Self-extrication from porn--NOT

When I woke this morning and checked Facebook, I saw an earnest prayer from a pastor affirming that only Jesus can deliver our culture from the effects of porn.  It irritated me.  Then I saw a post where the British PM is working to prevent Internet Providers from streaming porn into everyone's house.  It gave me hope.  Then, I saw a post about striving against lust--that Jesus tells us to strive against lust or we will love our salvation.  I got pissed again.

Porn is the natural (sinful but natural) outgrowth of a God-given desire.  Does anyone ever acknowledge this?  But for God having instilled a remarkably strong attraction in men for women, the human race would have become extinct before it ever got started.  The human race would have been a mere blip in time but for the God-given instinct to procreate.  Yet, instead of recognizing this instinct as God-given, we cover it up.  We call it lust, and we try to shame people out of lust.

How is this working for you?  Are you ashamed enough yet to not watch porn?  No, probably not.  Shame never delivers us from a problem, but instead drives us deeper into that problem.  Shame is the impact of the teaching of the Law without the commensurate teaching of Grace.  Luther said (paraphrasing) that the Law (while being the most salutary doctrine of God) cannot lead us to righteousness but instead leads us into unrighteousness.  So, pointing out that porn is a problem (and it is a huge one) is not going to deliver anyone.  In fact, it only drives the problem further underground in men's lives.

Is there a way to obtain deliverance from porn?   How did Jesus deal with people with sexual sin?  Did Jesus shame the prostitute?  Jesus had every opportunity to.  Jesus could have even allowed her to die--the Pharisees were getting ready to stone her.  Instead, Jesus saved her from stoning:  "Let him who is without sin cast the first stone."  When Jesus wrote in the sand, it was like God writing on the wall in the Book of Daniel.  God was pronouncing judgment, but not on the prostitute, rather on the self-righteous.

The prostitute knew that her way of life was wrong.  Men know that porn is wrong.  The Law and shame will never lead one to deliverance.  But, if we turn from ourselves, we find some help in overcoming porn.  Plus, it is helpful to find the grace in sexual desire, rather than condemning ourselves for it.  This is something of a Law/Grace analysis.

Porn is not only harmful to men individually, it is harmful to our culture in general, and it is most harmful to those engaged in making the porn.  Some years ago, I saw an interview in USA today with a young porn star.  She grew up in a strict, religious home and left for the bright lights (and supposed freedom) of Hollywood.  There, she made it into movies, but the wrong kind.  Her life was the most bleak that I have ever heard described.  She had a boyfriend who was a porn actor.  He had recently broken up with her, and she wanted him to take her back.  She wanted him to take her back even though it would mean living with him and his three other girlfriends.  Plus, she described that the more dangerous the sex act, the more money she was paid.  So, the movie producers paid one thing for protected sex, but then paid more if she was willing to risk contracting a disease!!! This is heartbreaking--it is the ultimate fulfillment of the devolution of our culture.

Looking at the impact of porn on others can help give us the courage to set it aside.  Additionally, speaking a word of grace about sexual desire can be liberating.  Pastor Tullian tells the story of a parishoner who had struggled with porn for years.  So long as he tried to shame himself into turning from porn ("God is watching you while you download porn"so you better stop--as one idiotic preacher said), he had no freedom.  It only made matters worse.  Yet, when he began to realize that God loved him even as he watched porn, he began to get some freedom from it.

If the Bible is correct, we are never completely freed from sin.  This is also liberating, because if we think we will obtain complete victory over sin, we simply return to shame when we fail.

So, here are some truths that may be helpful in coming to grips with porn:

1)God gave a very strong procreative desire to men to keep the human race going;

2)this God-given desire for sex is not something to be ashamed of, but to be thankful for;

3)we will never find freedom from porn by shaming ourselves, but it is helpful to consider the impact that it is having on our families, our culture, and those persons who participate in the making of porn;

4)God isn't shaking his head in disgust at the people who look at porn or the people who engage in the making of porn;

5)God isn't readying to loose His lightning bolts upon you for watching porn;

6)instead, God is loving you right where you are--if you don't learn this from the NT teachings about Jesus, then your reading of the Scriptures has become too churchy.  (I know churchy isn't a word, but it should be);  and, finally,

7)as with all sin, don't expect or plan upon complete liberation.  Instead, realize that, when you return to porn, God will once again give you the freedom to turn from it.

My third marriage--God's plan for marriage

I heard a preacher espouse the benefits of second and third marriages. He said that he has a rabble-rouser in his Bible study who said that everyone needed to be married a second time. The pastor ruminated on this idea, and he realized that we are all married multiple times--that is if we stay with the same spouse. If we stay with the same spouse, our marriages must change fundamentally in order to stay alive. Conversely, often (but not always) when we change spouses, we deprive ourselves and/or spouses of having a really good marriage. Pretty radical idea, but Debbie and I decided that it was true.

Debbie and I have decided that we are on our third marriage. Our first marriage began in 1987. As God points out in Genesis, we are extremely self-focused beings, and men focus their ultimate energy on their jobs and women focus their ultimate energy on their children. We did not like this about each other. We tried to change each other for the first 12 to 13 years of our marriage. Debbie had reached the point that she believed that divorce was her only out. She told me this then. Thankfully, we were both in truly Christian Bible studies, and we immediately prayed together. Things then began to change. We stopped trying to change one another--but it was solely by the grace of God. 

So, our second marriage began around 2000-2001. It lasted for about 10 years. It was fine. I didn't think it could get any better. Debbie and I treated each other lovingly and with grace, but probably we did it more because we were so thankful to still be together than out of appreciation for who the other person was. Then, about three years ago, Debbie said, out of the blue (at least to me): "Let's go see Gil." Gil is a wonderful counsellor who truly understands the human condition and God's grace. My obtuse response: "We have a wonderful marriage, why would we go and see Gil? You can go if you want to." So, she did.

Our third marriage arose out of Gil's counseling. By seeing Gil, Debbie was able to love some difficult people in her life in a radical new way. Seeing this, I was eager to go to see Gil with Debbie. One day leaving Gil's, Debbie said: "Gil says that we are to treat each other with grace." Being a person that is euphemistically called "Mr. Grace" at church (positively by some and negatively by others), I couldn't believe that she was just now hearing this idea of grace. But often we can't hear things from our spouse. For years, I couldn't hear Debbie's counsel about how destructive my anger was. I learned it from my children. So, sometimes it takes a third person.

Gill taught me how to listen. I began to listen to every word that Debbie spoke. We are so different, and rather than being a curse (which it was in the early years of our marriage), it is a blessing. Debbie is strong where I am weak, and vice a versa. She has wisdom where I don't and vice a versa. Our third marriage is a partnership, or really a tri-party relationship involving the Holy Spirit. Had Debbie not courageously hung in there but instead had acted on her desire for a divorce, we wouldn't be on our third marriage. I will be eternally thankful to her for this.

One last thing. As we were discussing this topic, Debbie told me that, years ago, when she was contemplating divorce, she thought: Well even if I can't do it in this life, at least God will let me divorce Ellis in heaven. Well, I couldn't stop laughing and crying. It's humorous, but also deeply sad. That was the state of our first marriage. As PZ says, change is not done incrementally, but it requires death and resurrection. 

Thanks be to God for PZ, Kathy Girardeau, Gil Kracke, and so many others who have ceaselessly proclaimed the pure unadulterated Gospel of grace into our lives. Debbie and I, our children, and so many others have been the beneficiaries of those who courageously espouse grace with no "buts," no "ands," and no conditions.

Is God for us or against us?--Part 2

George Herbert: "Ah my dear angry Lord since they dost love, but strike; cast down, yet help afford;"

Auden says that poetry is the "clear expression of mixed feelings."

Chris Wiman: "This is why poetry of some sort is essential to any unified religious life, and why the bastardizations of the Bible which erase poetry for the sake of clarity are so wrongheaded and dreary."

In order to apprehend whether God is for us or against us, we have to access our emotions and deal with them. PZ says that we must all have a religious psychologist with whom we regularly discourse. Our emotions are a mixed bag--is God for us or against us?

Yesterday, praise be to God, Debbie and I were each other's religious psychologists. I'm sharing this in hopes that others can receive the same blessing from their spouse, significant other, best friend, etc. It went something like this:

Debbie: Are you grieving over something? Are we okay?

Ellis: We are great. Do you perceive that there is something wrong?

Debbie: You seem detached. You were short with me when you got home.

Ellis (we had earlier been talking about church and whether to join): I don't feel like I belong. I felt like I belonged at First Baptist but the church leadership committed hairi kairi. I never felt like I fit in at our last church, nor do I at the current church. I love to teach, but I haven't taught in some years. I really miss it.

Debbie: You do have a gift for teaching. Maybe God has something else for you.

Ellis: For me, teaching is a mixed bag. I love to express the wonders of Christ, but I also like people's respect. The first is healthy, the second not so much.

Debbie: You are respected in your home.

Ellis (I am emotional as I write this): i never thought that I would have this amount of respect in my home. Had God not taken away the teaching and respect at church, I would have continued seeking it there when God wanted to give it to me where it matter most--with my wife and children.

So, Debbie's a wonderful religious psychologist. When we access our emotions, we can come to grips with our pain, which then reveals God's love.

Is God for us or against us?--Part 1

Bombarded by the same idea from different sources--confluence. This morning, the confluence of sources (a book, a sermon, a dear suffering friend, and milk for the cat) deals with whether God is for us or against us--the emotional challenge of this most important of all questions.

Last nite, I was getting into bed and Debbie had put a plate of cat food in the pathway to the bed. This morning, in the kitchen, although I had put a saucer with milk for Sunny in a safe place last nite when feeding Sunny, Debbie did not put milk in that saucer, but put out a new saucer only two feet away which was directly in my path. I know this sounds inane, but she has done it for years. She knows how it irritates me--I clumsily wind up kicking cat food and/or spilling milk, then having to clean it up. I couldn't help but think--she must be against me. She knows this irritates me, but yet put out a new saucer rather than using the one only two feet away. Or, if she's not consciously against me, she must subconsciously be "getting back at me" for being a difficult husband for all of those years. If such small things make me question my wife's love for me, then how much more must people question God (or even His existence) when they are struck by cancer, divorce, etc.

I have two dear friends in deep pain--one dealing with cancer, the other dealing with divorce. The first friend (understandably) wonders why God has beset her with a life that has been fraught with so many difficulties. The second friend is berating himself--thinking that the divorce has resulted from his not following God closely enough. I so feel for both of my friends. I try to speak words of truth and grace, but God, through Tullian, does a much better job.

Tullian is preaching on Job, and he describes God's answer to both of these questions. First, suffering is part of this broken world--we may never know why particular things happen. However, God is sovereign--He feeds the sparrows, He created a universe of infinite proportions made up of sub-atomic particles, He has kept the world from nuclear annihilation on several occasions (at least twice--once under Kennedy and once under Reagan), and He dialogues with His creatures. Yet, He doesn't give Job an explanation for the suffering. You see, when we seek explanations, we want to fix things so that the suffering won't come again. Instead, God points us to Himself, and He does this most significantly on the Cross. God is with us in the suffering of this world, but we are assured that, at the end of the day, He will set all things right.

Second, we certainly can bring pain and suffering into our lives through bad choices, but this doesn't answer the questions of suicide, murder, cancer, etc. When we focus too much on how we may have strayed from God's desires for our lives, we have no hope (a false hope in ourselves). We may believe that we can change, and we try, but ultimately we fail. However, we have one chance--AA gets this. We have to recognize our inability to change and cast ourselves upon the mercy of God. God's mercy is the only change agent. It is the only response to suffering. It is our only chance for "getting out of this life alive."

P.S. After reading this post, Debbie assures me that she's not out to get me. Well, I've got almost 26 years invested in her, so I'm not going to let cat food get in the way.

1

Church and Community while important are—ultimately—unavailing

As usual,, listening to a PZ podcast leads to mediation and reflection.  In PZ’s most recent, he talks about William Inge’s novel, Good Luck Miss Wyckoff.  Miss Wyckoff is a spinsterly woman who has no one in her life--no one.  Given her desperate need, she winds up in an abusive relationship and then becomes a social pariah. At the end of the book, she still has no one, and the prospects of having someone are virtually non-existent given her infamous notoriety.  Yet, PZ finds this hopeful.  PZ says that religion has been unavailing for her—that community has been unavailing for her.  Yet, PZ finds hope in this.  Is PZ right or wrong?

Once, in a sermon, PZ said that we are islands when we die, directly contradicting that famous poem.  Yet, Miss Wyckoff will not only be an island when she dies, she is an island now.  Zahl says that this leaves her open to the possibility of Oneness.  What is he talking about?

As Jesus said, and Stephen King demonstrated in his wonderful novel: “There is only one needful thing.”  There is only one thing that will satisfy the deepest longing of our hearts for relationship.  With that one thing, we can face life.  Without that one thing, no matter how good our church is or how loyal our friends are, we are to be pitied.  Without that one thing, we are hopeless.  Without that one thing, our lives are ultimately meaningless.

That one thing is the Friend of Sinners.  That one thing is the god/man who came to set the world right, is doing so now, and ultimately will in all respects.

With that one thing in our corner, we have our expectations for our lives satisfied.  We have our expectations for our relationships satisfied.  We can then turn to our lives and to our relationships in a non-needful fashion.  Once our needs are met in The One, we can live our lives with peace, joy, and happiness.  Once our needs are met in The One, we can love others in an availing fashion.

Recently, I offended a pastor when I wrote that some, if not many, churches point people towards the wrong god.  They point people towards a god who places us under the burden of having to earn His pleasure.  They are even underhanded (although usually not intentionally) about it—“you are saved by grace, but if you are saved, this is what you will be doing.” This has the exact same psychological impact as telling people that they have to earn their salvation.  The result is that we then place those around us under these same burdens.  This leads to broken marriages, broken families, and suicide—yes suicide.  Accordingly, I suggested that attending those churches could have negative consequences for one’s life.

The truth is that no church, even good ones, can give us what we need in Christ.  Church is important, but our relationships at church, (home, work, or the neighborhood) while important, are ultimately unavailing.  There is only One relationship that is ultimately availing.  There is only One relationship which frees us from the bondage of “doing.”  Once freed from this bondage, we are free, not required, to love others.  This generates acts of beneficence, kindness, and grace—acts not based upon the “ought to do” but upon the “want to do.”

At the end of the novel, Miss Wyckoff is poised to find this—she is poised to find this relatively early in her life, long before she faces death.  So, Miss Wyckoff has the possibility of living a life with The One, a far greater chance than most of us.