Actions must Match our Words.

So as I was driving to work this morning and listening to my local talk radio station. The topic of Kate Upton came up. If you guys and gals don’t know who that is, she is a model who was on the cover of sports illustrated. Anyways the story goes that she is upset that people view her as a sexual object and “a piece of meat”. Secondly, they said that at one photo-shoot she was wearing a cross and the photo-shoot organizers made her take the cross off by saying “oh yeah, like you are religious”. So now she got a tattoo of a cross on one of her fingers. So The cross can always be with her.

Yet, here is my problem. I believe actions matter, I believe that the way we represent ourselves to the world matters. You can proclaim something with words, but your actual have to line up with what you say. To me if a woman dresses in a tiny string bikini for the world to view. Then she is sending the message that “hey look at me, im the object of your lust”. She is not saying “hey love me for what is inside” or “hey im more than my body”. The message she is sending s “my body is all I got”. So for me its utterly foolish for Kate Upton to be upset if people look at her just like a sexual object.
Secondly, On what level does a Godly woman expose herself to the world. But then claims the Cross needs to be with her at all time? What kinda messed up notion of Christianity is that? That to me is sort of like the Rap Musicians who with say the most disgusting things in their music. But then get an award and say “oh I wanna thank Jesus”. So Again Actions matter.

I wanna Compare Kate Upton to Kylie Bisutti. Now Kylie Bisutti was a Victoria Secret Model who decided to quit her Victoria secret modeling career because she said her body was reserved for her husband only. My point is not to say Bisutti is a better Christian than Upton. My point is to say that Bisutti’s actions match what her mouth proclaims. Upton’s action’s do not.
Anyways, What is your take?

It is very much true that our actions should match our words. Some people will make statements boldly advocating for a certain moral value while also demonizing those who don't adhere to said moral value. But then they go and violate their own aforementioned moral value soon afterwards.

This is why, when we call into question the actions of others or criticize those things that others do, or even make bold, strong statements about how wrong something is, we should save the most important question for last--where am I myself falling short? Otherwise you will always operate under the premise that "I am morally superior to whoever I am criticizing."

This has been a passive aggressive post by Paulie, brought to you by the letter A, which can stand for whatever you want it to.

Paulie079 wrote:

It is very much true that our actions should match our words. Some people will make statements boldly advocating for a certain moral value while also demonizing those who don't adhere to said moral value. But then they go and violate their own aforementioned moral value soon afterwards.

This is why, when we call into question the actions of others or criticize those things that others do, or even make bold, strong statements about how wrong something is, we should save the most important question for last--where am I myself falling short? Otherwise you will always operate under the premise that "I am morally superior to whoever I am criticizing."

This has been a passive aggressive post by Paulie, brought to you by the letter A, which can stand for whatever you want it to.

But the discussion regarding standards of morality is something that is beneficial to the Body. If I make the proclamation that there is a moral standard that Christianity follows. Then that proclamation is not based on my own personal ideas. But, rather based on the standards presented First by Christianity.

One can judge matters based on moral standards developed by Christianity. One can criticize the actions of an individual or individuals if they do not follow the moral standard they profess to follow. For example The Westboro Baptist Chruch is rightly criticized by most Christens for their Actions.

Yet, it is funny how its OK to be critical of them. But, question anyone else's actions and you are given the age old Lecture.

Paulie I find your above post to be highly ridiculous.

If you have a daughter who is interested in becoming a model, then you might explain these things to her. Of course we want our actions to match our words. That being said, we don't necessarily know what's going on in the hearts of others, and unless they impact us directly, their actions are ultimately between them and God. Besides, what Kate Upton does has little to no impact on most of us. The time and energy it takes to focus on her life would be better spent on our own lives.

Miles wrote:

If you have a daughter who is interested in becoming a model, then you might explain these things to her. Of course we want our actions to match our words. That being said, we don't necessarily know what's going on in the hearts of others, and unless they impact us directly, their actions are ultimately between them and God. Besides, what Kate Upton does has little to no impact on most of us. The time and energy it takes to focus on her life would be better spent on our own lives.

If we take the idea of "what others do has little impact on my life" then we might as well just sit in our homes and not talk about any ideas. Simply because they do not directly have an impact on our lives.

Additionally, is it not said in the scriptures that "you will know them from their Fruit"?

Like I said in the example above. What the Westboro Baptist Church does has no direct impact on me. Yet, they are still criticized and their relationship with God Questioned.

Since when did Christians start drinking the Koolaide of "well its between them and God" so we cannot discuss it or question it?

Im sorry are there only a select few like the Westboro Baptist Church that we are allowed to question. But not the actions of people like Kate Upton?

Why is it wrong for me to say that a woman like Kate Upton who exposes herself for a living and her livelyhood is based on promoting Lust in an already sexualized society, is not being a good representation of person who Claims Christ as their path?

Have we so limited Christ to simply being concerned with being nice and not judging anything EVER?

Of all the things you could be doing, why do you feel this is a good battle to pick? Sure, we can talk about this stuff, but how do we benefit from dwelling on Kate Upton's apparently poor choices?

It's true that there are a lot of people who talk about being Christian and following God, yet they do some very un-Christian things sometimes. None of us is perfect, but there are people who honestly slip up and then there are people who are just hypocrites.

Now, we shouldn't be judging one another either way, but if you care about a fellow Christian, you can point out something that they need to work on. It should be done in love, and we should be humble enough to accept such suggestions from fellow believers. If Kate Upton really is a Christian, maybe she has a Christian friend who can tell her, "What you're doing with your body really is not godly."

From gotquestions.org: "In Matthew 7:2-5, Jesus warns against judging someone else for his sin when you yourself are sinning even worse. That is the kind of judging Jesus commanded us not to do. If a believer sees another believer sinning, it is his Christian duty to lovingly and respectfully confront the person with his sin (Matthew 18:15-17). This is not judging, but rather pointing out the truth in hope—and with the ultimate goal—of bringing repentance in the other person (James 5:20) and restoration to the fellowship. We are to speak the truth in love (Ephesians 4:15). We are to proclaim what God's Word says about sin. 2 Timothy 4:2 instructs us, "Preach the Word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage — with great patience and careful instruction." We are to "judge" sin, but always with the goal of presenting the solution for sin and its consequences—the Lord Jesus Christ (John 14:6).

Miles wrote:

Of all the things you could be doing, why do you feel this is a good battle to pick? Sure, we can talk about this stuff, but how do we benefit from dwelling on Kate Upton's apparently poor choices?

That's a flawed stance to take. Different people feel passionate about different ideas.

Its like when people who spend a hundred thousand on a car other claim "well that could have been spent to feed hungry Children". Or like when the Mary Anointed Jesus's feed with perfume and Judas said "the money could have been used to help the Poor".

Ultimately, I do feel passionate about the idea of what Christian Standard's inside the Church should be. I do believe to many young girl's will look at the example of the Kate Upton's of the world and think "hey, presenting your body as a sexual object" is compatible with the path of Christianity. Sadly many already believe that and go down the path where men around them start to view them only as objects.

But, should I not care about them? Should I not care about the Body of Christ? Should I not care cause I do not have a daughter? Should I put on my blinders and say "well it does not directly impact me" so why should I care?

If you only feel passionate about ideas that directly impact your life, good for you. But, that is not the path I choose to follow. There is more to life and the world than simply being concerned with things that directly impact my life.

Strider1002 wrote:

It's true that there are a lot of people who talk about being Christian and following God, yet they do some very un-Christian things sometimes. None of us is perfect, but there are people who honestly slip up and then there are people who are just hypocrites.

Now, we shouldn't be judging one another either way, but if you care about a fellow Christian, you can point out something that they need to work on. It should be done in love, and we should be humble enough to accept such suggestions from fellow believers. If Kate Upton really is a Christian, maybe she has a Christian friend who can tell her, "What you're doing with your body really is not godly."

I agree. I got nothing against Kate Upton. What I dislike Is the idea she currently presenting to the world. THe idea that its ok to present yourself as a sexual object and claim its compatible with a Christian way of life or even that presenting yourself as a sexual object is somehow empowering.

Im against Kate Upton's stance on the issue.

Anyway, there's not much you can do about it... pray for her, maybe.

Otherwise, why not focus on yourself and the people you do have contact with?

wannaberocker wrote:

Paulie I find your above post to be highly ridiculous.

Oh, well if it makes you feel better, I was in no way talking about you or really the issue you brought up in your OP regarding modesty. I took the topic of the thread to be more about what the title is--actions must match our words--rather than about the modesty issue. And I thought it was funny that someone (not you) could be entirely against something and then turn around and actually do that thing, which is why I posted about it.

To speak more to what you were saying, though, you just can't expect non-Christians to be concerned with biblical values. Just because someone wears a cross does not mean that they are a Christian. Wearing a cross is just one of those cool things to do nowadays (which is interesting to me because if you think about it, it's basically like wearing the first-century version of the electric chair--I mean, how weird would it look if you wore an electric chair necklace?)

It is foolish to demand that she not be objectified, though, when she has her picture taken with basically no clothes on, especially if you know anything about how the male brain functions (and I don't mean that in a cheeky sense, I mean it quite literally--the male brain registers the same type of emotional response to a random naked woman on a magazine cover that it does to objects.)

P.S. I'm not a fan of the whole giving negative reps thing.

Paulie079 wrote:

wannaberocker wrote:

Paulie I find your above post to be highly ridiculous.

Oh, well if it makes you feel better, I was in no way talking about you or really the issue you brought up in your OP regarding modesty. I took the topic of the thread to be more about what the title is--actions must match our words--rather than about the modesty issue. And I thought it was funny that someone (not you) could be entirely against something and then turn around and actually do that thing, which is why I posted about it.  

To speak more to what you were saying, though, you just can't expect non-Christians to be concerned with biblical values. Just because someone wears a cross does not mean that they are a Christian. Wearing a cross is just one of those cool things to do nowadays (which is interesting to me because if you think about it, it's basically like wearing the first-century version of the electric chair--I mean, how weird would it look if you wore an electric chair necklace?)

It is foolish to demand that she not be objectified, though, when she has her picture taken with basically no clothes on, especially if you know anything about how the male brain functions (and I don't mean that in a cheeky sense, I mean it quite literally--the male brain registers the same type of emotional response to a random naked woman on a magazine cover that it does to objects.)

P.S. I'm not a fan of the whole giving negative reps thing.

Oh Ok, my Mistake. I took your post as a suggestion that somehow my discussion on the idea was hypocritical. But, I understand what you mean now.

Well I wouldn't think her wearing a Cross makes her a Christian. Its just that she talked about how It was a representation of her faith. I just felt pretty sad for her misguided views on the Godly Path.

wannaberocker wrote:

That's a flawed stance to take. Different people feel passionate about different ideas.

Its like when people who spend a hundred thousand on a car other claim "well that could have been spent to feed hungry Children". Or like when the Mary Anointed Jesus's feed with perfume and Judas said "the money could have been used to help the Poor".

Ultimately, I do feel passionate about the idea of what Christian Standard's inside the Church should be. I do believe to many young girl's will look at the example of the Kate Upton's of the world and think "hey, presenting your body as a sexual object" is compatible with the path of Christianity. Sadly many already believe that and go down the path where men around them start to view them only as objects.

But, should I not care about them? Should I not care about the Body of Christ? Should I not care cause I do not have a daughter? Should I put on my blinders and say "well it does not directly impact me" so why should I care?

If you only feel passionate about ideas that directly impact your life, good for you. But, that is not the path I choose to follow. There is more to life and the world than simply being concerned with things that directly impact my life.

There are many things that one can care about, but not all warrant the same response. That's why people who speak out against hate groups like Westboro may not also also become outraged over the foibles of a 20 year old model. They've picked their battles, and I'd say they've chosen them wisely. Kate needs patience and guidance from other Christians in her life, not the kind of condemnation that Westboro deserves.

If you care about the standards within the church, then it will show in your behavior. It will show in your love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. The best way to change things for the positive is to become an example yourself. Of course, it's harder to do that than it is to point out the perceived shortcomings of others.

You bring up a valid point. It's like those pop stars who claim that sexualizing women is bad, yet turn around and make videos where they themselves are nothing more than a sexual object and then defend it by saying they're "empowering women". That kind of hypocrisy is puzzling to me and Kate Upton's no different. It's nice that she wants to be taken more seriously but posing for the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Edition isn't doing her any favorites.

I'm not trying to judge her or anyone but it's a pretty frequent issue and one I feel strongly about. Women can't complain about pornography and objectification if they're willing to participate, just as we can't condone certain sins while claiming to be against them. If we really want to make a difference we need to be producing fruit and working to show that Christ has something better than what the world offers. I know it's an uphill battle but we know that God has already won the war. The least we can do is stand with Him.

Miles wrote:

There are many things that one can care about, but not all warrant the same response. That's why people who speak out against hate groups like Westboro may not also also become outraged over the foibles of a 20 year old model. They've picked their battles, and I'd say they've chosen them wisely. Kate needs patience and guidance from other Christians in her life, not the kind of condemnation that Westboro deserves.

Then I stand corrected. People feel passionate regarding different issues n ideas. Just because you do not feel passionate regarding a certain issue does not mean, I shouldn't feel passionate about it either.

Funny thing is that your above statement. You have tried to force you idea's of "what a person should feel passionate about" onto me. By first suggesting that I should pick my battles and then suggesting that the people who question the actions of Westboro are wise. But implying that it is somehow unwise to feel passionate about the issue of modesty and the Christian life.

miles wrote:

If you care about the standards within the church, then it will show in your behavior. It will show in your love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. The best way to change things for the positive is to become an example yourself. Of course, it's harder to do that than it is to point out the perceived shortcomings of others.

Yet, the path of Christianity is not limited to Love, Joy, Peace, Forbearance, Kindness, Goodness, Faithfulness, gentleness and self control. No, while that is part of the Christian life, it is not the complete Christian life.

Discussion regarding what is morally right and wrong is also part of the Christian life. Im not so self centered to believe that Kate Upton cares what some dude on a forum thinks of her. No, the topic main point is to discuss the idea at its core which is the impact public figures like Kate Upton can have on social norms and moral standards inside the church.

Lastly, What "Perceived Shortcomings" am I discussing? Comparing someone's actions to the Christian moral standards and judging such actions to be misguided and wrong is not "Perceived shortcomings".

Thunder Peel wrote:

You bring up a valid point. It's like those pop stars who claim that sexualizing women is bad, yet turn around and make videos where they themselves are nothing more than a sexual object and then defend it by saying they're "empowering women". That kind of hypocrisy is puzzling to me and Kate Upton's no different. It's nice that she wants to be taken more seriously but posing for the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Edition isn't doing her any favorites.

I agree. All these internet trends where teens take provocative pictures of themselves and post them online. These aren't bad kids, these are simply kids who are now raised in a culture where presenting yourself as a sexual object is considered cool.

And part of that is this whole nonsense of associating being half naked with some sort of "empowerment" BS.