Posted on 01/21/2006 9:18:48 AM PST by bulldozer
It’s been a bad fortnight for biblical Christianity in the world of popular entertainment.
To begin with, NBC has launched The Book of Daniel, a situation comedy about a pill-popping Episcopalian priest. Troubles surround him: one son is homosexual and another is sleeping with the bishop’s daughter. His daughter gets arrested for dealing drugs. A sister-in-law has become a lesbian.
Through all difficulties, Daniel (the priest) is sustained by conversation with a smarmy character who is supposed to be Jesus. This “Jesus” gushes inclusivism and spouts wisecracks (“you can quote me”). He is a paragon of liberal (or postliberal) nonjudgmentalism.
One description of comedy is that its purpose is “castigat ridendo mores,” to “correct morals with laughter.” The expression is used for the tactic of dismissing an idea by ridiculing it. Such dismissiveness allows the comedian to avoid any responsibility for understanding and interacting with the idea.
That description neatly fits The Book of Daniel. It begins with a debased version of Christianity (liberal Episcopalianism). It then reduces even that version to an object of ridicule, not in order to restore a pure and strong version of the Christian faith, but rather to dismiss all Christianity as merely goofy. Christians have become accustomed to milder versions of this treatment: network television rarely uses Christianity for anything except comic relief of the depiction of bigotry.
The Book of Daniel, however, is more than an attack upon the faith. It offers a trivialized and comic depiction of the Lord Jesus Himself. This program directly attacks the person and character of the Lord Jesus Christ. I cannot think of a time when the networks have done anything more offensive.
By way of comparison, consider what would happen if NBC subjected a Muslim Imam to the same sort of treatment, perhaps showing him in conversation with an unctuous Mohammed. Muslims around the world would respond with more than protests and boycotts. Network executives would be tripping over themselves to issue apologies.
I’ve never been one for promoting boycotts and writing letters of protest. But I do know this: On my local NBC affiliate, The Book of Daniel has been sponsored by (among others) Burlington Coat Factory, Dairy Queen, and the Chattem brand Icy Hot. It will be a long time before I can bring myself to give money to these businesses.
As if The Book of Daniel weren’t bad enough, Brokeback Mountain is in the news again. The movie won, what—four?—Golden Globe awards, including best drama. According to the pundits, this puts the film on the fast track for the Oscars.
Brokeback Mountain is a dramatic “love story” about two cowboys (married men, both of them) who are also engaged in a homosexual liaison with one another. Its depiction of this homosexual relationship is dominated by the theme that “love is a force of nature.” In other words, love is love, whatever the object.
What Brokeback Mountain is trying to do (to all appearances, quite successfully) is to generate sympathy for the terrible difficulties of men who are swept away by desire for other men, but who are hindered in the indulgence of that desire by social conventions. It smuggles in the assumption that homosexual desire and heterosexual love are similar in quality, differing only in the objects to which they are directed. It also reinforces the contemporary prejudice that love trumps justice, so that the terrible fracture of a man’s sworn fidelity to his wife can understandably and naturally be absolved by his yearning for relations with another man. Rather than showing homosexual activity as the shameful and degrading thing that it is (as reflected in the proper term sodomy), the film presents homosexuality as an appealing manifestation of human intimacy and caring.
Nowhere is it more important for Christians to remind themselves of the distinction between sins and sinner than when dealing with homosexuality. All humans must be treated with dignity and respect simply because we recognize in them the value that derives from being made in God’s image. This applies even to sinful humans (all of us), including homosexuals. We must never allow the demonstration of human respect, however, to imply that we approve or condone sin. This is particularly true in the case of homosexuality. We must not forget that Scripture classifies homosexuality as “vile affections” and condemns it not only as wrong, but “against nature.”
We ought to have compassion upon homosexuals just as we ought to have compassion upon all sinners. WhatBrokeback Mountain is pleading for, however, is not compassion on those who have gone astray. This movie depicts homosexuality in such a way that it can no longer be rejected as an unnatural, vile affection. Rather, it informs us that “love is a force of nature.” The message is that sodomy is not shameful and degrading, but a loving way for one man to treat another. With this production, Hollywood has reached a new moral nadir. Even those who refuse to watch the movie will be affected by the cultural backlash.
It is disappointing enough when unsaved, worldly culture-mongers cannot see clearly on basic moral issues. It is even more distressing when professing Christians betray complete moral confusion. That is the case with the new movie from Every Tribe Entertainment, End of the Spear.
ETE is supposed to be a Christian maker of Christian films. End of the Spear is supposed to be the film biography of Nate Saint, the missionary pilot and martyr who gave his life to get the message of the gospel to the Auca Indians of Ecuador.
The problem (well, one of the problems) is that director Jim Hanon handed the role of Nate Saint to a man whom he knew to be a homosexual activist. Chad Allen has been a very public advocate of so-called gay marriage and gay rights, including the putative right of homosexuals to adopt children.
Why would a homosexual activist want to portray a Christian martyr? Here is a recent bit of Chad Allen’s personal testimony, extracted from a recent interview on Larry King Live:
(I)f they’re going to speak about absolute transcendent truth, I need to tell you, I know absolute transcendent truth. I have a deep relationship with God and my understanding. It’s very powerful, and it’s taken its own shape and form. And I am very much at peace in the knowledge that in my heart God created this beautiful [homosexual] expression of my love…. These days I judge all of my actions by my relationship with God of my understanding. It is a deep-founded, faith-based belief in God based upon the work that I’ve done growing up as a Catholic boy and then reaching out to Buddhism philosophy, to Hindu philosophy, to Native American beliefs and finally as I got through my course with addiction and alcoholism and finding a higher power that worked for me.
Allen goes on to discuss his willingness to play the role of Nate Saint:
You know, I made this movie with a group of conservative Christians who do not agree with my expression of sexuality. But we said to each other, I will walk with you accepting your differences and we can create together. I will give you your space to respect you fully. They don’t need to take away from my freedom, I don’t need to take away from theirs. And I am so proud to have done that. That’s the kind of bridge-building I think we can get to…. You know, I had to sit down with that same God today and say, “Do you want me to go on this show? Do you want me to speak the things that are in my heart? And if not, I’m happy not to go. Do you want me to make this movie?” It’s the same God that I go to for every decision.
For Chad Allen, End of the Spear is an opportunity to advance his agenda of homosexual advocacy by “bridge-building” to a community that disagrees with him. It is an opportunity to “speak the things that are in [his] heart.” It is an opportunity to present the syncretistic, relativistic message of a New Age gospel.
People who have seen the film have said that it contains little or no presentation of the Christian gospel. In other words, there is little in the film that would contradict Allen’s position. People who already know the story of Nate Saint will probably read their pre-understanding into it, but non-Christians and naïve viewers are simply going to see Chad Allen. What Every Tribes Entertainment and Jim Hanon have done is to provide Allen with a platform from which to launch an attack upon the faith that is taught in the Bible.
Thanks for nothing.
Once again, I have to say that I am not in the habit of calling for boycotts. I cannot imagine, however, why any reflective Christian would want to pay money to view this debacle. If Every Tribes Entertainment hopes to garner a profit, let them get it from Queer Nation and NAMBLA.
Yes, it’s been a bad two weeks for biblical Christianity in the world of popular entertainment.
For the last month, it has been posted on Freepers and had everyone going. Other than here, I have not heard from anywhere else.
I never said it was sleaze or scorn. I am unaware of what your saying.
You misunderstand.
What should scare you is that if this film does well (and it looks like it will) it will give a homosexual a platform to share how beautiful homosexual love is making it more "normal". There's enough going on right now spreading that message, it doesn't need more air time.
My daughter knew at 4 that it existed and proceeded to tell her pre-school teacher that it wasn't OK for a man to marry another man. Very simply: at age 4, she got it!
"Did you ever consider it might be part of God's plan to have Allen star in this movie"
That is a line that could pretty much be used for anything thing.
If memory serves, Tolkein was Catholic, and no, he didn't produce the Lord of the Rings trilogy nor get to select the actors who played the roles.
The producers did not know about his sexual life when they cast him, but when they learned about it, they decided to keep him. They had prayed and fasted prior to making casting decisions. We are not privy to their prayers or God's plan, but I trust God is in control.
The entertainment industry and the media are doing a magnificent job of destroying themselves.The American people reject the liberal tone of the industry but the liberal morons choose to ignore reality and continue with their bombardment.These idiots should have learned something after the internet and Fox News kicked their ass in the news business but they learned nothing.Pretty soon the liberals will have turned a monopoly into a worthless pile of rubble.
see post 37.
MM, I seem to recall your unashamed Christian bashing on countless other threads, including one of mine. I also believe that you resorted to reporting me to the admin for not following posting etiquette to the letter because you didn't like the content of my post... to refresh your memory, it was that Scientific American article that ridiculed Christians. Sound familiar?
So... why, oh why would you be putting thoughts into Christ's head on THIS thread now? The irony is crushing.
I think I have a pretty clear idea as to what motivates you.
APf
Hey, AMR, for what it's worth, I agree with you 110.5%
This guy is gay, but nowhere does he try to preach gayness from the movie, and, quite frankly, I have no love for sexually immoral or drunken people in Christian entertainment at all, but we are all sinners. You go to hell as much for an addiction for masturbation as an addiction to homosexuality. Sin is sin and sinners are sinners. In God's eyes, the only difference between myself and a homosexual or a murderer, is that I have turned to Him for salvation and am trying to change.
What do we do when unrepentant sinners poke their ugly heads up in Christian movies? Well, we go to the movie, take what we can from it, and teach ourselves and our children discernment. Let children know the proclivities of the actors in these flicks, but don't let them associate Nate Saint with this pervert, and don't let an unrepentant sinner's presence in a Christian movie keep you from seeing it; I saw it yesterday, and it was a powerful film, not for homosexuality, but for Christianity.
"Greater love hath no man than this, that he lay down his life for his friends" John 15:13
"For whoever seeks to save his life shall lose it, but whoever loses it for my sake shall find it" Matthew 6:25
"...love your enemies, do good to those who hate you" Luke 6:27
This doesn't, as some freepers have worried, say that Christians can't punish people or fight evil when they must, but, as C.S. Lewis says in "Mere Christianity" "we must not hate or enjoy hating". Mere Christianity is an excellent companion to any Christian film or Bible study, as it shows a mature Christian's exposition of Scripture.
I am not trying to sound prideful, but I think that the son of the Morning is laughing at the Sons and Daughters of God who are trying to slime this movie.
If Lucifer can get us to disregard the message of "End of the Spear" and focus on the gayness of an actor, than he has won a battle that he feared he'd lose.
The man playing Nate Saint may put on a brave face to the world, but I have no doubt that he is screaming inside, weeping because he knows he is lie. I know what that is like from personal experience {I wasn't a homosexual, but I had another, equally filthy besetting sin}, I know what it's like to have nightmares of demons taunting you, of flames ripping up in front of shadowy faces, and of a constant niggling in my brain that tells me that I am inescapably d*mned, that not even Christ can save me.
My mindset at that time, and the mindset of many who have fallen into sexual sins probably mirriors a quote from the Mad at the World "That Lonesome Road":
"Free, I used to be so free/then I gave away my faith so willingly/Bound by those sins I used to hate/I feel for those lies from hell that tell me it's to late/and this'll be my fate. {Chorus: So I'm travelling down that lonesome road/my head is heavy and my soul so cold/and it feels like Satan's waiting there for me/he lives on the end of this one way street}"
Despite this I always played the role of the good Christian on the outside, until one time I punched a hole in a wall and broke down in front of my family.
Am I saying that this young actor's besetting perversion is alright? No, I am saying that homosexuality is a perversion from the black pits of hell,but that homosexuals are folk who need Christ's love, and that the people at Every Tribe showed one of them that love. He may never change,but he doesn't need to be told he is wrong at every turn; he probably knows that already in his heart and from what he's heard from the Christian community. But some people tried to reach him with compassion, and that's all they can really do, all any Christian can do. We are not the Holy Spirit.
That's my 2 cents at least. Forgive me if I have offended any fellow Christians in speaking my mind. I meant to share my view, not to offend or attack anyone.
I agree, totally, they deny the Bible and they are corruptors.
I went to the Love Won Out conference in Houston last year and got some real good info on the ministries to the homosexual community Homosexuals are, at their base, very, very damaged people. We must fight their sin to keep them from destroying themselves and others. We want them to change, make no bones about it, but their sin is so deeply ingrained in them most of the time. I heard stories at that convention that were heartbreaking.
So yeah, it is hard. Thanks for being so understand with this young fire-eater. Maybe God is calling me to join the Vineyard's "River" program, but as a minister and not as one getting ministered to.
NE-way, you're right about praying for God to use it for good. God can do all things, even tame Leviathan, so we just need to put it God's hands.
The Armadillo of Doom
"So if Mel Gibson had picked Chad Allen for the lead in the Passion of the Christ, you would have felt that we should simply ignore his lifestyle."
Absolutely. I see no difference whatsoever.
"I seem to recall your unashamed Christian bashing on countless other threads"
Nope. You must be thinking of someone else. I never bash Christianity. As for the post you mention, I do not remember why I contacted the moderators. It was not because it dealt with Christianity, though. You'll forgive me...I post in many threads.
I believe that Christianity is a fine religion. I do not share that belief, but I know many who do. Christianity has been one of the most influential religions ever known, and the teachings of Jesus, as recorded in the New Testament are among the wisest of all religion's teachings.
My comments in this thread are about a movie, not about Christianity. This film promises to be an excellent one, one that portrays the dedication of Christian missionaries to a primitive tribe. Dedication that leads to the deaths of several, followed by more dedication by others.
I am angry that some are recommending that the film be boycotted because one cast member is a homosexual. That's just silly. The film is what the film is...a powerful depiction of the dedication of a group of Christians to spreading the Gospel. That's something Jesus called on his followers to do. What Jesus did not call on his followers to do was to revile others. Jesus did not call for boycotts of things, he called for love for all men.
The actor's homosexuality is not portrayed in this film. What is portrayed are people doing what Jesus taught them to do.
I do not bash Christianity. If you can find a post where I do that, then copy it here. I sometimes bash hypocrisy done by individual Christians. But then, I bash hypocrisy done by anyone, regardless of their religion.
I happen to think that "End of the Spear" is a film likely to bring a lot of people to think about what Christianity really means. Christians should be celebrating this film.
I'd love to go through your posts and point out where I am absolutely 100% correct, but it seems that you write around 3,000 replies PER MONTH so I'll have to settle for what I have found and not the exact instances I was thinking of.
If you can find a post where I do that, then copy it here.
Here is a bash of the theory of intelligent design written by you:
Hmm...a class on I.D.
Prof: Good morning, and welcome to the first Intelligent Design 101 session.
[shuffles papers]
Prof: God Did It!
[puts papers in briefcase]
Prof: Thank you for attending. All students will receive an "A" for this class. Class dismissed.
And some snottiness to the mix:
I know! I know! God was distracted by a cell phone call when he designed those two. I mean...you can't expect him to pay 100% attention all the time. Yeah, no slight there. It's even worse in the context of the thread. I have also seen you on a few occasions dismiss someone's ideas because they were based on the belief of a "sky god" or some such nonsense.
But typically, you like to disrupt a thread by pointing out spelling and grammar errors, going on and on about Atheism like some Godless missionary or promoting, defending and excusing behavior and that are antithetical to Christian mores (read the thread above) while people are trying to discuss the culture wars and Christianity's role in it.
What really chaps me, though, is after sifting through your post history and reading your self righteous, long winded atheistic platitudes is that you have the oats to pretend to know what was and is in Jesus's head.
People can take off their WWJD bracelets now because all we have to do is ask MineralMan, the self proclaimed Godless Atheist.
You have no shame, sir.
I no longer have an interest in anything you have to say. Your "admission" that you have respect Christianity is nothing more than a mask for your true intent on threads like this one. Your claims of Libertarianism is nothing more than a way to excuse your rude, disruptive behavior and I tire of it.
SO, enough with you. We're done here.
APf
FReepmail me and little jeremiah if you want on/off the ping list.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.