What today would be classified as the 'unfruitful works of darkness'?
What could be so shameful today to even mention publicly?
The Monica Lewinsky/Barbara Walters interview made me feel like taking a bath. Here was a woman who saw no shame in what she had done with a married man, saw no shame in aborting a child (although this will probably bring the feminists to her defense), the by-product of yet another sexual fling.
Peggy Noonan, former Reagan speech-writer, and author wrote "Be careful what you applaud, for what you applaud, you encourage".
Monica Lewinsky is set to make millions, shamelessly. And society, at least segments of it, will applaud. Monica should be displayed to all young women as the anithesis of a role model.
If ever there was a woman today who might be the modern day woman at the well, thirsty for the wrong kind of water, Monica Lewinsky would fit the bill.
Pray that soon, really soon, she finds Christ, and He gives her that sense of self-worth that she longs for and seems to be looking for in all the wrong places...
Rick in Va
To Rick in VA - It might come as a surprise to you to learn that there are feminists who don't condone abortion! I might gently suggest, my brother in Christ, that you think before you type, and not hang labels off people unless you know for absolute certain that "all feminists approve of abortion" or any other such sweeping generality!
Now that I have that off my chest - what constitutes the unspeakable today are often the very things which terrify us the most: prejudice, abuse, violence, oppression - and the personal demons which torment us all - demons with names like lack of self worth or the fear oÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ
I'm hoping that the poster who apparently had a problem would finish his/her post, I'd like to hear the rest of it.
As far as my sweeping generalizations when it comes to feminists, is it really that sweeping?
The feminist movement, as represented by NOW and other leading feminists, has little today to do with equal rights for equal pay, or glass ceilings, or even sexual harrasment in the workplace (unless the offender is conservative, then it's katie-bar-the-door), it has much more to do with being pro-abortion, and for granting special rights to gay and lesbians.
As for the use of sweeping generalizations... before your post ended with cyber-gobbledygook, could one possibly accuse you of sweeping generalizations about what terrifies 'us' the most, or the idea that personal demons torment 'us all'.
That seems pretty sweeping to me...
But then again I'm a conservative, and I can't think before I post...
Rick in Va
All feminists are represented by NOW the same way that all conservatives are represented by David Duke. We are all entitled to have a point of view without being clumped in with extremists. Relax folks. I came to think about the texts, not witness battle. Back to your corners. SS in PA
Let the people say Amen!
It is nice to see someone referring to the NOW organization from the perspective of extremism... that's refreshing.
Now if only David Duke would be addressed by folks much like the Honorable Robert Byrd is, the Democratic (liberal) Senator from West Virginia, highly esteemed by the media and especially West Virginians, since they were both members of the Klu Klux Klan years ago. But apparently it's only fashionable to mention the past histories of public figures when it suits a particular agenda, can anyone guess which one?
Gosh, I love tolerance...
Rick in Va
I enjoy seeing both David Duke and NOW identified for what they are, people teaching things which come from the darkness. I think it's very much to the point of this scripture to recognize that we conservatives need to speak plainly against the darkness of David Duke types and that liberals need to speak plainly against the darkness of NOW types. We could all go to our corners much easier if we could all agree on this simple issue.
Christ brought the light, but sinners love the darkness for it hides their shameful deeds.
God bless you, sandy@minister.com
Clarification... and then I promise to take any more comments to the discussion site.
I do not endorse or defend David Duke and it would appear that my last post could imply that. The point I wanted to make and may have failed is that I find it interesting that Byrd is never identified in the media as an ex-KKK member, yet David Duke is. Duke, like Byrd, has repudiated his racist past but it seems that Byrd has been able to shake the label while Duke has not.
Hope that helps...
Rick in Va
Sure is dark in here. Anne in Providence
Is anyone preaching on Eph 5 this week? Pam;tpa
Is it dark to expose the unfruitful works of darkness?
Is it dark to expose these works to light?
This is what I believe I'm doing with my previous posts, however error-prone those attempts might be.
Does anyone else see the fault in dismissing David Duke for his racist past and not doing the same to Robert Byrd?
I don't know David Duke, neither do I know Robert Byrd, but I refuse to dismiss one because he espouses conservative views while respecting the other because he espouses liberal ones.
Either we dismiss them both for their pasts or we judge them both based on the fruit they are bearing today. Consistency in our judgments, our fruit-picking, is a must.
Is David Duke, if Christ has shined on him, capable of repentance? Or does he have to become a liberal like Robert Byrd before others judge him to be worthy?
If David Duke's fruit today, and this requires judgment by those around him, is still as stinky as it was years ago when he wore a white hood, then it is our duty to expose him. And then pray for him.
The same standard ought to apply to Robert Byrd. Does it?
I simply want to know why Mr. Duke is seen as a villain while Robert Byrd is seen as a saint.
This I believe has much to do with the text, where everything exposed to the light becomes visible, including the hypocrisy of those who judge under the guise of any standard not revealed by the light of Christ.
Rick in Va
What is it with the liberals on this page? Let anyone veer away from their preceived notions of right and wrong and they go all weird.
Mike in Ohio
There is a contrast between the darkness and the light. And the last verse lets us know that it is Christ who brings the light in which the believers dwell. And if we are in the light we want to do what is good and right and true. And we want to please God; we want to glorify God. In my tradition (Presbyterian), the catechist question is "What is the chief end of man?" Answer: To Glorify God and enjoy him forever. When we are in God, truly, we want to please God and it feels good to do the right thing not because people praise us, but because that is our honest response to Christ's wonderful sacrifice to us - his death for our life. What beautiful words these are "Sleeper, awake! Rise from the dead, and Christ will shine on you." That is talking about sin, most certainly, but I have done two funerals in the last five days so it is about victory over the physical death too. Oh, Thank you, Lord!! Jennifer in Mississippi
Preach it Jennifer...
Pastor Eddie Grigsby of Pikeville, KY (credit where it is due) used a wonderful illustration in a sermon at Presbytery this week. Grandfather asked grand daughters what they wanted for Christmas. They told him they wanted the world. After some discussion he understood they wanted a globe. Being a typical grandfather he went right out and bought one. Wrapped it in tissue paper and under the tree it went. Of course, it is pretty easy to guess what is in this tissue paper so all during the wait the girls would gather under the tree and discuss their wrapped gift. On Christmas morning they tore open the paper and they were clearly disappointed. He asked why and they told him they wanted one that glowed. Knowing they meant a lighted globe, and being the good grandfather, he set out the next day to find a lighted globe. Store after store and no globe. Finally he found one and brought it to the girls. When asked by his daughter what he had learned from his experience he said, "well a globe with a light is a lot more expensive". Indeed it is. There is often a cost to being the light Christ would have us be. gm in KY.
One of the most powerful sermons in John Wesley's 44 is the one Charles preached on "Awake Thou That Sleepest"! In a pregnant utterance he states concerning the "sleeper"..."and yea tho hell is moved from beneath to meet thee...and yea tho the flames of hell burn thee, thou knowest it not". What a remarkable and futuristic revelation that we may now experience the present tense of the verb "burn" and yet the ingredient of hell is that we are insensitive and/or unconscious of our condition to the degree that we do not know or feel the pain. The present tense experience of being burned by the flames of hell and Knowing it not certainly suggest the destructive aspects of the "unconscious" even more so than Freud. It is not unlike Kierkegaard's perception of "despair" as that condition of using the crteative relational capacity to choose to "disrelate" such that we commit ourselves to an unconscious dying that does not as in real reath bring us to an end but rather the Death State of Being/Becoming is unending and goes meaninglessly on and on...as if we are "paralyzed force"..frozen in the unending ending...frozen in a dying that is endless...a "Sickness Unto Death". Oh! what wonder and mystery there is in the resurrection from the dead...the new birth in Christ where death no longer has dominion over us! I suggest from the framework of Dodd, Bultmann, and others, that "realized eschatology" has as much relevance for understanding hell as it does heaven when these constructs interprete the existential/existentiell state of our daily lives in its movemant from past to future in our process/journey of Being/Becoming....PaideiaSCO in LA swampland.. [in appreciation for the faith vision of Charles Wesley to deal with "hell" in a more sensible manner than almost anyone I have read. No wonder he gave birth to the beautiful words/hymn..."I want a principle within of watchful Godly fear, a sensibility to sin, a pain to feel it near".]
I preached on Ephesians 5:8-14 last Sunday. I've contributed it to the "sermon section."
I'd be interested to hear your comments especially since preaching is to be, first and foremost, Christocentric, right? Then, secondly, the work of a proclaimed Christ impacts our daily life.
dubby in Topeka
Dubby,
It was excellent... one small critique... for readability over on the Sermon Review, please use more paragraphs. Makes reading it a little easier.
I loved it however, great job!
Rick in Va