Driscoll on Nightline

My boyfriend visited a strip club

Conspiracy of Denial: Porn

On a recent blog post concerning abortion, someone in the comments mentioned the phrase "Conspiracy of Denial". That phrase has sat with me, and I believe God wants to break open many Conspiracies of Denial. The next one I want to look at is porn. To do that, let me introduce you to Shelley Lubben. In her own words: "Shelley Lubben is a mother, a fighter for truth and survivor against all odds. Shelley is also a former porn actress fighting tirelessly against pornography which affects most of the world in a destructive way."

Before we listen to what Shelly has to say, let's learn a little about who she is. Watch the video below:



Now we will hear about the conspiracy of denial concerning the porn industry. The following comes from this article, which is probably an excerpt from her upcoming book.


Sex-packed porn films featuring freshly-dyed blondes whose evocative eyes say “I want you” is quite possibly one of the greatest deceptions of all time. Trust me, I know. I did it all the time and I did it for the lust of power and the love of money. I never liked sex. I never wanted sex and in fact I was more apt to spend time with Jack Daniels than some of the studs I was paid to “fake it” with. That’s right none of us freshly-dyed blondes like doing porn. In fact, we hate it. We hate being touched by strangers who care nothing about us. We hate being degraded with their foul smells and sweaty bodies. Some women hate it so much you can hear them vomiting in the bathroom between scenes. Others can be found outside smoking an endless chain of Marlboro lights.

But the porn industry wants YOU to think we porn actresses love sex. They want you to think we enjoy being degraded by all kinds of repulsive acts. The truth, porn actresses have showed up on the set not knowing about certain requirements and were told by porn producers to do it or leave without being paid. Work or never work again. Yes, we made the choice. Some of us needed the money. But we were manipulated and coerced and even threatened. Some of us caught HIV from that coercion. I personally caught Herpes, a non-curable sexually transmitted disease. Another porn actress went home after a long night of numbing her pain and put a pistol to her head and pulled the trigger. Now she’s dead.

It’s safe to say most women who turn to porn acting as a money-making enterprise, probably didn’t grow up in healthy childhoods either. Indeed, many actresses admit they’ve experienced sexual abuse, physical abuse, verbal abuse and neglect by parents. Some were raped by relatives and molested by neighbors. When we were little girls we wanted to play with dollies and be mommies, not have big scary men get on top of us. So we were taught at a young age that sex made us valuable. The same horrible violations we experienced then, we relive through as we perform our tricks for you in front of the camera. And we hate every minute of it. We’re traumatized little girls living on anti-depressants, drugs and alcohol acting out our pain in front of YOU who continue to abuse us.

As we continue to traumatize ourselves by making more adult films, we use more and more drugs and alcohol. We live in constant fear of catching AIDS and sexually transmitted diseases. Every time there’s an HIV scare we race to the nearest clinic for an emergency checkup. Pornographers insist giving viewers the fantasy sex they demand all the while sacrificing the very ones who make it happen. In other words, no condoms allowed. Herpes, gonorrhea, syphilis, chlamydia, and other diseases are the normal anxieties we walk around with daily. We get tested monthly but we know testing isn’t prevention. Besides worrying about catching diseases from porn sex, there are other harmful activities we engage in that are also very dangerous. Some of us have had physical tearing and damage to internal body parts.

When porn actresses call it a day and head home we attempt to have normal healthy relationships but some of our boyfriends get jealous and physically abuse us. So instead we marry our porn directors while others of us prefer lesbian relationships. It’s a real memory making moment when our daughter accidentally walks out and sees mommy kissing another girl. My daughter will vouch for that one.

On our days off we walk around like zombies with a beer in one hand and a
shot of whiskey in the other. We aren’t up to cleaning so we live in filth most of the time or we hire a sweet foreign lady to come in and clean up our mess. Porn Actresses aren’t the best cooks either. Ordering food in is normal for us and most of the time we throw up after we eat because we’re bulimic.

For porn actresses who have children, we are the world’s WORST mothers. We
yell and scream and hit our kids for no reason. Most of the time we are intoxicated or high and our four year olds are the ones picking us up off the floor. When clients come over for sex, we lock our children in their rooms and tell them to be quiet. I use to give my daughter a beeper and tell her to wait at the park until I was finished.

The truth is there IS NO fantasy in porn. It’s all a lie. A closer look into the scenes of a porn star’s life will show you a movie porn doesn’t want you to see. The real truth is we porn actresses want to end the shame and trauma of our lives but we can’t do it alone. We need you men to fight for our freedom and give us back our honor. We need you to hold us in your strong arms while we sob tears over our deep wounds and begin to heal. We want you throw out our movies and help piece together the shattered fragments of our lives. We need you to pray for us the next fifteen years so God will hear and repair our ruined lives.

So don’t believe the lie anymore. Porn is nothing more than fake sex and lies on videotape. Trust me, I know.

Unfortunately the church hasn't always been the best witness of Jesus to those involved in porn, erotic dancing, and prostitution. But there is Light at the end of the tunnel: check out the JC girls, below:

Oral Sex and Backrubs

Its Friday, so time for something different. I've been debating Driscoll's preach on the Songs of Songs in this post over at Dave Warnock's blog. Apparently a preacher talking about oral sex is still controversial these days. What does the bible say about all this, you ask?

• each man should have [sexual] relations with his own wife and each woman with her own husband.
  
• A husband should give to his wife her sexual rights, and likewise a wife to her husband.
  
• It is not the wife who has the rights to her own body, but the husband. In the same way, it is not the husband who has the rights to his own body, but the wife.
  

-- 1 Corinthians 7:2-4 NET

Read this slowly, and then read it again. This is mind-blowing. Apparently a wife has a sexual right to be pleasured by her husband. Guys, if you are married and your wife is not sexually satisfied, you may be in sin! Likewise, girls, if you are married and not sexually satisfying your hubbies, you too may well be in sin. And finally, if you are not married and are sexually satisfying your partner, you are definitely in sin! Can't win, eh?

Paul and Lori describe this principle as sexual stewardship:

It's interesting that there's a symmetry here; she owes him the same thing he owes her. This symmetry isn't found in other areas of the marriage, so God obviously felt it important to tell men they owed their wives sex. This is where we see the idea of stewardship. A steward is put in charge of something which does not belong to him. The steward is given both authority and responsibility for the thing (or person) he's made a steward of, and he's accountable to the one who made him steward. In the case of sex, God has given the husband stewardship of the wife's sexuality, and the wife stewardship of the husband's sexuality. A steward never puts his own desires above the care of what has been entrusted to him, and we must do the same with sex, putting the good of our spouse above our own sexual desires.
-- From The Marriage Bed: Sexual Stewardship.

Now the actual point of debate is whether Driscoll encouraged oral sex as a holy activity within marriage, or whether (in general or in one particular instance) he commanded it. Dave Warnock feels that he had commanded it (based on Song of Songs affirming it), and therefore that command itself would be wrong. I would agree in principle, if Driscoll indeed commanded said activity. But I never got that impression. Scripture does say something like "whatever does not proceed from faith is sin", so I think we can all agree that even if the bible affirms something, if our conscience troubles us, we are to abstain until we can resolve the issue.

Those of you who are single may be wondering why I am telling you all this. I wonder myself...but at the end of the day, biblical sexuality is the same as everything else for us Christians: our life is one of service, of sacrifice, and of great joy. Too often our sex lives are ignored by churches and pulpits. I thank God for those who are willing to speak out on this issue.

Sex God [updated 13/03/07]

Rob Bell has authored a new book on sex, entitled Sex God. There are some initial comments at Jesus Creed, plus Ben Witherington has a detailed review. With chapter titles such as "God wears lipstick", "Sexy on the Inside", "Leather, Whips, and Fruit", this looks like the sort of book the church needs to embrace :-)

A comment from Jesus Creed sums up my response as well:

Interestingly, I have had a number of older folks tell me that in all their years of going to church they have NEVER heard a message on sex! Seeing how sexuality is a significant part of our humanness, as well as the ways it has been distorted throughout human history, I think we need to be talking about it. Especially since Jesus talked about it!

I look forward to reading this...

Why is the church so reluctant to talk about sex ? Perhaps we should take a cue from Salt 'n' Pepper?

update: Check out Part 1 of McKnight's response, and Part 2, his critique.

Women, Men & Sex

I've just finished reading Men and Women in the Church, by Sarah Sumner. Its a refreshing and challenging stab at the decades-old issue of how men and women should relate, looking at headship and leadership both in the home and in the church. It challenges both those who hold to Grudem/Piper-esque Complementarism, as well as those who believe more in Egalitarianism.

She points out that both camps make assumptions and both camps depart from the teaching of the bible. In doing so, she points to a third way. She isn't the first to do this (Craig Blomberg has suggested something similar). Nevertheless, her book is a fresh and provocative overview of the whole issue, and left me reconsidering my beliefs.

At the end of the book she looks at some issues surrounding the core debate, one of them being the issue of sexual sin in the church.

It should be normal for men and women to fight together for sexual purity. Most of the time the subject it so taboo that we feel way too ashamed to admit out temptations, much less to confess to our sin. Thus we tend isolate from each other rather than ministering to each other. We practically pretend that none of us have any hormones. Consequently, many Christian men are rarely held accountable for the suggestive and demeaning kinds of things they sometimes say to Christian women. And women in the church are rarely held accountable for the way they dress.

How can the people of God win the world for Christ when we are unwilling to modify the way we express our sexuality? Much of us know that the issue of sex and modesty is a hypersensitive subject in church.

I believe the church could greatly recover from a lot of our sin if Christians would be more willing to confess our sins out loud and repent.

-- "Men and Women in the Church", Sarah Sumner. 2003.

What do you think? Do you agree with Sarah? Is she on to something here?

Wright blasts new Anglican movement [updated 29/01/07]

N.T. Wright, the Bishop of Durham and renowned theologian, has severely criticised 'A Covenant for the Church of England', a new document which ostensibly sets out to affirm a conservative, evangelical/charismatic free-church inspired movement within the Anglican tradition. Here's an excerpt:

Not least, it should be said, in that the document is a slipshod piece of work simply at the drafting level; I have been assured that it took a year to write, but it reads as though someone put it together hastily on the back of a few envelopes, and didn't trouble to stand back and reflect on it.

Fans of Wright know that he is hardly one to fight against church planting or renewal of any kind. However it appears that those behind this 'covenant' are not in step with much of the theological renewal which has been going on with and without the Anglican communion. This whole affair to me seems very much relating to ongoing disputes within the body of Christ at large. There seems to be an increasing amount of in-fighting, rebuking and general disturbance throughout the Western church. Over the past few weeks we have had names like Wright, Driscoll, Piper, Grudem, McLaren and MacArthur popping up over the blogosphere as each one either receives or hands out rebuke. What on earth is happening to the Church? Personally I think we are in a time of great transition...and not everyone is liking it.

So what are the areas of contention? The hot issues seem to be:

• homosexuality. In Anglican circles the question is whether a gay man or lesbian women can serve as a minister or bishop. In other circles the question is to how homosexuality is approached by the church, both theological and practically. And in some Emergent circles, the topic is avoided altogether, due to concern over offending gays and lesbians.
  
  (For those that don't have the luxury of holding out on a theological position on homsexuality, this emergent blogger gives his own personal reflection, which according to Andrew Jones, is probably what many in the emerging church believe.)
  



• egalitarianism vs complementarism. Wayne Grudem has recently come under heavy fire on the blogosphere for alleged theological flaws in his defense of the traditional view. This is just one mini-debate out of thousands which are currently playing out in this arena. (From an outsider's POV, it looks like Grudem is losing this particular skirmish at Better Bibles)



• emerging/Emergent church. John MacAruthur has recently blasted both Driscoll and the entire emerging church. Driscoll is blasted because he speaks in the vernacular, rather than in the language of 'polite society'. Whatever.
  

I'm not sure if Wright's rebuke fits neatly into any of the above categories, but a quick reading through his posting shows all of the above issues lurking under the surface.

Goto Tall Skinny Kiwi's blog for more.

Hotting up the marriage bed

Too many Christians believe in a watered down theology of sexuality. Mark Driscoll says it well:

Sadly, too often the message of the Christian church to men and women is be a virgin until you get married and do not commit adultery when you are married. While this is true, it is also incomplete. What is sometimes lacking is full, free, and frank teaching from such books as the Song of Songs about the sexual liberties that can be enjoyed by married couples.

Personally I cannot remember ever hearing a sermon (in church) on Christian sex. Strange, because a lack of wisdom, teaching and discussion in this area can lead to sexual sin which causes immense damage to relationships, families, children, churches, and communities. People often ask probing questions about the theology and life of their leaders and teachers, in order to ensure they are under proper "covering". But I think a more appropriate question would be to inquire of their sex life.

Thankfully Internet ministries such as Marriage Bed and XXXChurch (see links on right) are tackling this area head on, for the glory of God. However its about time this frank discussion filtered down to off-net communities as well.

Please use this thread to comment on the issue in general. All perspectives welcome!