! Porn people like there privacy. So the environment of a porn addict is one of being alone or at least hidden from others. Bringing the addiction into the open doesn't just 'seem' to kill the strength of the sin, but it actually does do it by no longer keeping the consistent environment of secrecy in which the addiction thrives.
Accountability not only means bringing the addiction into the "light," but it also entails a continual, honest and growing relationship with a person that has been freed himself from porn. Many people who have not been into porn do not have the understanding of the sick, wicked and deceptive mind that they are working with. Porn addicts want to be alone with there porn. There thinking is always to pursue more porn. My dad used to say, "you can't BS a old BS'r." And in that cured statement, I believe there is a truth to it.
With what I just said, now I wish to show, that accountability with a freed porn addict is the real, but not the ideal! It would be ideal if everyone in the Christian Church could minister to a porn addict! If only all of us in the church new the depth of our sin and the wickedness of our minds. But so many in the body see themselves as "not as bad off" as the porn addict or any other kind of addict. "Sure I might sin a bit," someone might think to himself, but the Biblical reality is any type of missing the mark of God's perfection and Glory is a offence to Him, and because of such action on our parts, the cross was needed. Jesus blood was shed for the porn addict and the prideful pomp.
Christ died for the ungodly…Romans 5:6
If anyone needs help in this area call me at 331-0758 or visit www.settingcaptivesfree.com
Thursday, November 20, 2008
Sunday, November 16, 2008
For Goodness Sake?
THIS BLOG IS TAKEN FROM SCOTTRICHARDSLIVE.COM
It's beginning to look a lot like Christmas.
The inflatable Frosty the Snow Man displays are popping up in front yards.
The occasional Christmas carol is being worked into elevator music.
Pre-Thanksgiving Holiday Bonanza-thon Sales Blow Outs are being staged at the mall.
And, of course, the godless set is already offended.
To whit-
'Why Believe in a God?' Ad Campaign Launches on D.C. Buses
WASHINGTON, D.C. — You better watch out. There is a new combatant in the Christmas wars.
Ads proclaiming, "Why believe in a god? Just be good for goodness' sake," will appear on Washington, D.C., buses starting next week and running through December. The American Humanist Association unveiled the provocative $40,000 holiday ad campaign Tuesday.
In lifting lyrics from "Santa Claus is Coming to Town," the Washington-based group is wading into what has become a perennial debate over commercialism, religion in the public square and the meaning of Christmas.
"We are trying to reach our audience, and sometimes in order to reach an audience, everybody has to hear you," said Fred Edwords, spokesman for the humanist group. "Our reason for doing it during the holidays is there are an awful lot of agnostics, atheists and other types of non-theists who feel a little alone during the holidays because of its association with traditional religion."
To that end, the ads and posters will include a link to a Web site that will seek to connect and organize like-minded thinkers in the D.C. area, Edwords said.
Edwords said the purpose isn't to argue that God doesn't exist or change minds about a deity, although "we are trying to plant a seed of rational thought and critical thinking and questioning in people's minds." http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,450445,00.html
"Rational thought and critical thinking", eh?
Let's examine this ad campaign by its' own standard for a moment.
The first question that runs through my mind is pretty basic - What does the American Humanist Association mean by the word "good"?
No doubt, they take the general societal consensus that defines being "good" as having compassion and consideration for others, particularly those who are strangers, physically hurting or generally on the losing end of things.
But what if my culture says that being "good" is helping humanity perfect itself by culling out such "human weeds"?
What if my perspective states that the sick and the slow should not be allowed to survive and pass their inferior genes on to another generation who will only suffer the same fate.
What if I believe, for the greater evolutionary good, all welfare, social assistance and health care should be denied those who simply fail to measure up to a pre-determined genetic standard. In fact, unless certain individuals meet that standard they should not even be considered human beings.
I'd be in some pretty impressive company if I held those views.
Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood believed the first statement. http://www.spectator.org/archives/2004/06/23/maggie-sanger-and-the-human-we
Nobel Prize nominee Herbert Spencer believed the second. http://www.iep.utm.edu/s/spencer.htm
Francis Crick, the co-discoverer of DNA held to the third. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3798/is_/ai_n9036015
The ultimate questions the American Humanist Association raises with their amazingly superficial ad campaign is simple - Whose definition of good are you using? And why should I listen to you?
The main problem we run into when we remove God from a discussion of morality is this:
If there is no God, we are simply an accident. A nice roll of some chemical dice.
If we are an accident, there is no ultimate purpose to our lives beyond following our drives for survival and reproduction.
Morality is simply a social convention. It is enforced by the consensus and will of the controlling leaders of the majority of humanity.
And if morality is merely a power game, the only difference between Hitler and us, is that he lost a war.
To answer the question on that cheery holiday billboard - why believe in God?
Because "goodness for goodness sake" is both incomprehensible and irrational without Him.
A far more consistent ethic is rooted in the truth that our inherent desire to "be good" is a reflection of the fact that we are made in the image and likeness of the Author of goodness.
As a fairly intelligent man named Solomon concluded at the end of his life -
Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter:
Fear God and keep His commandments,
For this is man’s all.
For God will bring every work into judgment,
Including every secret thing,
Whether good or evil. (Ecclesiastes 12:13-14)
It's beginning to look a lot like Christmas.
The inflatable Frosty the Snow Man displays are popping up in front yards.
The occasional Christmas carol is being worked into elevator music.
Pre-Thanksgiving Holiday Bonanza-thon Sales Blow Outs are being staged at the mall.
And, of course, the godless set is already offended.
To whit-
'Why Believe in a God?' Ad Campaign Launches on D.C. Buses
WASHINGTON, D.C. — You better watch out. There is a new combatant in the Christmas wars.
Ads proclaiming, "Why believe in a god? Just be good for goodness' sake," will appear on Washington, D.C., buses starting next week and running through December. The American Humanist Association unveiled the provocative $40,000 holiday ad campaign Tuesday.
In lifting lyrics from "Santa Claus is Coming to Town," the Washington-based group is wading into what has become a perennial debate over commercialism, religion in the public square and the meaning of Christmas.
"We are trying to reach our audience, and sometimes in order to reach an audience, everybody has to hear you," said Fred Edwords, spokesman for the humanist group. "Our reason for doing it during the holidays is there are an awful lot of agnostics, atheists and other types of non-theists who feel a little alone during the holidays because of its association with traditional religion."
To that end, the ads and posters will include a link to a Web site that will seek to connect and organize like-minded thinkers in the D.C. area, Edwords said.
Edwords said the purpose isn't to argue that God doesn't exist or change minds about a deity, although "we are trying to plant a seed of rational thought and critical thinking and questioning in people's minds." http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,450445,00.html
"Rational thought and critical thinking", eh?
Let's examine this ad campaign by its' own standard for a moment.
The first question that runs through my mind is pretty basic - What does the American Humanist Association mean by the word "good"?
No doubt, they take the general societal consensus that defines being "good" as having compassion and consideration for others, particularly those who are strangers, physically hurting or generally on the losing end of things.
But what if my culture says that being "good" is helping humanity perfect itself by culling out such "human weeds"?
What if my perspective states that the sick and the slow should not be allowed to survive and pass their inferior genes on to another generation who will only suffer the same fate.
What if I believe, for the greater evolutionary good, all welfare, social assistance and health care should be denied those who simply fail to measure up to a pre-determined genetic standard. In fact, unless certain individuals meet that standard they should not even be considered human beings.
I'd be in some pretty impressive company if I held those views.
Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood believed the first statement. http://www.spectator.org/archives/2004/06/23/maggie-sanger-and-the-human-we
Nobel Prize nominee Herbert Spencer believed the second. http://www.iep.utm.edu/s/spencer.htm
Francis Crick, the co-discoverer of DNA held to the third. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3798/is_/ai_n9036015
The ultimate questions the American Humanist Association raises with their amazingly superficial ad campaign is simple - Whose definition of good are you using? And why should I listen to you?
The main problem we run into when we remove God from a discussion of morality is this:
If there is no God, we are simply an accident. A nice roll of some chemical dice.
If we are an accident, there is no ultimate purpose to our lives beyond following our drives for survival and reproduction.
Morality is simply a social convention. It is enforced by the consensus and will of the controlling leaders of the majority of humanity.
And if morality is merely a power game, the only difference between Hitler and us, is that he lost a war.
To answer the question on that cheery holiday billboard - why believe in God?
Because "goodness for goodness sake" is both incomprehensible and irrational without Him.
A far more consistent ethic is rooted in the truth that our inherent desire to "be good" is a reflection of the fact that we are made in the image and likeness of the Author of goodness.
As a fairly intelligent man named Solomon concluded at the end of his life -
Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter:
Fear God and keep His commandments,
For this is man’s all.
For God will bring every work into judgment,
Including every secret thing,
Whether good or evil. (Ecclesiastes 12:13-14)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)