My Sex Life…

Probably the most provocative sermon graphic I have ever seen…

Your thoughts?

The graphic:

The video:

It keeps getting more graphic.

It need not.

Your thoughts?

Todd

HT:  Jesus Needs New PR

25 Comments

  • J. February 14, 2011 Reply

    I dug the video… Where you saying that the video was too graphic? Or just the mysexlifesucks.org graphic above? BTW-I LOVE the new site and hope everyone from MMI can make it a new stop…

    • Todd February 14, 2011 Reply

      Nah… the video was fine. The graphic was a tad bit much for me.

      I have teenagers. Not quite sure how I could condone that image from my church with my kids.

      At least they’re wearing clothes I guess. 🙂

      Todd

  • Peter February 14, 2011 Reply

    I think this is so too far I can’t even describe it. The video is great. The graphic is crass.

  • Josh February 14, 2011 Reply

    I don’t think it’s that bad at all – to be honest.

    It doesn’t show any private body parts-

    and as a marketing guy – i know that capturing someone’s attention is important.

    they’ve got a REALLY important message that a lot of people need to hear –

    and I tend to think this verse applies –

    1 cor 9:22 To the weak I became weak, to win the weak. I have become all things to all people so that by ALL POSSIBLE MEANS I might save some. 23 I do all this for the sake of the gospel, that I may share in its blessings.

  • Bev February 14, 2011 Reply

    I live in Joplin Mo. where this church is located. Love the church. I think they are doing great things in Joplin. I have been wrestling with this graphic since it went up. They are located immediately behind a Sonic, I think that the banner on the building is a bit much. You can see the local video here http://www.koamtv.com it has the banner on it. I am the first person to say the church should push the envelope in order to reach people, I think this went to far. Again, love the church, just don’t love the graphic or the fact that people HAVE to see it when they go to Sonic. If the banner wasn’t on the building I might be ok with it, because people would have the option of coming or not.

  • Josh R February 14, 2011 Reply

    Nah, that isn’t graphic at all. Perhaps if he wasn’t wearing clothes…

    Jeremiah 2:20 is way more sexually provocative than anything in those graphics or videos.

  • p. Sam February 14, 2011 Reply

    I think Myriad Pro Bold would have been a better choice than Helvetica.

  • Scott Harrison February 14, 2011 Reply

    I agree with you Todd. Video was right. Graphic is a little out there. Something, it seems, done just for the shock factor. Not sure that a family church is the best place for it.

  • Spica February 14, 2011 Reply

    You’re right, it’s awful, the video’s too large and breaks your new site design !
    What do you mean I missed the point ? :-p

    • Todd February 14, 2011 Reply

      You have a skinny screen, my friend. Video shows up fine on mine. Anyone else having the video show up too big?

      Thanks,

      Todd

      • Spica February 15, 2011 Reply

        I guess that’s because I was on my old laptop which doesn’t have a large screen (just a small 15.4″). I do not have the problem on my desktop computer at work (a 23″ I think). 😉

  • Nathan February 14, 2011 Reply

    It totally depends on the culture targeted. On either coast or any big city this is probably fine. However, in Northeast Indiana this would not go over very well.

  • Jan February 14, 2011 Reply

    My first reaction to the graphic:

    “Bleh!”

  • Steve Miller February 15, 2011 Reply

    The video is fine, the graphic is too suggestive for my tastes. Using a worldly image of sexuality to attract people and then telling them we want to talk to you about being chaste and modest seems to be a mixed message.

  • Fred February 15, 2011 Reply

    I don’t think the church is a sex therapist.

    • George February 16, 2011 Reply

      But God created sex! I think the church better teach sex, the accepted way for sex that is! We, as the church have abdicated too many areas of our lives to “other professionals”. If you don’t know about sex the way God intended it to be, then it is up to you to find out how, and the government or the education department is NOT the answer

  • Kevin Powell February 16, 2011 Reply

    I’m with Fred. What exactly does the church teach that will help deal with some of these issues, that doesn’t fall into the trap of legalism?

    As a pastor, I don’t feel I have the deal with every issue or answer every question facing my congregation. That’s why I refer people to counselors, therapists, social workers, etc.

    kgp

  • Leslie Oden February 16, 2011 Reply

    Too far, I think. My husband and I are church planters, and our current series is “God, Love & Sex”. On a couple of billboards around town, our sign is a queen sized bed with valentine colored linens (and no one on them) with the series title, church logo and service times. Eye-catching, and attention getting, but not offensive.

    I think the church must discuss these things (in the light of Scripture) to be relevant to those we’re trying to reach. But I don’t think we need to be provocative or offensive in the process. There’s nothing lame about modesty and good taste. It’s possible to make our point (that love, sex, and marriage need to be discussed in church) without being vulgar.

  • David February 16, 2011 Reply

    Changing the subject slightly, did anyone catch the location of the church? Maiden Lane…

  • Chris Elrod February 16, 2011 Reply

    Forget the graphic and video above…go the website. The graphic on the actual website and the survey push the envelope even more. Whoa!!! 🙁

  • Steve Fogg February 16, 2011 Reply

    Graphic pushes ‘tasteful’ envelope too far for me.

    Video is good.

    I’ve scared to go to the website as I’m sitting here in my church office and our cyber cops might excomunnicate me 🙂

  • Mike February 21, 2011 Reply

    It is the same old thing…. Sex sales! So is this what it takes for folks to come to church.

  • Mark Kasper February 21, 2011 Reply

    My reaction to the pic: If that’s the dudes wife, good for him! The pic does not indicate whether the couple is married or not. Why assume otherwise? Also, the pic does not portray sex, looks like they’re making out to me, foreplay at best. I’ve had my wife jump up on me and kiss me like that and we didn’t have sex. Having a frank discussion about sex in church is a fantastic idea. Paul had no bones about it. Do yourselves a favor, read Song of Solomon, that makes this little pic look like Sunday school. Should we cut that out of the Bible, just in case a single person reads it? Please.

  • Pingback: Avoiding the Sex Sermons? « Modern March | church theology culture

  • Pingback: bone bewray bibliopegy

Leave a Reply

0 Total Shares
Tweet
Share
Share
Pin
+1
Current Events Humor Leadership Staffing
churches-in-washington-d-c-reach-millennials
Churches in Washington D.C. Reach Millennials

Over 600 attendees at District Church in Washington D.C. are primarily...

millennials-are-more-generous-than-you-think
Millennials Are More Generous Than You Think

Millennials are much more social and personalized in their giving, and...

sbc-full-time-pastors-see-positive-salary-trends
SBC Full Time Pastors See Positive Salary Trends

While health insurance coverage continues to decline among Southern Baptist Convention...