Featured Magnets for A Mens Mind

There is nothing wrong with what Pastor Martin is saying - it is exposure of his descriptions and demonstrations to a mixed audience. If this had been the pastor and his wife addressing a congregation of women I would say "Amen!'

The problem is that men don't need to be reminded of what they are already battling. Teenagers and younger boys who may never had noticed some of this things don't need to be awakened to the potential - in church - of '10 ways to get your cheap thrills' that some of them may not have thought about yet.

No man is immune from from criticism. It is not an attack on the man to be critical of a message. Saying that, I think the 'self arousal' comments were unnecessary and unjustified.

The things he said are needed - but women need to hear them. That primarily is up to fathers and brothers - but a case could be made for them being said publicly - to women.

 

Again, this makes absolutely no sense. The man was preaching on an issue that the word of God addresses. It was taking place in the context of the church body and rightfully addressed with the church body.

Should young men not read or be preached to from the Song of Solomon too?

If there were abortionists or homosexual offenders in the congregation, not many would care that he preached a sermon against it.

He didn't get vulgar or inappropriate. He gave very G and PG descriptors for what he needed to to the entire congregagtion because the entire congregagtion needed to hear it.

And I say again, the man has been in that pulpit for 40 years. He knows how frank he can be with them without being unGodly.

 

The reality is that yes, they actually do.

2 Timothy 2:22 -- So flee youthful passions and pursue righteousness, faith, love and peace along with those who call on the Lord from a pure heart.

1 Corinthians 6:18 -- Flee from sexual immorality. Every other sin a person commits is outside the body, but the sexually immoral person sins against his own body.

1 Thess. 4:3-5 -- For this is the will of God, your sanctification: that you abstain from sexual immorality; that each of you know how to control his own body in holiness and honor.

Matthew 5:27 -- You have heard that it was said , 'You shall not commit adultery. But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart.'

It looks to me that it was in fact used as a reminder and directed towards men and women. Jesus did it and perhaps this preacher was being like Jesus and this is why he is not liked and is being attacked.

It's interesting how Scripture dismantles ones own personal philosophies. I'll stick with the Book, not 'balance' not 'opinion' but the Word.

 

Just watched it. A couple of observations.

1. This pastor knows his church and I presume the congregation needed to hear this message.

2. He's probably not the right person to deliver this message. He comes off as a dirty old man. His gestures did not help.

3. He probably has a bigger problem with "women's slacks and jeans that hug the buttocks and crotch and show off the butt crack", tight "garments that hug the breasts" and "sleeveless blouses with large armholes, " than most men do.

4. He lumps all men into the same spot of "wondering what's under that last button?" He assumes all men react to women in the exact same manner.

5. He puts way too much of the blame for men's lusting on the woman and not enough on the men. Women need to repent of wearing provocative clothing, he says, but I heard no call for men to repent of their lusting.

I think it's likely that he's got a real problem with this lust issue and he assumes all men are similar.

So what is a church to do? When I was a teen I attended a IFB church with dress standards. Hemlines on women's skirts or dresses no more than 3" above the knee when kneeling (and yes, they would measure). No pants. Is that what we want? Are we to measure the diameter of sleeveless blouse armholes?

 

If a person has a stagnant brook or creek as we call it running through his property and want's to cure it, he does not treat the stream but goes to the fountain head and deals with it. The pastor went to the fountain head or the source of the lust and dealt with it. Sometimes course language and illustrations are a must for hard headed people. I saw a woman wear a G string covered by a see through dress one time at church and during the lunch time after service the pastors wife had the young woman to stand to be recognized by all because it was her birthday. This was a in your face, no shame tactic by people that believe you give no account of your life style but will condemn you to death if you don't believe in their antinomian ways.

 

The source of the lust is in a man's heart. That is where the repairs should be done.

 

Remember this is not a Christian man at a public swimming pool or a gathering where the world will be there dressed in shorts, mini skirts, tight paints, but a worship service that should not have any worldly distractions. In this instant the source was exactly as what the preacher described.

 

Which is also why I have no problem with the pastor doing and saying what he did or how he did. Kudos to the pastor.:thumbs:

 

Given he's a "hero" of yours, of course you mind never entertained such a thought. And anyone who has had any kind of experience reading body language can make the same "claim" -- because it is rooted in truth. It isn't a gift. It's simple observation even you could manage to absorb, should you have any desire to do so.

No, indeed, simple observation does not require a "predisposed bias" in order to "activate." It works whether you try to make it work or not.

You and Icon have no interest in doing so, but as EW&F has suggested, you might want to look into Martin's "retirement." I didn't, not until after I watched the video and made my previous comments. As a result, I am more convinced than ever that my "analysis" if that's what you want to call it is correct. It isn't an analysis, it is simply reading the entire communication offered, not just the words spoken. Even the unobservant do it. You and Icon do it. You just don't want to with this video.

 

And I say again, a predisposed bias that was brought into the thread by someone with "other" information that has, whether intended or not, influenced folks to think certain things about the pastor's motives.

I saw nothing vulgar or out of place with his gestures or anything else. Kudos to the pastor!!!

 

I didn't need to know the details of his "retirement" before knowing there was something wrong with the message. Anyone completely honest with themselves will come away from that video at least thinking his illustrations were out of proportion to the content of the message, if not unnecessary or inappropriate to the message.

You don't want to see anything out of place. I've never called them vulgar. I have questioned the motive behind the gestures, but have made clear it would be speculation on my part to define exactly what they mean.

And that establishes exactly why you see nothing "out of place" -- so be it.

 

I'm completely honest with myself and I saw absolutely nothing wrong with his illustrations. I believe that he did a wonderful job with a topic that many pastors won't address for fear of having people do exactly what yall are now doing.

My ability to listen and see is much better than the majority. And I see that this man is needlessly being maligned for preaching God's word. It's not a good look.

Again, this is silly. He wasn't playing with himself or simulating sexual acts from the pulpit. Leave that man's gestures alone. People just have to find a reason to complain. He did what needed to be done. And I continue to applaud the man of God.

 

I believe that's possibly part of why he preached what he did. too many men have just let it go and so the pastor ends up doing what should have been addressed by fathers and families first but apparently had not been. BRAVO Pastor wherever you are.:applause:

 

I'm sorry, but no one, including myself or the most self-aware individual in the history of the word -- short of Jesus Himself -- can say that with 100% certainty.

You believe there is a need for the message, you will support whatever method by which the message is delivered. I do not believe the pulpit is an appropriate place for this message to be delivered as the sole subject matter of an entire sermon. I'm willing to admit that may color my opinion of the message content, but I assure you it does not color the view I have of the non-verbal part of the message. Now, this is becoming first-grade quality discussion, as do most discussions around here:

"Did not."
"Did too."
"Did not."
"Did, too, and I'm telling MOM!"

Done here.

 

That's a silly statement to make. Why would there be a dearth of people who are honest with themselves? You might be dishonest with other folks, but I've never had a problem being honest with ME. :laugh:

That's your opinion. The message is to be delivered the way that God says to deliver it, in love. He did that.

Your belief and feelings on what should come out of the pulpit are irrelevant. The subject on which he preached is part of God's word so the pulpit is the place for it. He did so in a loving, Christ honoring fashion. Scripture is to be used to correct. HE correctly used it to attempt to correct wrong behavior.

 

That's a bit harsh, isn't it? This is a discussion forum, after all.

I'm not so convinced. He used language that I thought was inappropriate for a mixed age/gender audience. He said NOTHING about how men might dress to cause lusting in women. He placed the blame on women's attire and not on men's hearts. He even said, "women who walk around with their hair piled up on their head", as if that's seductive? C'mon!

I agree that this message needs to be heard in many churches. I disagree with his technique.

 

No and please don't take it that way. I said it that way because people do tend to think that what the pastor preaches upon should be based upon everything but what it should. He is called of God to preach the word and to use it to teach, correct, rebuke and train in righteousness. If he's preaching out of God's word, then the subject matter is appropriate and is not subject to feelings or belief about the appropriate venue.

It's church. It's God's word and disobedience to that word of which he was speaking. The venue is appropriate. So feelings very much so are irrelevant as he is called of God to preach the word. ALL of it and not just the parts that make folks comfortable.

He's a pastor preaching from the overflow of what God has given him and using that to speak into a situation of his congregation. His congreagtion is made up of all sorts of ages and genders so it's an appropriate audience.

I'm pretty sure that he didn't discount the men's hearts in this. That's a sermon for another day. At issue during this sermon was the fact that the women are not dressing modestly.

I don't see anything wrong with his technique.