Skip to comments.End of the Spear - How About End the Christian Witch Hunt
Posted on 01/24/2006 7:51:17 AM PST by No Fool
I got spammed this morning by Jason Janz with some heroic epic about his own personal crusade to save the Christian world from the terrible threat of The End of the Spear - a movie on the redemption of the native tribe who killed the five missionaries including Jim Elliott and Nate Saint.
The movie had gotten a lot of good Christian press and seemed poised to do well at the box office.
Now Janz is demanding a boycott by us and an apology from the film's producers because of the terrible sin they committed of hiring a homosexual actor to play the part of Nate Saint.
I was rushing out the door this morning but sent this hasty email to the heretofore-unknown-to-me Mr. Jantz:
Please consider that the best place for a gay activist to spend time would be surrounded by Christians. Who knows what long-term impact that may have on him, what seeds were being planted, what God will do with it?
I am all for building bridges. It's hard to make a monster of a group of people when there is open communication.
And among those Christians were probably at least a couple adulterers, porn addicts, and so on.
Jesus hung out with prostitutes and tax collectors. I think he would want us to not be afraid of associating with sinners. I think he would like it.
Just a few thoughts as I am dashing out to the Blogs4Life conference and the Right to Life March.
Barbara Curtis www.mommylife.net author of Reaching the Left from the Right (out 8/1/06 - my 7th book, but first one on politics)
When I got home there was no email from Mr. Jantz waiting for me. I checked out his website and found that he has made quite a name for himself with his crusade. Then checked around the blogosphere to find tons of Christians who'd jumped on his bandwagon - with hundreds of words, words, and more words.
This is so sad. I disagree with most everything I read, except my friend Molly's analysis. And not wanting to add to the avalanche of words already, I'll just leave it at what I said to Mr. Jantz, plus a few thoughts:
I can picture God saying to those who cast a homosexual in a Christian film: "Well done, my good and faithful servants." I think he would be very pleased. Honestly. I really, truly do.
I don't think he is pleased at the ranting and raving and gnashing of teeth of the sinners he has so graciously saved who find it so incredibly difficult to relate in a meaningful way with anyone not meeting up to their standards. I agree with those who've asked if we should boycott all products and stores owned by sinners. Should we quit our jobs if our bosses are sinners? We live in a fallen world. Get over it. Be kind and be grateful if you ever have an opportunity like the producers of End of the Spear had to live the Golden Rule and be a true witness to the God they are obviously serving, in the face of all this unwarranted condemnation by those who love to call themselves "Brothers and Sisters in Christ."
I'm sorry, but as someone who wasn't saved until the age of 38 - precisely because of the ridiculous mess Christians have made of Christianity, I do get a little riled up when I see this kind of stuff.
As to whether the content was overtly Christian "enough" for all the very talented and creative bloggers sitting back in judgment, I would beg to point out that the book of Esther never mentions God.
And finally, my memory verse this week:
Speak and act as those who are going to be judged by the law that gives freedom, because judgment without mercy will be shown to anyone who has not been merciful. Mercy triumphs over judgment! James 2:12-13.
Kind of makes any "boycotters" seem like they are stepping out of the step with the rest of the band.
How could Jesus hang out with such scum. I mean those tax collectors are disgusting.
I'm more concerned with the message of the film than the failings of those behind it.
Next time bring a gun
I took my daughter to see it opening night....it was powerful and moving. Since none of the actors were "A" list...not a peep out of my 12 year old as to "who" the actors were anyway. This movie is focused on story, not celebrity.
Too many "Christians" are losing sight of what it really means. They either condemn people for homosexuality, without attempting to influence the homosexuals in a positive fashion, or they promote homosexuals within their churches. When asked why he hung out with the low-life, Jesus made a statement akin to: The well don't need the attention of doctors. Since it is our biggest duty as Christians to spread the Word and try to get others to claim Jesus as their own Saviour, we need to spend more time with those who are wandering in darkness, in the hope they may see the Light.
Ugh, and those prostitutes and hos. Especially the ones with skimpy clothes, and the nice bods and . . . . Oh, Lord. Help me.
Hate the sin / Love the sinner (and go to the movie he helped make).
All Christian legalists (in whatever form) should get their heads checked and/or go argue in front of God now.
It's not a preachy movie. Themes important to our culture. Compassion, forgiveness, reconciliation.
Check out the review from Cal Thomas I posted a few days ago...
Excellent observation we need to say this clearly: Homosexuality is a damnable sin and an addiction, not a lifestyle choice and you were no more born a homosexual than I was an alcoholic but I know I have the genetic background which makes me susceptible to that so I avoid the drink.
At the same time we need to love these people, and love does mean telling someone they are in sin and endangering their soul. I think many Christians pick homosexuality and abortion as their pet sins because its easy for them to avoid doing it themselves while pointing a finger at others. Always talk to someone about the saving grace of Christ by using a sin you commit, a sin you have in common with that person.
There are so many things Jesus did that would have so many people today all twisted up, and to be honest with you if crucifixion was standard and allowed, he would probably be crucified faster TODAY (and by a good segment of Christians) than he was when he gave Himself up for us. For one he'd be banned from very many churches for many of the things he said and did.
What if she'd actually thought through Jason Janz' (she misspells his name) very carefully documented, well thought out writing, and dealt with his thoughts and facts, rather than her feelings about his thoughts and facts?
Not to mention turning water into wine and (gasp!) drinking wine!
So you believe in only hiring perfect, "pure" people?
I'm not being sarcastic in saying this: that you would ask me this tells me that you have not read my linked essays on this topic. I spell out what I think and why, on that very issue, pretty clearly. If you're interested, give it a read, get back to me.
Well, we finally get a movie that shows what Christianity is about. It shows what our goals and motives are (or at least should be).
Who cares if the messenger is flawed. Moses killed a man. Peter denied knowing Jesus. Paul held people's coats while they stoned the Christians to death. These are some of the people God went on to use to communicate the building blocks of our faith.
God has a history of using flawed people to spread his message. :-)
In other news; "Book of Daniel" cancelled today.
I have read them. I just find your position disturbing.
Does the actor do a good job, or not?
Would you really rather see a less effective performance from a more "pure" actor?
Wow..you must be all hollywood all the time...I've never even heard of this guy and certainly didn't recognize him while watching the movie. He's certainly not a well known "star". I don't believe anyone outside some christian factions were even discussing the actors or their personal lives. The film tells a story, it seems purposely void of celebrity.
I actually agree about that because we want to present our Lord and His works in the best possible light. They clearly could have found a better role model for the role.
Having said that, I was merely agreeing with the other poster's comment that, although we Christians need to walk in the light and be the salt of the Earth, we need to reach out to non-Christians in a way that does not compromise our beliefs. I also agreed with the poster that some Christians are legalistic on certain issues that are not indicative of whether a person is or isn't a Christian.
We hear all the time that there aren't enough "Christian" films being made. Now one has been, and the whinging starts. Nothing about the actual quality of the film, of course, but that the people who made it aren't sufficiently "pure". Sheesh....
I read one of your essays, and you seem much too concerned with how the MSM will perceive the film and christians viewing it. I'm surprised you care. Do you actually do this much research into everyone you hire and pay, and every single company you hand your dollars to? You certainly took the time to do research into the background of the actors. I take it you watch NO television at all, and completely turn off the MSM....yet you implicitly know how the MSM will deal with all of this and more importantly....how the rest of us will react to the news.
They knowingly gave a "dysangelistic" platform to a homosexual activist who is vehemently opposed to the very truths the depicted missionaries gave their life for.
You think that's wise? By no lexicon in my possession.
I just wanted to put that out on the board, in clear language, where it can be seen by all.
I don't like hiding essential elements of a conversation behind links.
Not sure I follow you; certainly don't follow calling openly linked, openly blogged essays "hiding"... but if you're happy, hey!
You're right, and it's too often misunderstood.
If you refuse to restate your position on this thread, requiring others to bump your web traffic, then yes. Hiding.
But whatever makes you happy....
"Jesus hung out with *repentant* prostitutes and tax collectors. I hate it when screed-writers make the Jesus of the Gospels sound more like Jesus Christ, metrosexual. What part of "Now go and sin no more" don't they understand?
"Jesus was quite *intolerant* when it came to sin."
screed-writers and metrosexual - nice emotion-packed touches, but your reasoning is flawed.
Ummm, I don't see the word repentant in the verses. And how would they become repentant unless Jesus first built a relationship with them? Actually, the people Jesus was most intolerant of were the legalists who enjoyed judging people.
And for the guy a while back that referred to me as PoMo - I like that! 57 years old, BA in Philosophy, Mother of 12, Author of 8 books - but still open-minded and humble enough to come across as PoMo!!! You made my day!
And as to the criticism of my writing being based on feelings, take another look. I just see it as reader-friendly prose, stripped of all the pomposity and tiresome rhetoric I found in the anti-Spear pundits. Hey, Jesus spoke plainly and simply. And scripture reminds us that our faith should be humble and childlike - God has chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise.
I wake up every morning thanking God I am not a lawyer or a theologian! This ridiculous furor is a good example why.
This is the only comment I will make here, as I have my blog www.mommylife.net to tend to and a book due Feb 1 and a daughter getting her tonsils out tomorrow.
I wonder if he has spent as much time praying for Chad as he has campaigning against this movie that depicts so powerfully depicts Gods love, forgiveness, reconciliation.
>>he ate with tax collectors (ANATHEMA I tell you!!!!), he embraced prostitutes (oh my gosh!!!!)...<<
To minister to them, not to affirm their lifestyle.
To convict them of their sin, tell them to "go and sin no more", not to shake their hand and say, "I'm ok - you're ok - just as long as you feel good about yourself!"
I don't know; I would assume he has prayed for Allen. I've certainly prayed for Allen's repentance and conversion to Christ. Though, as I discuss, the foolish move of ETE seems to have muddled Gospel issues for him rather than the reverse.
Are you saying that they did not know in advance that he was a homosexual activist?
Well, here's my thinking. Did you read my blog? I didn't know the guy, but the web site itself said he'd produced Corpus Christi. I'm not even in "the biz," but I put 2 + 2 together pretty quickly. Do you think that the producers, casting folks, and all don't know how to use IMDB? The guy was "out" and loud and had appeard on Larry King to argue with John MacArthur about homosexual marriage. Janz documents all that. This was before the casting, wasn't it?
So even leaving aside what you might think of Jason's skills as a journalist -- if you're trying to suggest that these movie business professionals just had no way of knowing that Allen was a homosexual activist... I just can't see it.
Please see my #25. I can't speak for the other poster(s), but I agree wholeheartedly that we cannot affirm their lifestyle as it reflects poorly on God's work.
I merely was agreeing that we cannot hide ourselves either and that there are some who would judge like the Pharisees did for merely drinking wine or "being with the undesirables".
Althought we are not of this world, we do live in this world, and as such must reach out to evangelize in a way that does not compromise God's standard.
Thank you for clarifying.
>>and as such must reach out to evangelize in a way that does not compromise God's standard.<<
There's a fine line however, between that and evangelizing for fear of offending the lost. Far too many preachers and evangelists water down God's truth and refuse to convict sin because they're afraid of alienating people. You see this a lot - but most noticably in some of the larger "Mega-Churches", and mainline liberal denomications, which can't see to find that division line between worldly things and Godly things.
In total agreement. There's nothing wrong with a big church as long as they become big by boldly preaching the gospel and not by trying to appeal to whatever the public wants. I think we have to remember that to most people, the gospel message will be offensive and a turnoff. Only God's grace will open their hearts to the gospel's saving truth!
An excellent response. There is no need for all of the actors in a Christian film to be Christians. And, in fact, there is no guarantee that the actors who call themselves Christians are in fact following Jesus. The question should be: Does the final product convey a Christian message?
here, here, Barbara... ditto to everything you wrote...
I had less of a problem with Chad Allen portraying Nate & Steve Saint and more of a problem with the lack of the missionaries being portrayed as missionaries (at least like the ones I know). I did not see a Bible or missionaries in prayer at any time. I left feeling like the missionaries could just have easily have been Peace Corp workers. Their spiritual lives (which is a DAILY walk) was non-existant in the film. Heavy emphasis on humanitarian works (food and medicine). The word "saved" was used once. The plan of salvation was never given except for one veiled attempt from one indian to another. Beautiful movie, but very weak in sharing in the gospel. Born again Christians will understand the context, but will an unsaved world?
"At the same time we need to love these people, and love does mean telling someone they are in sin and endangering their soul."
Well put brother. Also, bear in mind, that if one persist in unrepentent sin, then one can not hear G-d or see G-d. To rebel against G-d is to separate yourself from him (definition of sin.) Does this mean that the homosexual will lose his soul? We have all fallen short of the glory of G-d. But we must repent and recognize our need for G-d before we can have a relationship with him. The fallacy of homosexual acceptance is that it denies the W-rd of G-d. It is almost impossible for someone to hear the voice of G-d if they are in open rebellion to him. Most of us try to make G-d in our own image (or what we see as our image, not as we really are!) They remember the G-d of Love in the Person of Messiah, but they forgot that G-d is also (and must be) a G-d of justice. All of our sins will be judged, either in this life or after this life; but always by our faith. Our acceptance of the sacrifice is sufficient to pay for our sins--but what does judgement mean? A poor example might be like the Judge in a courtroom--he assigns judgement to fit both the punishment for the crime, but also to reprove the person so that they learn and do the crime no more. As a father, you discipline your child out of love, not out of anger or pleasure--because you realize that if you don't, that little image of you will grow up to be without morality because they have not been taught goodness. What makes homosexuality such an affront to G-d? It denies his existence. A person should turn from this lifestyle because they can not get the blessings of G-d otherwise. Most of the modern churches are selling fire insurance. But what is hell? Hell is to be separated from G-d. What is Heaven? Heaven is to be with G-d.....Many have sought to invoke the Golden Rule as a sign to accept anthing and everything--but if you read what He really said, the Golden Rule means to treat others as you would want to be treated yourself--not a license to accept G-dlessness. In other words, in the spirit of the golden rule, if I commit a wrong, I would hope that someone would tell me in the spirit of love--not just blow me off so as not to offend me.
the gist of His remark was that ALL are sick (all have fallen short) but that the tax collectors and prostitutes knew they weren't on the right road as opposed to the priests, etc didn't think they they needed the spiritual help to begin with
They hired actors to appear in a movie...not local theatre. For him to have been given a platform, he would have spoken his own text. I just don't see how you read into this, a direct effort to dysangelize the flock so to speak.
Do you think they delved into questions whether some of the women had had abortions? Perhaps some of them are "loose" too. What if one of the actors were an atheist? What if we find out one of the actors has cuckolded their spouse and is in the process of getting divorced..that's a "public" action.
Sorry, we'll have to agree to disagreeing...This is starting to sound like christian conspiracy theory...don your foil hats!
They cast a gay man in this film?
I can't support it then....they clearly are not standing up for what is right. They are essentially enabling the man.
Christians do NOT compromise on truth.
These filmmakers chose to UNEQUALLY YOKE themselves and disobey God's word.
I was going to see the film. No more.
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.