That's Entertainment!(The Book of Daniel, Brokeback Mountain, End of the Spear)

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.

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.

Here is another statement Chad Allen made on Larry King Live this last week which wasn’t in the above posted article:

I play a Christian, yes. And they're going to be saying, "This is the way you be Christian, there's only one way." Well you know what, there isn't. I'm a part of a wonderful community church here in Pasadena that has a very different interpretation of those same gospels that they are speaking of. There isn't just one way to do this, there are a lot of paths.

By taking his statement for what it is worth it appears Chad attends a church which has it’s own interpretation of the gospel. Maybe a gospel which is tolerant of homosexuality?

There is presently a "Black List" in Hollywood. Christians & conservatives are forced to hide 'in-the-closet', while liberal homosexuals are 'out-of-the-closet', and employed. It seems as if they've taken over the entire industry.

Personally, it was nauseating to see Viggo Mortensen openly smooching another "man" at the Golden Globes.

This shot is from Cannes in May,'05, but you get the picture:

Giving decadent actors,producers and directors the message at the box-office--- can only help turn this sick situation around.

Sorry for grossing you out.

"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."

It is my understanding Mr. Hanon found out about Mr. Allen's sinful lifestyle after the contracts had been signed. However, if we use this writer's faulty logic, then the missionaries should never have gone to Equador to witness to this tribe because the tribesman are sinners and Christians shouldn't dirty their robes by associating with those who desperately need Christ (such as the tribesmen, Allen, you, me).

My wish would have been that Mr. Allen would be repentant and receive Christ after working with Christians and learning the Gospel message via the script. Unfortunately, that has not appeared to happen. We don't know what seed has been planted in his heart, however.

I plan on seeing the movie.

I agree with you. Christians I know who have or are planning to, are going with Nat in mind, not the actor. They plan to see the film, in spite of who is in it. In this way, they send their own message. If interviewed afterward, as some have been, they will say openly, this is God's way of showing this man the truth. It will be up to him whether or not he hears it.

This actor is like the harlot who Jesus said "go and sin no more". This man can profess anything he wants, he knows in his heart whether or not he is following Gods word. It's up to him to change, not us.

Ahhhhhhh so you see, he does KNOW the difference. And even though no one has probably said "This is the way you be Christian, there's only one way." directly to him, he knows it anyway. The Lord reached him, no doubt, and he is already protesting too much. What he does with what was given to him will be of his own free will. But God gave him a wonderful opportunity see the truth, first hand, and to do the right thing.

It's Sunday night and I have just returned from seeing "The End of the Spear". I knew of the controversy from World Net Daily but went anyway having heard Steve Saint preach last night at Mission Fest 2006 here it Portland.

Steve's message blew me away. I was raised on mission conferences as a teen and am also a graduate of an Evangelical seminary. Steve's saint's theology of missions was more profound than almost anything I've heard before.

The movie was one of the most moving experiences of my life!

There is no sense at all in which a gay agenda is present in the movie. The cast does a wonderful job.

Frankly, the public outcry about the star and his lifestyle is doing immense harm to the message of the movie and the gospel. Some activists don't know when to shut up.

I am fully opposed to the gay agenda but I this thread (and other Internet articles like it are doing an incalculable
disservice to the work that Steve Saint and Mincaye are doing.

Why must so many celebrity Christians with web sites, radio programs, etc. turn into piranhas when dealing with this issue. Why must there be an almost cannibalistic feeding frenzy?

It seems to me that American Christians had better learn how to stand for truth without spearing each other (as the Waodani *USED* to do!!

And. PLEASE, go see the movie.

Paul (aka Newberger)

You are absolutely right about the caniballistic feeding frenzy, Newberger. I wonder how many of those people who are spending so much time actively campaigning (and lying and repeating lies) about this movie would be willing to spend an equal amount of time praying for Chad Allen.

What a shame that such a movie that portrays vividly the unconditional love and forgiveness of God, would be attacked by Christians. It is spiritual warfare.

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.