Orginally published on Sunday, November 23, 2008 at 10:12 PM
by Todd Rhoades
Ed Young, Jr. has gotten a lot of press coverage and feedback over this "Seven Days of Sex" message that he brought at Fellowship Church Dallas recently. Some of the feedback has been good; other feedback, not so generous.
Here's an interview Ed did with Julie Chen at CBS. Somehow they qualified this story as a 'Healthwatch' story:
Ingrid, over at Slice of Laodicea, said that watching Ed Young, Jr. 'lounging on a bed' caused her 'gag reflex' to kick in.
See here. When Ed claims that he is simply talking about a topic the church has been silent on, Ingrid remarks: “Really, Ed? You mean no pastors have ever preached on Thou Shalt Not Commit Adultery? Do you really believe that no Christian pastor has ever provided the whole counsel of God on the need for purity and respect for sexuality because God commands it in His Word? You’re the only one who has broken this terrible taboo in 2000 years?” In her opinion, Young made a ‘fool out of himself’ by ‘erecting billboards with naked feet sticking out of the sheets, passing out cards with tips to jazz up your sex life, dragging beds onto the “stage” and lounging around in the most embarrassing manner imaginable.’
I don’t imagine she liked his analogy that ‘Sex is like superglue’ either.
Not to be outdone, a woman has just finished a book about the benefits of offering herself to her husband sexually for not seven days, but a whole year! (That’s right, folks, 365 days!) You can read more about this book here.
Not to be outdone… I had to add two more light-hearted posts to the internet world about the series:
Doug Heffernin evidently attended Fellowship Dallas yesterday and put the sermon into practice…
and
Ed Young Announces New Message Series to Follow “Seven Days of Sex”
The Dallas CBS affiliate did a follow-up story yesterday about how couples felt after the experience:
For the Waddell’s the challenge meant more than connecting physically, it meant connecting emotionally as well. The couple says they have already hit some hard times in their seven months of marriage. Cody says it mean they had to “really focus on the other person’s needs other than you own. That’s what we’re called to do in marriage. It was a great opportunity to do that.” Amy adds that they may keep going. “We don’t want to stop at the seven days. We’ve seen what it’s done for us with the intimacy; we’ll continue to do that”
You can watch their follow up report here...
This post has been viewed 2172 times so far.
There are 32 Comments:
We know that anything that isn’t “expository preaching” from a reformed perspective is likely to have Ingrid upset, so that is no longer news.
I actually like a pastor challenging married couples to be more intimate, and yes, that includes physical intimacy, but this feels just a little bit like marketing to me, especially watching that video interview.
I love the “superglue” comment. I think it’s dead on accurate.
This is getting very tiring. A megachurch leader does something stupid to get some press, Ingrid calls their bluff on their siliness ,Todd trashes Ingird and commenters pile on. How many years has this been going on?
How long has this been going on JOB? Oh, about as long as you have been calling megachurch leaders stupid, trashing what you read here, backing Ingrid, and then making a comment here about it.
Todd
Ingrid is my negative benchmark - I pretty much automatically like and support anything she’s against. Side note: it’s sheer cowardice to write the things she does against her brothers and sisters in Christ and then close the comments section…
Anyhoo, I thought Ed’s approach was novel and necessary to break through most church people’s hangup with admitting that sex is enjoyable.
And I loved the way he worked some “Ed Young-isms” into the interview - I almost spit coffee when he said “whole ‘nutha level.”
Way to go on the you tube link of the king of Queens. It ends with a lap-dance at a strip club! If you wouldn’t show it Sunday morning you shouldn’t link to it. And if you would show it Sunday morning.... all I can say is wow...depravity…
Marv,
You must be of the “reformed” type.
How about Christian and biblical…
That wasn’t Connie Chung.
Marv,
So your a Pharisee?
this is getting tiring indeed…
Todd, That wasn’t Connie Chung. Connie is MUCH older and Married to Maury Povich.
On the challenge, I can’t participate because I am not married.
Ingrid’s remarks are of the fruitcake variety. She totally does not get it, for sure.
No topic should be TABOO in church.
How embarrassing. I always get Connie Chung and Julie Chen confused.
Todd
In my context I do not think I would do this series. I also struggle with the 7 days in a row, the three weeks every day, the 30 straight days. I think there are so many hurt people, women especially, over sex and sexuality that this tactic might cause more harm. I have no evidence to this, nor do I think you would find any since it most likely would bet buried under a persons frustration.
This is just my opinion but it is one formed by many years of ministry working with people.
This sex series, just like every one that has gained national media attention and been done in this fad that has extended over the past several years, is juvenile. It gets attention because people snicker, “they’re talking about sex in church?” and then that’s about the extent of it, and the Gospel doesn’t make the limelight.
Much like Leonard said, and a CNN commentator also brought up when interviewing Young Jr., when we have people engage in sexual activity reluctantly or against their will, this can be constituted as sexual assault.
--
CS
CS,not to be too picky I did not say assault. That is a much stronger word than I was going for.
Let’s get real. The goal is not talking about sex in church because that can be achieved without the polished marketing and hype that FC is putting forth.
While I do believe the “Church” should discuss God’s plan for sex I do not think it’s His intention to turn into a carnival freak show.
This is just another lousy gimmick that has to do with pride, recognition, and shameless self-promotion.
Leonard:
You’re right, sorry about that. It was the CNN anchorwoman who used that term. I didn’t mean to lump you directly with that comment, so much as to say you noticed similar reasons for not preaching on it due to the past some women have had. My apologies.
--
CS
James and others,
I would be careful about assuming anything regarding people’s motives.
I can guarantee that you would not appreciate the same being done to you by those who disagree with you.
(I think Jesus said something about treating others the way they would like to be treated. Hmmm....)
You may not agree with the tactic - and that’s fine. Even guys like Leonard, who I agree with almost all the time disagree with the tactic, and I can’t imagine doing that series in my church.
But I’m not about to pretend that I know what’s in Ed’s heart.
I did not say I would not preach on the issue, I said I would not do the 7 days of sex promotion. I do thing the church needs to figure out how to approach this series. I speak for marriage retreats and when I do I will often address this issue. I will also address the need for connecting physically in a marriage. I just don’t think I would promote every married couple to have sex 30 days straight or 7 days straight. I also would not oppose it were it to come to my area.
Love believes all things and Ed Young is my brother so I will only ascribe to him right motives.
Sorry, Leonard
I didn’t mean to imply you were against teaching. I meant to say just what you said. And I would do the same thing!
Brian -
I agree that we should be wise in assuming people’s motives and should not judge because we don’t know a person’s true heart.
However, I do think we can question the intention behind this series and the use of a stupid gimmick. I do have to challenge the motives behind turning church into a sideshow because if you honestly look at the situation, a pastor who preaches with biblical authority, accuracy and conviction needs no TV interview or billboards. And if the topic is “controversial” enough, the members of a church will talk it up anyways.
I don’t assume to know Ed Young’s heart. No doubt he has done some cool stuff but I do think that applications like this really have more to do with pride and recognition. But we can agree to disagree.
BTW - I don’t agree with your “guarantee” either. I have thick skin and could really care less about people questioning my motives or intentions. They do have a right to do so and sometimes when we are questioned, it helps us be accountable.
“However, I do think we can question the intention behind this series and the use of a stupid gimmick”
Ok. Perhaps Ed Young Jr. thought this is what God wanted for the church he pastors. Maybe I can deal with that. But why make it so public, the TV interviews etc? This is all over the news. Refuse the interviews and the media attention it has nothing to do with them.
JOB,
I think I can see your point, and would even agree with the idea that seeking attention is not a good thing.
However, my guess is that EY didn’t call CBS and ask them to do a story (they might have, but I hadn’t heard that).
What if he had refused to let anyone interview him?
Imagine CBS saying, “Pastor Ed Young has been promoting sex at his church. He refused to comment on the situation...”
Most would not see that as humility, but an effort to hide something. And if we know anything, we know that society loves a “secret sex” story involving the church.
Brian,
I know that many of these churches publish there own press releases. Here is a similar one.
http://religionblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2008/10/ed-young-of-fellowship-church.html
I’l see if I can find it they issued one for this series.
Well, I have good and bad thoughts
regarding this. First it’s been done before, right? I think it is definitely done for the shock and attention value. So, for me, there was a bit of smarmy-ness and pandering in this, and truly a bit ridiculous to see the bed up in the pulpit like that. That seems undignified to me in the least.
Does he have a point about Christians “taking back” sex from the culture that’s perverted it? Sure! Does he have a point about how important it is for Christians to talk & learn about “good sex” within marriage? Sure! I think that the importance of sex tends to be over or under emphasized within the body of Christ. Can we find a healthy and happy medium? Sex is a big part of our lives. I’m just not sure if this is the best way to go about it. I’m not sure if such a bold statement on a Sunday, to the general congregation is the best context to get this message across. Is this what the Sunday morning worship and fellowship celebrations of our church fathers and disciples looked like? Is this how OT Israel worshiped?
I agree with his superglue analogy, too!
I’m not so thrilled about the hype, the time and way he presented it to the congregation.
Page 1 of 2 pages
1 2 >