From: noel@crs.cl.msu.edu (Noel Estabrook)
Newsgroups: rec.music.christian
Subject: Re: *Burning*Albums* (Anti-Secularism)
Date: 29 Jul 92 22:35:26 GMT
Reply-To: noel@crs.cl.msu.edu.UUCP (Noel Estabrook)
Organization: Michigan State University

In article <1992Jul29.021927.11962@ucsu.Colorado.EDU> hill@spot.Colorado.EDU (Michael Hill) writes:
>Oh my!  Quick, gather up the children and herd them into the back room,
>plug their ears, and pray that they haven't been corrupted!  A Christian
>acknowledging that we, along with the rest of humanity, are sexual
>beings, and admitting that our sexual nature might be a gift from God?
>Blasphemy!  Sacrilege!  Burn that witch at the stake!  (Just as soon as
>the Inquisition's finished with her, that is.  They got first dibs.)
>
First of all, such sarcasm is very unbecoming.  My post wasn't in such terms
and I don't expect responses to be such either.  Next time, please think
before flaming something intended in sincerity.  If you had you would realize
that the above is NOT what I said.  I do NOT believe she is a witch that 
should undergo inquisition or be burned at the stake.  Also, her statement
was not in the context of admitting that "we are sexual beings" (the Bible
admits as much).  The reason I only quoted that line is because it was the
only one I remembered verbatim and I hate to misquote.

However, the line I quoted was from a quote in which she had been questioned
about the fact that she kissed a man who was not her husband in a sexually
suggestive manner in a recent video of hers and how that was reconciled to
her faith.  Her basic response was that there is nothing wrong with a 
Christian being "sexy".  She was NOT referring to some theological concept
regarding sexual nature, she was referring to what all of us mean when we
say sexy.  If we say someone looks sexy, we never mean, "my, that person is
someone with a sexual nature".  We are saying that that person is dressed
or adorned in such a way as to attract lustful attention from one of the 
opposite sex.

Our sexual nature is a gift from God, and should be enjoyed in private (let
not the marriage bed be undefiled), not flaunted in public.  I apologize
for only quoting a portion.  However, it was NOT quoted out of context.  It
was clear by what she said that she believes it's okay for a Christian to
be SEXY, not a "sexual being"..

>So Amy (or anybody else, for that matter) says it's okay for Christians to 
>"be sexy", and all of a sudden you're able go gauge her commitment or
>the evidence thereof by one statement?!  Come on, Noel, if there's a
>larger portion of the statement to which you disagree, you would have
>done well to quote it in its entirety, not just a sound bite.  If it's
>not the greater context in which you found something objectionable, then
>I feel justified in exploring the meaning of this small snippet.

I'm not judging, just going by the words of her mouth (Scripture says our
mouth speaks of the overflow of our hearts).  If she says it's okay to
dress in a manner which arouses sexual interest (sexy, Webster's), then
that tells me how she views the command of Scripture, nothing more.

Again, I apologize for my inability to quote the entire passage.  I am
not a regular reader of People, and I only read the article to see what
she had to say.  I did not keep it.  If someone has a copy of the article
and would like to post the whole quote, please do.  I believe my use of
it will be exonerated as correct.

>"Be sexy" I interpret as meaning admitting that our sexual nature colors
>to a large extent the way we interact with everything in our experience,
>and that we don't have to deny this fact (like Adam and Eve hiding their
>nakedness in the garden) out of shame.  I see it as meaning that we
>can acknowledge our sexuality as a good gift from God (alliteration!)
>for which we should thank Him.

If you will note, it was GOD who made the loincloths for them to cover
their nakedness.  Our sexuality IS a gift of God, but it is to be 
enjoyed and demonstrated in the privacy of a monogamous marriage room, 
not in public.  Our life is to emphasize our INNER selves, not our
external.  You may interpret sexy any way you wish - however, tell me
the truth, when someone says "she looks sexy", what is meant 99% of the
time?
>
Again, I don't mind honest, sincere disagreement.  I DO mind sarcastic,
inflammatory statements that amount to nothing more than Ad Hominem
attacks.  Such words have no place among believers.



--
Noel Estabrook		|	If you were indicted in court for being a
noel@crs.cl.msu.edu   __|__	Christian, would there be enough evidence
Educational Technology  |	to convict you?
Michigan State Univ.    |				Romans 12:2
Newsgroups: rec.music.christian