# p0rnography



## Osage Bluestem

Have you noticed that there is p0rnography everywhere now? Just driving down the highway you are exposed to basically nude women advertising for strip clubs and such. Of course the television these days is polluted with it as well on about all the shows and commercials, and obviously the internet where light, medium or even hard core p0rnography is just a click away. As Mark Driscoll says "it is easier to look at a beautiful woman naked than it is to get up and go to your fridge." 

This is a terrible development in our society and is going to be even more difficult in the coming years. We need to come up with a sound plan to keep our children away from p0rnography when the rest of the world says it is a healthy expression of sexuality and even many Christians don't condemn it because p0rnography and masturbation isn't explicitly mentioned in the bible.

This is one area where I support censorship laws. I would love to see p0rnography banned and decency laws enacted in all public places and domains. ID verification and password protection should be required by law to access it on the internet, and it should never be placed on a billboard or in any public area. Such as this billboard that was eventually taken down in New York: Calvin Klein 'Threesome' Ad Draws Oohs, Aahs and Protests - Local News | News Articles | National News | US News - FOXNews.com

This is one area the devil is using right now to really drag down Christians, especially pastors and deacons and such. I think Mark Driscoll dealt with this topic well in his booklet **** Again Christian: http://relit.org/****_again_christian/toc.php

Well, the Mark Driscoll link isn't going to work because apparently the word **** can't be used here. But if you google Mark Driscoll **** again christian you can read his work. He is a Calvinist pastor of Mars Hill Church in Seattle.


----------



## au5t1n

You're absolutely right. It's out of control. The only part I disagree with is having password verification to access it - It should be illegal to put it on the internet or publish it at all.


----------



## SolaSaint

I'll add my "amen to your post. I've noticed this for a long time now. I mentioned it at a men's breakfast about ten years ago and got several "amen's", but little or no reaction. Seems the church has turned a blind eye to this sinful behavior. Sadly our pastors and leaders are big targets for Satan for it seems many are hooked on ****. When the church can't be seen as opposing the world, we are in trouble.


----------



## AThornquist

It must be fought. The most difficult battle is in our own hearts though; it is why I had to go through certain verification with Covenant Eyes just to open this thread. Our own ways must be guarded to show others that it is possible--but it's not easy! Ultimately this is an issue of the heart. The public's perception of p0rn won't change until their hearts do.


----------



## Hamalas

I'm pretty libertarian/laissez-faire when it comes to things like this generally, but this is one issue where I am becoming increasingly persuaded that strong censorship laws need to be put in place. But since this is a multi-billion dollar industry and most Americans are either strongly in favor of it or apathetic, it seems to me that we should be focusing on how we as Christians can fight it. Both on a personal level obviously, but also in the home and the church. (As some have already alluded to in this thread.) So I'm curious, in y'all's experience, what are some of the best resources/practices available to combat this deadly temptation?


----------



## Osage Bluestem

Hamalas said:


> So I'm curious, in y'all's experience, what are some of the best resources/practices available to combat this deadly temptation?



Good question brother.

I don't really know of any other than meditating on scripture and trying to think of something else whenever you are unfortunatley bombarded by something pornographic. We as Christians are on a spiritual battlefield all of our hours and there is no rest until we leave this flesh behind. Since we know the truth that p0rnography and such is as deadly to the soul as heroin is to the body we should do everything we can to eradicate this filth from the earth so that people don't always have to endure the kinds of torture we go through on a daily basis.

I think that the following passage is great to reflect on when we are greatly tempted to partake in corruption and filth. If we really, really, believed this without any doubts at all and lived like this to the letter we would immediatley be able to see these temptations of the world for what they really are and be truely disgusted by them, we would never even crack a smile at them:

Colossians 3:1-17 KJV
[1] If ye then be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ sitteth on the right hand of God.
[2] Set your affection on things above, not on things on the earth.
[3] For ye are dead, and your life is hid with Christ in God.
[4] When Christ, who is our life, shall appear, then shall ye also appear with him in glory.
[5] Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth; fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry:
[6] For which things' sake the wrath of God cometh on the children of disobedience:
[7] In the which ye also walked some time, when ye lived in them.
[8] But now ye also put off all these; anger, wrath, malice, blasphemy, filthy communication out of your mouth.
[9] Lie not one to another, seeing that ye have put off the old man with his deeds;
[10] And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him:
[11] Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all.
[12] Put on therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, bowels of mercies, kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, longsuffering;
[13] Forbearing one another, and forgiving one another, if any man have a quarrel against any: even as Christ forgave you, so also do ye.
[14] And above all these things put on charity, which is the bond of perfectness.
[15] And let the peace of God rule in your hearts, to the which also ye are called in one body; and be ye thankful.
[16] Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord.
[17] And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him.


----------



## kvanlaan

> I'm pretty libertarian/laissez-faire when it comes to things like this generally, but this is one issue where I am becoming increasingly persuaded that strong censorship laws need to be put in place. *But since this is a multi-billion dollar industry *and most Americans are either strongly in favor of it or apathetic, it seems to me that we should be focusing on how we as Christians can fight it.



Somewhere I read that Americans spend more on p0rn than the US spends on foreign aid. Regardless of what you think of foreign aid, better that than p0rn!


----------



## charliejunfan

AAAAAAAAAHHH!!!!!!!! You said the P word!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## SemperEruditio

If you or someone you know...chances are like 100% you know someone who is allowing themselves to be taken away for their lust in p--n I would recommend Freedom from habitual sin: Overeating, P--nography...

-----Added 11/17/2009 at 07:38:35 EST-----

The first part of my post sounds like a cheesy commercial.


----------



## AThornquist

On lust and temptation, particular in regard to p0rn:

Tim Challies has a free book called "Sexual Detox." It's new and not very long but very on point and worth the read if you struggle in this area. Here is a PDF of it that you can save to your computer if you so desire: Sexual Detox

-----Added 11/17/2009 at 07:47:25 EST-----

I love Psalm 119 for this topic and just posted one of my favorite passages from it on Facebook yesterday. From verse 9 and 10: "How can a young man keep his way pure? By guarding it according to Your word. With my whole heart I seek You; let me not wander from Your commandments!"


----------



## Wayne

I remember reading some years back of a 17th century Scottish Presbyterian pastor who, as he began to preach on Romans 1:18ff., said, "Such sins are unknown in our land."

Some might contest whether the pastor was entirely correct, but what a blessing to come even anywhere near to such a state of blessed ignorance.


----------



## ewenlin

I am rather glad for the censorship laws in my land, though it could be better.


----------



## Zenas

Try covenant eyes and make your wife your accountability partner. You'll quit or get beaten to death.


----------



## darrellmaurina

I am in complete agreement with the premise of this thread, namely, that certain things should not be seen, read or heard.

However, we need to be extremely careful that we don't get ourselves into a position where we ask non-Christian civil magistrates to do the church's job for us. Our friends from Singapore will likely tell us that their non-Christian rulers censor a lot more than just unbiblical filth. I would have a very different opinion if we were a formally covenanted Christian nation, or if (as was the case until a few generations ago) we could trust the Christian consensus of our voters to elect God-fearing magistrates who will appoint God-fearing judges.

This is a Christian board, not a political theory board, and there is little point in debating the highly technical points which caused the Supreme Court to elevate "dirty dancing" to the level of protection our Founding Fathers intended for the public press and public speech. The logic involved in that twisting of original intent is complicated, and it can only be undone by replacing a number of black-robed Supreme Court justices, not by passing new laws. Furthermore, even if we replace a lot of legislators and a lot of judges, if we start passing censorship legislation without a major heart change by the majority of the American populace, we could easily see those new laws turned against us in ways we never anticipated.


----------



## TimV

> if we start passing censorship legislation without a major heart change by the majority of the American populace



You could use that argument against any sin. For instance you could say murder shouldn't be legislated against since it does no good without a heart change.

When I first moved to SA a woman couldn't even wear a bikini in a national park. Travellers were checked for Playboy etc.. at the air port. Then things collapsed, and all those laws were dropped, and now one South African woman out of every 4 will get raped at least once in her life.

About the only type of p#rn the State gets right is kiddie p#rn. You can get thrown in jail in north America or Europe just by having it on you computer, since even the modern State realises there is a correlation between kiddie rape and kiddie p#rn.


----------



## ColdSilverMoon

I agree that we must take care to avoid temptation, but I sort of take a different approach. I would like to see absolutely no censorship whatsoever: if NBC, ABC, CBS, and Fox want to show hard-core p0rnography in the middle of the day, so be it. I don't think the state should arbitrarily draw a line defining what is obscene and what isn't. What if they decide the Song of Songs is too erotic or Judges is too violent. Then what?

Let the secular state do what it will. Then Christians will have to make the choice of following God's Word and living according to its standard, or slipping into the sinfulness of the world. Just my personal take...


----------



## TimV

Mason, should there be an age limit for women who are shown naked on ABC?


----------



## Ivan

TimV said:


> Mason, should there be an age limit for women who are shown naked on ABC?



 Dude!


----------



## ColdSilverMoon

TimV said:


> Mason, should there be an age limit for women who are shown naked on ABC?



Not necessarily. But if they are a minor they should have parental consent, just like they do for any number of things.


----------



## TimV

So, a crack addict gives her 9 year old daughter permission to engage in **** for lots of money and you're good with it?


----------



## Southern Twang

ColdSilverMoon said:


> Let the secular state do what it will.





Uhhhhh...no. The state needs to bow the knee to Christ just like every other sphere of life.


----------



## LawrenceU

Covenant Eyes is good for internet accountability. But, if you have children in the house or struggle with the temptation yourself it is not enough. Use a server based filter like American Family Online provides. You can still have sites visited sent to an accountability partner, but the do a very good job at filtering sites and eliminating spam if you use their email service. If you can't get there you can't see it.


----------



## ColdSilverMoon

TimV said:


> So, a crack addict gives her 9 year old daughter permission to engage in **** for lots of money and you're good with it?



You didn't say engage in p0rnography, you said appear naked. I don't equate nudity with p0rnography, regardless of the age. Go to a Spanish beach sometime - most of the pre-pubescent girls run around in bottoms only and it isn't the least bit sexual. 

As for engaging in sex acts, it's different because children aren't equipped to handle the emotional or physical baggage that comes with sex. So no, minors shouldn't be allowed to engage in p0rnography, even with parental consent. I'm not sure where you're going with this, though I'm sure you have a point I'm missing...

-----Added 11/18/2009 at 10:19:53 EST-----



Southern Twang said:


> ColdSilverMoon said:
> 
> 
> 
> Let the secular state do what it will.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uhhhhh...no. The state needs to bow the knee to Christ just like every other sphere of life.
Click to expand...


Agreed, but they don't and won't. If you look at the instructions to the Israelites in Babylonian captivity and the pattern of Apostolic evangelism in Acts, it is pretty clear that God doesn't want Christians to convert cities or nations wholesale, but to live as shining examples and make their communities better places. 

As Christians we should carry that out wherever we live today. I don't expect extremely secular New York to conform to a biblical view of sexuality any more than you expect [-]Sodom[/-] San Francisco to repent of its sexual sins. But I try to make the city a better place and live as an imitator of Christ as best I can. I think that's what we're called to do...


----------



## kvanlaan

> What if they decide the Song of Songs is too erotic or Judges is too violent. Then what?



It's already here: Bill C-415



> For example, Hugh Owens published an advertisement in a local newspaper that included quotations from Leviticus, the third book of the Bible, against homosexual behaviour. Owens was convicted of discrimination against homosexuals by the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission. The case is under appeal. Whether his appeal is upheld or not, the point is that Mr Owens has been subjected to prosecution and onerous legal costs for quoting from the Bible.



Canada Family Action Coalition - CFAC


----------



## A.J.

Hamalas said:


> So I'm curious, in y'all's experience, what are some of the best resources/practices available to combat this deadly temptation?



I have personally found these (from the _New Horizons_ and _Ordained Servant_ of the OPC) helpful: 

The p0rnography Trap by David Feddes

Pastor to Pastor: The Peril of p0rnography by William Shishko 

Pure Sex by Larry Wilson


----------



## Hawaiian Puritan

I think we have to acknowledge we are living in the days of Sodom in the Old Testament. 

I don't see any possibility it can be changed in this generation absent a nationwide revival. Although that's in God's hands and His grace, I think the opposite is more probable, that the church is going to be tested like never before in this country.

The pagan culture in which we live is so saturated by immorality there is not much we can do other than heed and follow the teachings of Paul he gives over and over again throughout his epistles.

You know how sick things are when this is an actual quote from a lesbian in my denomination who has now been found fit for ordination:



> In a statement she presented to the presbytery’s Committee on Preparation for Ministry, Larges declared the “fidelity and chastity” requirement to be “a mar upon the church and a stumbling block to its mission,” and said she could not in conscience comply with it.
> 
> Presbytery votes to permit Larges ordination; stay of enforcement sought



To bring it home, just yesterday in our Nation's capital, it was ruled that a voter initiative supporting marriage was invalid as illegal discrimination which violated human rights. D.C. vote on gay marriage denied - Washington Times

We are living in very dark days, apart from the hope of Christ.


----------



## Hamalas

ColdSilverMoon said:


> TimV said:
> 
> 
> 
> So, a crack addict gives her 9 year old daughter permission to engage in **** for lots of money and you're good with it?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You didn't say engage in p0rnography, you said appear naked. I don't equate nudity with p0rnography, regardless of the age. Go to a Spanish beach sometime - most of the pre-pubescent girls run around in bottoms only and it isn't the least bit sexual.
> 
> As for engaging in sex acts, *it's different because children aren't equipped to handle the emotional or physical baggage that comes with sex. So no, minors shouldn't be allowed to engage in p0rnography, even with parental consent. *I'm not sure where you're going with this, though I'm sure you have a point I'm missing...
Click to expand...


Here's the point (or at least I think it's the point he's wanting to make) you say that children shouldn't be involved in p0rnography even with parental consent, but from whence do you draw that conclusion? Aren't you being just as arbitrary as the government censors would be? If you are removing biblical standards of what is right and wrong then how can you condemn this practice? After all, isn't the world just going to be the world? When you adopt the stand that you're suggesting you open up the door to almost anything. What about bestiality or pedophilia? Should that be censored on public television? I hope I'm not being antagonistic here, I can see where you're coming from but I just don't think any of us would like the conclusions of such a view.


----------



## ColdSilverMoon

Hamalas said:


> ColdSilverMoon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TimV said:
> 
> 
> 
> So, a crack addict gives her 9 year old daughter permission to engage in **** for lots of money and you're good with it?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You didn't say engage in p0rnography, you said appear naked. I don't equate nudity with p0rnography, regardless of the age. Go to a Spanish beach sometime - most of the pre-pubescent girls run around in bottoms only and it isn't the least bit sexual.
> 
> As for engaging in sex acts, *it's different because children aren't equipped to handle the emotional or physical baggage that comes with sex. So no, minors shouldn't be allowed to engage in p0rnography, even with parental consent. *I'm not sure where you're going with this, though I'm sure you have a point I'm missing...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here's the point (or at least I think it's the point he's wanting to make) you say that children shouldn't be involved in p0rnography even with parental consent, but from whence do you draw that conclusion? Aren't you being just as arbitrary as the government censors would be? If you are removing biblical standards of what is right and wrong then how can you condemn this practice? After all, isn't the world just going to be the world? When you adopt the stand that you're suggesting you open up the door to almost anything. What about bestiality or pedophilia? Should that be censored on public television? I hope I'm not being antagonistic here, I can see where you're coming from but I just don't think any of us would like the conclusions of such a view.
Click to expand...


I think you - and I suppose Tim - make a good point: without God all morality is ultimately arbitrary and subjective. I wholeheartedly agree with you there. 

My point is I don't want the secular government drawing the line between was is obscene and what isn't. I should be the one deciding what my family watches based on biblical principles, not the government based on some arbitrary standard. If they can allow too much obscenity they can outlaw too much of what is good and right - I would rather them not regulate the airwaves at all. I suppose that's the libertarian in me coming out again. 

Going back the OP, I don't think there is a correlation between the amount of skin shown in society and the degree of sexual sin in the church. Sexual sin has been present from Genesis, long before the advent of p0rnography and suggestive advertising. Perhaps Christians should be more introspective and recognize sinful tendencies in our own hearts rather than pointing the finger at secular society.


----------



## LawrenceU

The governing authorities are to be protectors of those that do good and mete our punishment upon those that do evil.


----------



## tt1106

I think it goes beyond p0rnography. Simply put, the level of indescency on television and the internet speaks volumes. 
Even advertisements have become intolerable causing me to change the channel or mute the sound. It's ownderufl that I am watching a PG show only to have an R rated ad thrown in. And with the lack of consistency in censoring. You can't say the B word but you can say the A word 3 times in a row. 

I use OPen DNS. My router is set up to their DNS, and I can filter any address befvore it gets to my router, so they can't easilly defeat it.


----------



## Tripel

tt1106 said:


> Even advertisements have become intolerable causing me to change the channel or mute the sound.



And that's the best type of censorship.


----------



## Osage Bluestem

Tripel said:


> tt1106 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Even advertisements have become intolerable causing me to change the channel or mute the sound.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And that's the best type of censorship.
Click to expand...


Well, it's getting to the point where we have to never watch tv, read a novel, magazine, or surf the internet. We almost have to travel anywhere looking straight ahead or at our feet to avoid something pornographic.

Physical pollution of the world is illegal and can get one thrown into prison or at least a large fine. Why is spiritual pollution of the world without repercussion and even encouraged? We shouldn't have to live like that. We can't just change the channel and turn a blind eye. The reason filth is absolutely everywhere tells me that we as the church aren't doing our jobs in the world.


----------



## DeoOpt

Mark Driscolls book "**** again Christian" touches on some the issues


----------



## TimV

> I think we have to acknowledge we are living in the days of Sodom in the Old Testament.



Don't polish brass on a sinking ship? ;-)

Hyperbole is all well and good and useful, but even in my blue collar neighborhood here on the Left Coast if I had a male guest over not one single man from my whole town would come over and demand that I give my guest over to be raped by him. I suppose I can (barely) imagine someone high on something doing so, but even if I were incapable of protecting my guest, one of the neighbors would come down with a bat or a gun and when they scraped the guy up everyone would laugh.

Actually if you look at things dispassionately we're in something of an historical high point morally. Even in Sweden and Holland and Scotland such a thing is hardly conceivable, let alone the entire town including law enforcement standing in front of a person's door clamoring for homo gang rape. For that, you're pretty much limited to a few small villages in our allies Afghanistan or Pakistan, and it's been that way there since at least the time of Alexander the Great.

So, I think it may be a bit early to throw in the towel and acquiesce to naked 13 year old girls romping around on prime time.


----------



## Zenas

LawrenceU said:


> Covenant Eyes is good for internet accountability. But, if you have children in the house or struggle with the temptation yourself it is not enough. Use a server based filter like American Family Online provides. You can still have sites visited sent to an accountability partner, but the do a very good job at filtering sites and eliminating spam if you use their email service. If you can't get there you can't see it.



I would recommend this if accountability alone isn't enough. However, I know of few who won't change their ways if they are met with a sobbing wife with good cause.


----------



## carlgobelman

DD2009 said:


> This is one area where I support censorship laws. I would love to see p0rnography banned and decency laws enacted in all public places and domains. ID verification and password protection should be required by law to access it on the internet, and it should never be placed on a billboard or in any public area.



As one who struggled(s) with this particular sin, all I can say is...

-----Added 11/20/2009 at 11:31:02 EST-----



ColdSilverMoon said:


> My point is I don't want the secular government drawing the line between was is obscene and what isn't. I should be the one deciding what my family watches based on biblical principles, not the government based on some arbitrary standard. If they can allow too much obscenity they can outlaw too much of what is good and right - I would rather them not regulate the airwaves at all. I suppose that's the libertarian in me coming out again.



Gov't censorship is a sticky issue I agree, but some things are so over the top that I believe the gov't *must* (I can't believe I'm saying this) do something; if for no other reason than to protect the general welfare (which is part of its mandate).

I forget who it was (I think it was Justice Stewart) who said "I can't define p0rnography, but I know it when I see it." There are some clear examples of indecent and pornographic material that has no place in public venues that cater to mixed audiences. You won't (and probably shouldn't) see a complete ban on p0rnography, but that doesn't mean it should be forced on everyone. We need to reinstitute the concept of the 'red light district;' segregate it instead of mainstreaming it.


----------



## VilnaGaon

ewenlin said:


> I am rather glad for the censorship laws in my land, though it could be better.


I once did landscaping for a new Canadian of Singaporean origin. He was not a Christian and he told me that one of the biggest differences between Canada and Singapore was the great difficulty in getting **** in Singapore. He told me of a former Prime Minister of Singapore who was very Victorian in morality and firmly believed and publicly stated that p0rnography would destroy any civilisation. Looking around here in Toronto, the Sin Capital of Canada, I would agree with that Prime Minister.


----------



## Marrow Man

I have discovered that this extends even beyond visual images and sometimes finds itself in unlikely places. For example, there are two restaurants here in Louisville that feature sexually suggestive slogans on t-shirts worn by their waitstaff. Skyline Chili makes an allusion to multiple partners, and Smokey Bones makes suggestive anatomical comments. I have simply concluded not to dine at those establishments and recommend to others that they do the same.


----------



## LawrenceU

Zenas said:


> LawrenceU said:
> 
> 
> 
> Covenant Eyes is good for internet accountability. But, if you have children in the house or struggle with the temptation yourself it is not enough. Use a server based filter like American Family Online provides. You can still have sites visited sent to an accountability partner, but the do a very good job at filtering sites and eliminating spam if you use their email service. If you can't get there you can't see it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would recommend this if accountability alone isn't enough. However, I know of few who won't change their ways if they are met with a sobbing wife with good cause.
Click to expand...



I'm not that concerned about a man in his stiff necked sin in my comment. My recommendation stems from the chance that children can inadvertently open a bad site while not attempting to do so. That, and preventing anyone, child or adult (especially if the adult faces temptation in this area) to accidentally see p*rn. I can't tell you how many times, as a pastor, I have counseled families whose children who were doing homework on something as innocuous as George Washington's childhood, raising chicks, or just about anything and where directed to really vile stuff by a link search link that looked real. (That hell spawned industry is not passive. The aggressively use the internet and email to lure younger and younger people into their perversions.)


----------



## WAWICRUZ

A.J. said:


> Hamalas said:
> 
> 
> 
> So I'm curious, in y'all's experience, what are some of the best resources/practices available to combat this deadly temptation?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have personally found these (from the _New Horizons_ and _Ordained Servant_ of the OPC) helpful:
> 
> The p0rnography Trap by David Feddes
> 
> Pastor to Pastor: The Peril of p0rnography by William Shishko
> 
> Pure Sex by Larry Wilson
Click to expand...


Thanks for these, A.J.


----------



## Christopher88

I hate **** and the adult industry, and like many men here struggle time to time. As much as cencorship would help allot of folks, guess what that is taking the easy way out. If pastors can't control their eyes they have no right to lead the Church. The elders in the Church should remove him of his position until he has it under control. 
As for Christians within in the body who struggle, we are at war. The best way to fight in a war is to get rid of it your self. If the TV causes you to sin, then take your TV and throw it out the window. If its your computer, considering this is a needed tool in today's' world. Put your computer in a public place, and don't go on it when your alone. 

I do not agree with censorship, just because our morals are more Godly, does not mean we should censor everything that goes against God. Jesus did not do that, He taught and went against the evils of this world. 

The trick is to fight it, if enough of us say no to pron, then others will follow; with that the collapse of adult industry will have to close. 

Fight them. You can't call mommy to put a kid in timeout. Sometimes you got to take that bully and put him in his place. Be men and stand against it. Look at Jesus in Luke 4.


----------



## iahm87

p0rnography destroys lives. Praise God He set me free from it. I'll never go back to it again ever.


----------



## Andrew P.C.

Just for thought...

p0rnography and the adult industry is an effect from the heart of man. Christ said, "For out of the heart come evil thoughts... adulteries, fornications.."[Matthew 15:19]. Man's hatred for God and desire for self-centered pleasures has caused an outpouring of such evil inventions as explicit sites, magazinez, etc. Remember Romans 1: "18For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness...21For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened.... 25For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen...". Then it even gives explicit acts of sexual immorality: " for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 27and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error."

Knowing that man, by their very nature, are "inventors of evil" and "haters of God(Romans 1:30)", why would you ask these very same men(secular government out of all places) to put on a ban for something they praise? Why would you ask worshippers of the immoral to put a ban in the name of the moral good? The government is there to protect the people through the "sword" i.e. physical harm, terrorism, etc... The government is not here to put a moral standard on those who have none. Moral purity is based upon glorifying God. 

For those who want federal censorship on such things... your hearts and minds are in the right place(morally speaking) but your direction is(in my opinion) not. Christ did not come here to set a moral standard but to seek and save the lost from eternal severance from God. 

I hate p0rnography with a passion. I struggle with it, but as one has already mentioned: "we are here to be a light unto the world by proclaiming the Gospel of Christ", not set moral standards to those who hate God[second half of sentence is my thought].


----------



## earl40

I want to organize a group of 50-70yo ladies from our church to have tea at our local strip club every Friday and Saturday night. How long do you think this would be allowed?


----------



## Andres

earl40 said:


> I want to organize a group of 50-70yo ladies from our church to have tea at our local strip club every Friday and Saturday night. How long do you think this would be allowed?



 huh? Am i missing something?


----------



## Pergamum

There are tons of books out there about male uninvovlement in church and the lack of men serving God vocationally.

Do you think any of this is related to the sexual-guilt associated with prn? They feel like - since they have failed in the past or recently - that they might as well not even try to be holy because they are already polluted?

Men feel like staying away from church or other service because they don't want to deal with the shame of their desires?


How to Deal with the Guilt of Sexual Failure for the Glory of Christ and His Global Cause :: Desiring God Christian Resource Library

Missions and Masturbation :: Desiring God Christian Resource Library

 Missions and Masturbation | Denny Burk


----------



## TimV

> For those who want federal censorship on such things... your hearts and minds are in the right place(morally speaking) but your direction is(in my opinion) not. *Christ did not come here to set a moral standard* but to seek and save the lost from eternal severance from God.



He came to, among other things, reinforce a moral standard; even to the point of making it more difficult, as per the subject of this thread.

Mat. 28: 27"You have heard that it was said, 'Do not commit adultery.'[e] 28But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. 29If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. 30And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell.

Christ wanted a Federal ban on buying and selling at the Temple, and He got really nice and direct.

Mat 21:12 And Jesus entered into the temple of God, and cast out all them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of he money-changers, and the seats of them that sold the doves;


----------



## Dao

austinww said:


> You're absolutely right. It's out of control. The only part I disagree with is having password verification to access it - It should be illegal to put it on the internet or publish it at all.



I thought there were talk about adding .xxx to Internet. Someone suggested that all p*orn should rest at .xxx instead of .com and make it illegal to use .com for p*orn site. What happened to that idea?

-----Added 12/13/2009 at 09:23:41 EST-----

The Chinese hermits explains it better. To improve health, spirit and mind, one must contain their sperm. They claim that the spirit rests in the kidney and is in direct link to the genital area. To spill the sperm too frequently will harm the kidneys and create poor health and possible death. "Too much of it would cause one the be blind" might ring true. Hermits and possibly monks contain their sperm for maximum heath. That's why I feel better


----------



## Andrew P.C.

TimV said:


> For those who want federal censorship on such things... your hearts and minds are in the right place(morally speaking) but your direction is(in my opinion) not. *Christ did not come here to set a moral standard* but to seek and save the lost from eternal severance from God.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He came to, among other things, reinforce a moral standard; even to the point of making it more difficult, as per the subject of this thread.
> 
> Mat. 28: 27"You have heard that it was said, 'Do not commit adultery.'[e] 28But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. 29If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. 30And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell.
> 
> Christ wanted a Federal ban on buying and selling at the Temple, and He got really nice and direct.
> 
> Mat 21:12 And Jesus entered into the temple of God, and cast out all them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of he money-changers, and the seats of them that sold the doves;
Click to expand...


So Christ came to tell the reprobate "23Therefore if you are presenting your offering at the altar, and there remember that your brother has something against you, 24leave your offering there before the altar and go; first be reconciled to your brother, and then come and present your offering." You're going to have a hard time trying to say that the reprobate are to give offerings to God. The reprobate aren't worshippers of God.

Where exactly does it say that Christ appealed to the Roman empire to have a ban on buying and selling in the market place?


----------



## Pergamum

Dao said:


> austinww said:
> 
> 
> 
> You're absolutely right. It's out of control. The only part I disagree with is having password verification to access it - It should be illegal to put it on the internet or publish it at all.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I thought there were talk about adding .xxx to Internet. Someone suggested that all p*orn should rest at .xxx instead of .com and make it illegal to use .com for p*orn site. What happened to that idea?
> 
> -----Added 12/13/2009 at 09:23:41 EST-----
> 
> The Chinese hermits explains it better. To improve health, spirit and mind, one must contain their sperm. They claim that the spirit rests in the kidney and is in direct link to the genital area. To spill the sperm too frequently will harm the kidneys and create poor health and possible death. "Too much of it would cause one the be blind" might ring true. Hermits and possibly monks contain their sperm for maximum heath. That's why I feel better
Click to expand...


Ask the doctor: Frequent ejaculation | Harvard Prostate Knowledge

There is no evidence that retaining sperm is healthier. A fulfilling marriage might be the most healthy of all.


----------



## Semper Fidelis

Andrew,

I think the issue is a bit more complicated than this.

I'm a firm believer in the notion that God's authority on this earth exists within different spheres but those spheres are not precisely divisible. The Magistrate is God's instrument for the suppression of evil within fallen human societies while the Church rules within the sphere of the visible people of God. I say it's not precisely divisible because we can't simply stand by at times and allow the destruction of other lives but, at the same time, the real Power that the Church wields is the Preaching of the Word and does not bear the Sword.

p0rnography is wrong not because it is wrong merely for those united to Christ to engage in un-Godly practices but because it is against the Law of God written on men's hearts. Magistrates will one day answer to God for all manner of permitting and promoting evil because they were ordained to be God's ministers of restraining evil on this earth.

p0rnography objectifies and destroys the image of God that men are created in. Men know and understand that this is evil because they bear the image of God whether or not they claim Christ as their Savior. Magistrates do not have the authority to do injury to the image of God in objectifying man created in God's image any more than they have the authority to destroy a human life.

The problem with society as it has degrade morally is that it has continued to recede philosophically. Modernism made man believe that he was the measure of all things and that God could be pushed to the corner of faith while human reason would determine what was true based on the physical phenomena or reasoned from within the will of man.

Philosophy took a predictable route in greater and greater skepticism and, eventually with the Nihilists, determined that the logical end to this philosophy was meaninglessness. Naturalistic existentialism tried to resurrect meaning by placing it within man but post-Modernism has most recently challenged any objective standard on the basis that all meta-narratives (ways to understand reality) are essentially power plays.

If man is the measure, they reason, then why must I agree to history or law or science that is the preference of any given society? In other words, without God, any view of reality proposed by a man or a group of men, has no bearing upon me and is an arbitrary set of norms cooked up by those who have the power to make those norms.

This is where we find the state of Law within our culture. The current norm for laws is stated this way (in so many words): We have grown beyond the point where we can appeal to any transcendent standard for law and the only validity for any law is the prevailing view of any culture.

Consequently, p0rnography is only bound in our laws insofar as our society generally agrees it ought to be bound because man is the measure and there is no appeal to anything outside of human power to set a more. There are no ethics (transcendent values) but only mores (what society is willing to accept).

Thus, as soon as the society degrades to the point where pedophilia and other sick objectifying behavior becomes mainstream, we will see laws relax in that direction.

I guess what I'm saying is that we ought not be too quick to defend the notion that the State has some sort of independent power to determine its laws. The laws that permit moral evil are evil themselves by the only standard that is not completely arbitrary. God's people may not always be in a position to change the laws but neither ought we to assume that we can simply ignore that which is an evil law and assume that the State has no authority or responsibility to enforce moral good. It is a judgment upon our culture that we have the laws and the magistrates that we do and reflects the captivity to Sin that permeates: man will be as God and so the State will wield the sword as if it is God.


----------



## Andrew P.C.

Semper Fidelis said:


> Andrew,
> 
> I think the issue is a bit more complicated than this.
> 
> I'm a firm believer in the notion that God's authority on this earth exists within different spheres but those spheres are not precisely divisible. The Magistrate is God's instrument for the suppression of evil within fallen human societies while the Church rules within the sphere of the visible people of God. I say it's not precisely divisible because we can't simply stand by at times and allow the destruction of other lives but, at the same time, the real Power that the Church wields is the Preaching of the Word and does not bear the Sword.
> 
> p0rnography is wrong not because it is wrong merely for those united to Christ to engage in un-Godly practices but because it is against the Law of God written on men's hearts. Magistrates will one day answer to God for all manner of permitting and promoting evil because they were ordained to be God's ministers of restraining evil on this earth.
> 
> p0rnography objectifies and destroys the image of God that men are created in. Men know and understand that this is evil because they bear the image of God whether or not they claim Christ as their Savior. Magistrates do not have the authority to do injury to the image of God in objectifying man created in God's image any more than they have the authority to destroy a human life.
> 
> The problem with society as it has degrade morally is that it has continued to recede philosophically. Modernism made man believe that he was the measure of all things and that God could be pushed to the corner of faith while human reason would determine what was true based on the physical phenomena or reasoned from within the will of man.
> 
> Philosophy took a predictable route in greater and greater skepticism and, eventually with the Nihilists, determined that the logical end to this philosophy was meaninglessness. Naturalistic existentialism tried to resurrect meaning by placing it within man but post-Modernism has most recently challenged any objective standard on the basis that all meta-narratives (ways to understand reality) are essentially power plays.
> 
> If man is the measure, they reason, then why must I agree to history or law or science that is the preference of any given society? In other words, without God, any view of reality proposed by a man or a group of men, has no bearing upon me and is an arbitrary set of norms cooked up by those who have the power to make those norms.
> 
> This is where we find the state of Law within our culture. The current norm for laws is stated this way (in so many words): We have grown beyond the point where we can appeal to any transcendent standard for law and the only validity for any law is the prevailing view of any culture.
> 
> Consequently, p0rnography is only bound in our laws insofar as our society generally agrees it ought to be bound because man is the measure and there is no appeal to anything outside of human power to set a more. There are no ethics (transcendent values) but only mores (what society is willing to accept).
> 
> Thus, as soon as the society degrades to the point where pedophilia and other sick objectifying behavior becomes mainstream, we will see laws relax in that direction.
> 
> I guess what I'm saying is that we ought not be too quick to defend the notion that the State has some sort of independent power to determine its laws. The laws that permit moral evil are evil themselves by the only standard that is not completely arbitrary. God's people may not always be in a position to change the laws but neither ought we to assume that we can simply ignore that which is an evil law and assume that the State has no authority or responsibility to enforce moral good. It is a judgment upon our culture that we have the laws and the magistrates that we do and reflects the captivity to Sin that permeates: man will be as God and so the State will wield the sword as if it is God.



After reading this post, I've been trying to think about the implications of what you are saying. We are not to lean upon a fallen government for moral fidelity. This is a topic I'm somewhat having a difficulty with. The government is to protect the people from evil, but at the same time the government is not a guide for morality. We as believers can't and are not called to transform a nation but rather we are called to proclaim the Gospel of our beloved Lord. 

This is definently a topic I want continue.


----------



## Semper Fidelis

Andrew P.C. said:


> After reading this post, I've been trying to think about the implications of what you are saying. We are not to lean upon a fallen government for moral fidelity. This is a topic I'm somewhat having a difficulty with. The government is to protect the people from evil, but at the same time the government is not a guide for morality. We as believers can't and are not called to transform a nation but rather we are called to proclaim the Gospel of our beloved Lord.
> 
> This is definently a topic I want continue.



I don't want to give you the impression that the government is a guide for morality. Quite the contrary. As I noted, our own society's laws are increasingly fashioned according to the social morays (what is the general public opinion) as opposed to any transcendent standard. Nietzsche pretty much exposed the arbitrary nature of Truth when one begins with man as the ultimate starting and ending point for inquiry. We're left now with no purpose or transcendence for man but only whatever public sentiment will sustain.

But this is all smoke and mirrors for man because he knows he is created in God's image and most simply cannot stomach the consequences of a philosophy created in man's image. Men will rail against the horrors of the regimes of this world while simultaneously sipping wine and declaring that there is no Truth.

Do a search for the phrase "out of step" in the News section of Google and you'll find that it is a typical term used by people promoting the advancement of humankind. For many, because they don't want to go the route of meaninglessness, they convince themselves that progress (evolutionary) is inevitable. Most modern conceptions of history have a view of history in which it is inexorably progressive. History becomes an idol as either the past (what was) becomes the norm for conservatives or the present evolution of society (what is) becomes normative for the progressives.

In other words, there is no transcendent standard but public sentiment itself becomes normative. This obviously ties into the ethics of modern culture but reflects a philosophy of man that is bound to the here and now such that history cannot learn from itself but can only look at things the way they are to make value judgments.

Thus, the real question for many is to measure public opinion and if a majority of the people find something is acceptable then man has progressed to the point where the norm becomes what is accepted.

I found an article where advertisers were going to gage public opinion about the use of sexually suggestive images involving children to determine where the flow of opinion was on the matter. If it was determined that advertisers were "out of step" with public sentiment then the advertising group might revisit its guidelines for advertisers.

This is a long way of saying that one's view of ethics is related to one's view of history is related to the view of man is related to their view of God. I don't look to the government to determine ethical norms and, even when the killing of people becomes normal because it is publicly acceptable, I cannot accede to those laws.

The point of contact with all men is that they are created in the image of God. The Church is fundamentally to be in the sphere of preaching the Gospel to men who are dead in their sins and trespasses but we also have a role as citizens within the sphere of human government to decry evil and p0rnography is evil.

That is not to say that I encourage my Pastor to stop preaching the Gospel or to endorse candidates or redirect the energy of the Church away from preaching the Word and administering the Sacraments. It is, however, noting that government has no inherent authority to arbitrarily make laws that are simply based upon the tides of public opinion.

In other words, one does not need the Church to take up the Sword of the Magistrate to do its work for it. The Church remains the Church and faithful to its mission but it does mean that I have every right to tell the State that it needs to wield the Sword it has been given by God according to the only transcendent norms they have the right to expect obedience by before God. I'm not looking for "heaven on Earth" from human governments but there are some evils where love of neighbor requires me to step in and say "this is wrong" even as I would be required to obey an order if it was unlawful. Remember that the trials at Nuremberg did not allow German Officers to simply say "I was only following orders."


----------



## Andrew P.C.

Semper Fidelis said:


> In other words, there is no transcendent standard but public sentiment itself becomes normative.



This hits the spot of my earlier posts. Man has no standard but himself. Man is created in the image of God and has the Law written on his heart, but man is by nature evil. Man's morality comes from his own corruption. The government isn't some abstract idea, it's ran by men and women. 

We must lean upon God for protection within our families from moral evil.

All I can say is... living in a post-modern world is hard, but we must be that light in the darkness.


----------



## strangecharm

When there are X-rated YouTube variants all over the internet, and file-sharing networks full of the stuff (some of which IS actually illegal), it is a very difficult thing to regulate now. As one in the middle of this battle, I can tell you that no software is foolproof, and no book can help, save one.

Only when I'm eyeballs-deep in the Words and in regular prayer does the battle even become winnable. 

Know this: This battle is JUST LIKE all other mortification. I'm not sure why we single it out from gluttony, pride, materialism, and the like.


----------



## buggy

DD2009 said:


> This is one area where I support censorship laws. I would love to see p0rnography banned and decency laws enacted in all public places and domains. ID verification and password protection should be required by law to access it on the internet, and it should never be placed on a billboard or in any public area.



Hmm... while certainly no Christian should touch that thing, I question the validity of government policy to outlaw it/and enforce decency laws, or most "moral laws" in general. For it's one thing to say "the land must conform to God's laws", and another to actively execute it.

You see, these divine laws are given to us by a perfect God, and it is impossible for us, fallible Man to enforce it totally. Suppose if you want to ban p*rn, you will only get an underground black market because the heart of the people as a whole has still not changed. And what about corruption from the very people who enforce the law?

I foresee something like that will end up in failure just like Prohibition. 

The best way to fight this sin has always been through the Church and the Gospel of Christ. Why would unbelievers want to hear us out when sexuality in professing (evangelical) Christendom is almost as bad as the world? With divorce (and separation) rates sky-high, big sex scandals time to time (e.g. Ted Haggard), pre-marital sex, and of course the prevalence of surfing p*rn, we are NOT in a position to campaign for the State to enforce what we believe. We should as the Bible said, to "cast the beam" out of our eye first.


----------



## ChristopherPaul

Censorship may be a slippery slope. All sin should be technically censored; it is all heinous in comparison to Holy.

Christians everywhere must attend to the means of grace (Word of God, Sacraments, and Prayer). Focus on fearing God, and keeping his commandments until, as CS Lewis said it, you express the same delight in God which made David dance.


----------



## Dao

Pergamum said:


> (clipped) . . . There is no evidence that retaining sperm is healthier. A fulfilling marriage might be the most healthy of all.


Ancient Chinese medical scientist held that "To conserve health one should practice abstinence. The practice of sex is suggested as follows: once in several days at the age of twenty, once in ten days at thirty, once in twenty-eight days at forty, and once in forty or fifty days at fifty. When one is sixty, his life has come to the final stage: he should stop practice of sex and subject himself to nonaction and the seeking of peace and quietness. Emission is to be abandoned." It is worth our while to learn that the ancients believe the abstinence of sex is very important in conserving health.


----------



## LawrenceU

Dao said:


> Pergamum said:
> 
> 
> 
> (clipped) . . . There is no evidence that retaining sperm is healthier. A fulfilling marriage might be the most healthy of all.
> 
> 
> 
> Ancient Chinese medical scientist held that "To conserve health one should practice abstinence. The practice of sex is suggested as follows: once in several days at the age of twenty, once in ten days at thirty, once in twenty-eight days at forty, and once in forty or fifty days at fifty. When one is sixty, his life has come to the final stage: he should stop practice of sex and subject himself to nonaction and the seeking of peace and quietness. Emission is to be abandoned." It is worth our while to learn that the ancients believe the abstinence of sex is very important in conserving health.
Click to expand...



It is more important to remember what the Scripture says about sexual health and practice. There is ample evidence that shows men enjoying the wives of their youth into what we would consider old age. In addition to that there is also rather firm evidence showing that men who are abstain from regular intercourse in their marriage have a much higher incidence of prostate problems and prostate cancer.


----------



## Pergamum

Dao said:


> Pergamum said:
> 
> 
> 
> (clipped) . . . There is no evidence that retaining sperm is healthier. A fulfilling marriage might be the most healthy of all.
> 
> 
> 
> Ancient Chinese medical scientist held that "To conserve health one should practice abstinence. The practice of sex is suggested as follows: once in several days at the age of twenty, once in ten days at thirty, once in twenty-eight days at forty, and once in forty or fifty days at fifty. When one is sixty, his life has come to the final stage: he should stop practice of sex and subject himself to nonaction and the seeking of peace and quietness. Emission is to be abandoned." It is worth our while to learn that the ancients believe the abstinence of sex is very important in conserving health.
Click to expand...


The ancients were dumb regarding many topics.


----------



## Dao

LawrenceU said:


> . . .It is more important to remember what the Scripture says about sexual health and practice. . . .





Pergamum said:


> . . .The ancient were dumb regarding many topics. . . .



I'd rather have the Scripture to tell me things. Thats why I like hanging around here with great folks.


----------



## Dao

Pergamum said:


> The ancients were dumb regarding many topics.



They may look like Zombies and have no expressions that might make some look dumb. They follow:

" The perfect Tao is without difficulty, save that it avoids picking and choosing. Only when you stop liking and disliking will all be clearly understood. A split hair's difference, and heaven and earth are set apart! If you want to get the plain truth, be not concerned with right and wrong. The conflict between right and wrong is the sickness of the mind."

That makes them walk around with no options or thought about anything.


----------



## strangecharm

Dao said:


> Pergamum said:
> 
> 
> 
> The ancients were dumb regarding many topics.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They may look like Zombies and have no expressions that might make some look dumb. They follow:
> 
> " The perfect Tao is without difficulty, save that it avoids picking and choosing. Only when you stop liking and disliking will all be clearly understood. A split hair's difference, and heaven and earth are set apart! If you want to get the plain truth, be not concerned with right and wrong. The conflict between right and wrong is the sickness of the mind."
> 
> That makes them walk around with no options or thought about anything.
Click to expand...


What is the Tao? (I prefer Dao, as a linguist) It is "the way" is it not?

If I remember rightly, the Dao De Jing begins with something like "Dao called Dao is not Dao." Or "The way that can be discussed is not the eternal way."

So what *is* the way? The Ancients had no concrete answer. Christianity does. That's a fundamental difference in worldview. What do we do tith it?

Oh by the way...


----------



## Dao

strangecharm said:


> (clipped) . . .What is the Tao? (I prefer Dao, as a linguist) It is "the way" is it not?
> 
> If I remember rightly, the Dao De Jing begins with something like "Dao called Dao is not Dao." Or "The way that can be discussed is not the eternal way."
> 
> So what *is* the way? The Ancients had no concrete answer. Christianity does. That's a fundamental difference in worldview. What do we do tith it?
> 
> Oh by the way...



Wow! Stranger. You're good. I believe Dao and Tao is the same thing but I could be wrong. I changed Dao to Tao cause my member name is Dao. I didn't want to confuse my name with the weird horrifying sounding quote, possibly "dumb", I posted. My real name Dow, is pronounced the same way as Dao, so I used that name hoping I wouldn't sound "the way".

Nah, it's not off the topic cause it's a reply to one calling something dumb. I'd rather not anyone reply me here in this topic. I hate to have 50 postings in the topic, p0rnography.


----------



## BJClark

TimV;



> About the only type of p#rn the State gets right is kiddie p#rn. You can get thrown in jail in north America or Europe just by having it on you computer, since even the modern State realises there is a correlation between kiddie rape and kiddie p#rn.



Unless of course you are the new 'safe school czar' who used to be head of GLSEN. 

I won't post a link because the link gives graphic details of items mentioned in the books in which that organization is pushing to get into school libraries..if you remember the book "The Color Purple" where it gives details of a rape of the young girl, but not in positive way..these books are just the opposite, the authors of these books go into detail of their first sexual assaults against them--but instead of speaking out against them, they call such evil's good and seek to promote that.

Though I can in some ways see the positives for reading such things for a Christian that has discernment and who is called to minister to this group of people--where God could use them to show how these acts were vile and evil
(notice both words use the same letters) against them and not something that was natural..

And P0rn is the same, it is evil, and degrades both men and women..

If you want a link I can get it for you..but I won't post it here..


----------

