I have no problems with the “concerned pastor’s” complaint. But, without having seen the butt-shaking worshipper, I also have little problem with bodily movement during worship. Generally speaking, anyhow.

So while I wouldn’t dismiss the criticism out of hand, the dance-remix puts the criticism in a different light for me: this is very possibly a picture of tension between generations and cultures more than tension between godliness and sinfulness. The dance-remix, for me, makes that clear, and allows me to view the whole episode with a touch of grace and humor.

I, for one, don’t feel the re-mix is mockery. Others here, however, disagree.

Fortunately, you have both recordings available to decide for yourself. And, for what it’s worth, this means the “concerned pastor’s” concerns have been honored with a wider impact and audience than he could have ever imagined. Perhaps the sovereign Lord had a hand in that?

Regards,

Rich
BlogRodent

I can also affirm, with you, the distraction of the distaff. I actually prefer to sit up near the front of the sanctuary so I’m not distracted by attractive ladies who are dressed somewhere north of sensuously and far south of modestly. I think the problem with that is probably shared:

a) It’s my problem to discipline my eyes. As Billy Graham is reputed to have said, it’s not the first look that is a sin. It’s the second look. (And the one after that, and after that, and so on.) I doubt this need for discipline will go away in the next 17 years (when I turn 55.)

b) It’s the lady’s problem in that she needs to learn the effect of her clothing choices and, if she is aware, should repent of her need to dress in sucha way. I think some ladies are ignorant of the effect. Other ladies, perhaps not. But since I cannot tell which is which by observation, it’s best to assume innocence. So…

c) It’s the parents’ problem in that they need to train their daughters to dress without tempting lust. Unfortunately, for women who are above the age of 18 and no longer live at home, then it becomes…

d) The pastoral staff’s problem to teach biblically appropriate models for modesty.

Note, the problem is first mine, and that’s the only one I need to concern myself with. I would be lying if I said I was never tempted to have that second look. And I would be lying if I said I never did.

That’s why I like to sit close to the pastor when he preaches. (Well, one reason anyhow. I also just like to be able to see facial expressions. But that’s beside the point.)

Bruce, I’ll send you LaTonya’s email address offline so you can contact her directly if you wish.

BTW: I visited your weblog just now and I was redirected to a handbag store.

Rich.
BlogRodent

I most certainly did not delete or ignore your note–if it’s not posted on the site, I simply didn’t receive it(is it possible that you posted under the name “Dr. M”? If so, you’ll note that your comments are not only on the site, but I took the time to include you, by name, in my response).

Although that conversation ended quite some time ago, you’re welcome to re-post your comments if you desire.

Now I forgot what I was originally writing about. When I was younger than 55, girls with flexible body parts caused me a problem. I suspect that this whole conversation hinges on the fact that we don’t have an institutionalized, systematic way of emotionally distancing the sexes. It’s the significant downside of gender equality.

Michal’s problem vis a vis King David was that she dissed the Lord and dissed her husband, all in one breath. It’s helpful to me to remember that she had been seriously mistreated in her multiple marriage situations–not that that excuses anything.

Oh, Rich, would ya please look in at my blog, listed on my website here. http://beinghumaninfaithartscience.blogspot.com/

Thanks. All the best.
Bruce

I’ve tried researching where the original voicemail and the subsequent dance-mix came from, but the further back I’ve traced it, the murkier its origins become. Really, for all I know, the original voicemail is a fake. But, no, I don’t really believe that.

But, really, I have no evidence that the worship minister at the church which received this voicemail is the one who created the dance remix. For all I know, the voicemail recording escaped protective custody and a stranger created the remix. Because nobody has stepped forward to claim responsibility for the hijacking, we’ll probably never know.

(And, truly, I’m shocked the blogosphere hasn’t gotten to the bottom of this yet! We can depose senators but not uncover remix artists?)

Look, I don’t know about you, but I listened to both the voicemail and the resulting dance mix with the sort of humor and affection one can only feel toward the foibles of family members. I don’t fault the concerned pastor overmuch. I’ll admit I’ve noticed and been tempted to distraction by jiggling body parts in church. It’s a reminder to worship with my eyes closed. So, I understand the pastor’s concerns, and I’m glad I wasn’t the recipient of the original voicemail.

But I also appreciate the way the remix relieves the tension of the original voicemail. In the best tradition of irony and satire, the remix doesn’t deny the concerned pastor’s complaints, it immortalizes it. Here’s the beauty of the irony: more people have considered his complaint and the scriptural basis for it or against it than he could ever have possibly imagined. In every page where the remix is linked, the original voicemail is included intact. I haven’t found a single website or blog where that isn’t the case.

So, isn’t it interesting that while we can accuse the bloggers who link to this of being judgmental, they are also giving this pastor a far broader platform for his concerns than he could imagine.

Regards,

Rich
BlogRodent

As Dr. Gordon Anderson, President of NCBC, MN, says: there is always a mix of “Dirt and Divinity”, God in man, man working the work of God. No one can get so “spiritual” that the body is no longer a part of the equation.

Maybe the “re-mix” was a little “over the top”, but nothing was said that it was played for the church to hear, or just passed around the office, . . . and blog-isphere.

Michael despised David for dancing in public unto God. God closed HER womb — I guess God judged who was right and who was wrong. Read the whole passage, David promises to get even worse next time.

Legalism and true fleshly sensuousness BOTH need to be dealt with. But the guys still have to chose whether to look at God, or the girl. We all know where that preacher, pastor, evangelist, writer’s eyes were, don’t we.

We are allowing a carnal dance hall spirit or worse a jezebel spirit into the churches of God today. This post-modern do as you please with little or no regard to the ways of Ggod is frightening. There is no fear of god today.

I believe the “re-mix” was out of line. We are not to dance “in the flesh” to please the flesh. We are not to cause our brother to stumble. The wiggling of butt’s in Church Services is inappropriate.

It is lewd behavior and does not glorify the Lord Jesus Christ.

To be a legalist is to keep the laws of Moses. Or to do works to win your salvation and favor with God. We are saved by His grace, and grace alone but I will say this. The church today is in grave danger of following after the ways of babylon as did the House of Israel becoming a house of harlots and not a House of prayer. Fleshly entertainments instead of breaking the bread of life and comming into one mind, in one accord for a soverign life changing experience with the holy Ghost.

1 Corinthians 6:15-20 Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ? shall I then take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an harlot? God forbid. What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh. But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit. Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body. What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own? For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God’s.

This is an abomination unto the Lord. He is Holy. We are to be Holy as he is Holy.

This spirit is coming into the Apostolic Church also and it is a disgrace.

Woman who move their bodies in a seductive manner bring damnation upon themselves. For they cause their brother to fall into sin.

Matthew 5:28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

James 1:14-15 But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.

1 John 2:16-17 For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world. And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever.

Lord Bless you today!

Edith