Oh how this magazine continues to descend into the depths of total depravity. Christianity Today not only felt it was necessary to review Sex and the City, but also gave it three out of a possible four stars. You can see their review here.
“In the end, I didn’t quite heart SATC—but I certainly enjoyed this meaningful reunion with its beloved characters and their winning friendships.”
Folks, the DVD series is rated R for a reason (i.e. strong sexual content, graphic nudity, and language). No true Christian has any business willingly setting this trash before their eyes.
Apparently some readers of Christianity Today still have a conscience left after it being seared from reading this rag to begin with. They wrote in to express their displeasure and Christianity Today addressed the dissenting voices with their excuses for reviewing this show and other objectionable films. I’ve commented below on excerpts from their unapologetic drivel:
“We totally understand why many people would have no desire to see Sex and the City, choosing to avoid it because of its portrayals of pre- and extra-marital sex and rampant materialism. I myself have no desire to see it, mostly for those reasons. But to slam us for reviewing the film makes no sense. Our mission statement is to help readers make discerning choices about movies—not to make the choices for people. Our review clearly warned readers of the sinful behavior in the movie, while also noting some of its redeeming factors—like the universal longing for love and companionship, what it means to be a true friend, and more.”
Really? Is that why you gave it three out of four stars? Doesn’t sound like you’re doing a good job of warning readers about the “sinful behavior” in the film when you endorse it! It must be all those “redeeming values” that gave it such a high rating like this quote from the original review: “All of this said, there is a lot of sex and nudity in the movie. Be warned: There’s a threesome, a naked man in a shower, some steamy makeup sex. The sex scenes between married folk are somewhat less offensive, but there were too many times when it seemed that the producers were simply trying to shock.”
And yet what’s even more shocking is that professing Christians are watching and endorsing this lust of the eyes and lust of the flesh fest.
“As for why we review movies that depict sinful behavior, it’s because such films depict real-world truth, and the truth is sometimes ugly. To suggest that one cannot find redemption amidst the muck is preposterous; often the best kinds of redemption come from out of the muck.”
And it’s much more entertaining to our sinful flesh (which we refuse to crucify) than reading that old boring Bible for guidance and direction.
“But here’s another reason for reviewing SATC and other uncomfortable films: It’s good to sometimes enter into the minds and worldviews of others, even of those we completely disagree with. It’s good to see what the world looks like through the eyes of even the depraved.”
I’m not even going to touch that lame excuse.
“That, dear readers, is why we review ‘objectionable’ movies. Because our eyes ‘are not enough for me.’ We will ‘see through the eyes of others’ and yet ‘remain’ ourselves. It is our own ‘experiment in criticism.’ If that kind of thinking is good enough for C. S. Lewis, it’s certainly good enough for us.”
Wow, I’d like to see you use that justification to indulge the flesh as you stand before your holy and righteous judge. “But Mr. Lewis said . . .”. Perhaps when they stand before God they will quote man’s words, but I have a sneaking suspicion God will quote His own: “Dapert from Me, I never knew you“!
Oh Christianity Today, how you make me long for Christianity Yesterday!
Christ Alone Wyoming 
This is unbelievable that a so-called Christian magazine covers such trash. I can’t say I’m to surprised. Look how many churches, no matter the denomination, try appease the lowest common denominator in our society.
Too many churches are putting entertainment over worship to fill the pews, others will appease illegal immigrants to fill the pews, and now Christians magazines will become like the rest of the trash rags to sell a few more magazines. Only in numbers will Christians be able to demand what is needed.
Christianity Today just duped all of their readers. Who buys their rag? Christians, and they kicked their audience in the teeth buy trying to appease another demographic. I will no longer buy Christianity Today unless they get back on the path.
Grace & Truth,
Joe Caruso
LikeLike
They should change the name of their
abominable ragmagazine to What Passes For Christianity Today.LikeLike
It’s just extending what we’ve been doing in our churches to print media, I guess.
For a good while now, most churches have been pandering to the lowest denominator — what would unbelievers coming to the church like to see or hear, rather than actually sticking to what church is really about, i.e. where members of the Body of Christ come together to fellowship and worship God.
I see this as just another lame attempt by a Christian organization to show the world that “hey, we are hip too, and we know what’s going on!” when we are specifically called to be NOT of the world though we are in it.
LikeLike
Others have well said that Christianity Today should be known as Christianity Astray.
I couldn’t agree more!
LikeLike
“I will set nothing wicked before my eyes;
I hate the work of those who fall away;
It shall not cling to me.
A perverse heart shall depart from me;
I will not know wickedness.”
Just a friendly reminder from someone who knows what he is talking about—David. Psalm 101:3&4.
LikeLike
This is not the first filthy movie they have reviewed and it won’t be the last. The sad thing is that they really think that they are helping people by doing these reviews. If you read the actual review it tells a lot about the critic herself. First of all she does not understand what a biblical church should be. She really thinks that the church should address her need for sex as a single woman. (and since they are not doing she applauds SATC for doing it for her). Secondly, if you look at the family section at the bottom of the review it says that its not even appropriate for some adults. Who is the “some” that they are talking about??? I guess she was referring to us Bible thumpers who actually believe the Word when it says that homosexuality is an abomination and that sexual deviancy is a sin. How can gay sex and threesomes be “redeeming”? It never ceases to amaze me how far people will stoop in the name of “christianity”.
LikeLike
Dear Darrel:
Spot on, sir! Thank you for your comment.
Dear Tanya:
I read the reviewer’s review and came away thinking she is as lost as the characters in SATC (which is why she seems to identify with them more than anything the Scriptures have to offer). I chose not to comment on her review due to brevity and focused my attention on CY’s unapologetic excuse-making statement. Thank you for bringing her review itself to light. And thank you ALL for your commitment to truth.
Never Compromise!
– The Pilgrim
LikeLike
Had I known that in 2005 Christianity Today gave a favorable review (3 out of 4 stars) to the movie Brokeback Mountain, I would have been less shocked at their favorable review (3 out of 4 stars) for Sex and the City.
“But as much as Brokeback Mountain is being touted as a groundbreaking movie for its depictions of homosexuality, it is populated with people with conventional attitudes about homosexuality. And though it’s presented as a story of thwarted love—of ache and longing and regrets—it’s also ultimately a story about the relationships that shape us … for better and for worse.”
And here I was (silly me) thinking that Christianity Today just now sunk to a new low. Boy, was I two and a half years too late with that estimation!
– The Pilgrim
LikeLike
I think this is not a strong enough fault to demonize Christianity Today. This institution has done a lot of good things in its background in defending, reinforcing and spreading the christian values amidst those disturbed times we are living, in our modern and post-modern world.
Some of CT editorials of the past ten years are by far considered classicals of the Christian literature.
What is lamentable in CT is their strong market oriented activities and that new crave for the secular media entertainment industry.
There`s nothing wrong with recommending a good movie for Christian audiences, but commenting craps like SATC and, what`s worse, finding this kind of trash to be of any value is certainly a lamentable record for CT`s history.
LikeLike
What I find truly awful is that Romans 12:2 tells us not to be conformed but be transformed by the renewing of our minds. When Christianity Today gives a movie like this 3 out of 4 stars it’s like telling the Christian community that this stuff is ok to watch and all Christians are doing is feeding their old sinful desires!
LikeLike
Hi Washington Noronha,
In your opinion what would constitute “a strong enough fault to demonize Christianity Today”?
I mean, they dispense favorable “reviews” of movies that would in all truth have been considered stag films at best or snuff films at worst a few decades ago.
I think most informed folks would agree with your assessment that CT is so market oriented that there is little difference between their publication and so many “secular” or “worldly” publications thus further blurring the line between the world and the church.
And last but not least America’s leading “Christian” magazine has, in fact, turned to promoting mysticism, contemplative prayer and other New Age, anti-Christian practices.
Don’t believe me? See for yourself.
No my friend, if CT had suddenly written an out of character article, or if somehow the editorial review process had missed a glaring omission then Christians such as myself would be more than willing to forgive and move on, yet like any individual organizations have a “personality” as it were. And in God’s order there are really only two possible personalities for organizations to reflect; the personality of the One True and Living God as He has revealed Himself within the Holy Bible, or the personality of Satan which is wholly opposed to Him.
I don’t think we need to venture many guesses as to which of these two personalities CT consistently manifests regardless of their rhetoric or moniker.
In Christ,
CD
LikeLike
What I find amazing is no one has yet mentioned that the film, regardless of belief system, is not worth 75%. It has a weak plot, poor characters and predictable events.
That said you also forget that CT is a magazine; as a previous poster pointing out they have done some extremely good articles in the past. If you want those to continue then they need to keep profits and that means pandering to the mass market. Oh and maybe by being seen to actually attempt to understand the world through an opponents eyes could lessen the damage done to modern society by secularist churches that appear to actively push away those trying to learn about faith. Blinkered vision does nothing but stagnate society, whether religious society or otherwise. I’m not advocating the film or the excuses I’m just putting a point across.
And stop calling the majority the “lowest denominator”? Because that’s a morally sound phrase. Why not just call anyone who doesn’t yet have faith mentally retarded and be done with it. /rant
LikeLike
Dear Chakka:
I cannot speak for everyone else, but I never mentioned the “weak plot, poor characters and predictable events” because:
A). The point is not whether someone endorses a poorly made film (this is not sin) but the concern is if someone endorses a film that is blatantly glamorizing those things which the Lord hates and are an abomination to Him (this is sin).
B). I haven’t viewed this garbage to determine it’s quality of characters and plot, nor do I care to concern myself with it. I don’t need to drink a cupful of Liquid-Drano to know it’s physically bad for me anymore than I need to watch this trash to know it’s spiritually bad for me.
“Oh and maybe by being seen to actually attempt to understand the world through an opponents eyes could lessen the damage done to modern society by secularist churches that appear to actively push away those trying to learn about faith.”
Please point me to any instruction, example or precedent in Scripture where we should expose ourselves to the moral filth of Hollywood to “understand” the culture (it’s like rolling around in the mud to “understand” the pig). Everything I see tells us to avoid sin, not to conform to the world. Be ye separate! Why is that such a hard concept for people to grasp today.
I’m so tired of those with one foot in the world and one foot in the church using the world’s wisdom in an attempt to entice our flesh into compromise under the guise of “understanding” the culture. I already understand the culture; I grew up in it.
The Bible speaks to the culture as well: All have sinned and all have gone astray; the human heart is wicked and deceitful. Enough said! Now quit trying to be like the world and start being like Christ.
Quickly losing tolerance for those who want me to compromise into sin:
– The Pilgrim
LikeLike
Chakka,
What do you think Paul meant when he wrote (or rather, was moved by the Holy Spirit to write) in Ephesians 5:11–“have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness but rather reprove them“?
What did David mean when he wrote in Psalm 101:3-4–“I will set nothing wicked before my eyes. I hate the works of the wicked, it shall not cling to me?”
What did Peter mean when he wrote in 1st Peter 2:11–“Beloved, I beg you as sojourners and pilgrims, abstain from fleshly lusts which war against the soul?”
What did these men and so many others mean when they told us to avoid partaking of the same evil things of the world? See, the problem with the Postmodern/Emergent school of thought is that we can’t minister to the world if we don’t do the same things they do. We can’t be “relevant” unless we look just like them. Um, actually, we are NOT supposed to look like the world. 1st Thessalonians 4:4–“This is the will of God-your sanctification.” We are to be different from the world, because we are not of this world.
You said, And stop calling the majority the “lowest denominator”? Because that’s a morally sound phrase. Why not just call anyone who doesn’t yet have faith mentally retarded and be done with it. /rant
Because the majority IS the “lowest denominator.” What did Jesus mean when He said, “Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many who go in by it. Because narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it” (Matthew 7:13-14). The majority of people in the world hate God, will continue to hate God, and will never want to stop hating God.
One more verse for you. What did James mean when he wrote James 4:4–“Adulterers and adulteresses! Do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Whoever therefore wants to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God?”
LikeLike