"The End of the Spear"

read the interview on CNN Larry King:

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0601/17/lkl.01.html

 

I watched the interview. It was unfortunant. They should not have hired Chad for that reason. But the movie is great.

 

more reading:

http://www.sharperiron.org/showthread.php?s=6c0d3385f86b2398688ffb47c090dc3a&t=2244

 

Hey, I guess it's no worse than Monica Belluci (played Mary Mag in Passion) showing all her private parts all over the internet and in movies. No wait...Biblically it's ALL wrong.Christian discernment is at an all time low.

 

This is a ridiculous statement! You can't mean this, and surely with a little thought you will change your view.

Think of Woody Allen playing this part. Then think of Clint Eastwood playing it. (Not that I would want either one playing it!) Then try to say once again with a straight face that "actors make no difference to the story." </font>[/QUOTE]John you are attributing those words to me. Those are the words of the World Magazine article that I posted. Please do not put words in my mouth. </font>[/QUOTE]Sorry pastor. Didn't mean to attribute something wrongly--I couldn't quite tell from the quote marks.

 

computerjunkie:

==Don't be so quick to make judgments. In fact I have mentioned this (I don't know if was in this thread or another). When Mr Allen was on Larry King with John MacArthur I believe MacArthur "hit a nerve" with Mr Allen. As I have said; given John MacArthur more time, no tv cameras, and power of the Holy Spirit, and I do believe Mr Allen may have had a dramatic change that evening. I do pray for the salvation of Mr Allen. However staring a homosexual activist in a "christian" film is not the way to witness to him. He believes that this movie will help bring Christians and homosexuals together. That is how he is viewing this. Rewarding or ignoring sin will never draw a person away from that sin.
_________________________________________

==I think the point here is about what is shown in movies/tv.

In Christ,
Martin.

 

==You are correct. Btw I was not aware of the situation you mention.

Martin.

 

==You are correct. Btw I was not aware of the situation you mention.

Martin. </font>[/QUOTE]The woman who played Mary, mother of Jesus also had some major skeletons.

 

It was stated on another thread that we should write a letter to ETE about our dislike of them using a homosexual activist in a Christian film. This is a good idea.

The same post said we should go see the movie, that it is good.

If we, as Christians refuse to go to see it, it will send the message even quicker. The less that the company takes in, the better the chance that they will not produce films like this one again.

 

Al Mohler was hesitant to promote the Passion, and now this:

http://www.albertmohler.com/commentary_read.php?cdate=2006-01-20

Maybe he should join another organization, as it appears that he has some Biblical discernment left.Anyone know his position on Narnia?

Take a listen:

http://www.albertmohler.com/radio_show.php?cdate=2006-01-20

[ January 22, 2006, 09:52 AM: Message edited by: Boanerges ]

 

nevermind...

http://www.albertmohler.com/blog_read.php?id=391l

 

Trivia:

Speaking of Paul, Silas and the men who accompanied them, a certain woman for many days would proclaim, "These men are the servants of the most high God, which shew unto us the way of salvation."

But this grieved Paul. Why?

 

She was mocking the men of God more than proclaiming the Gospel message.

 

Nothing new under the sun. hmmm....I see a parallel here....

 

yes, Boanerges....

Sad, isn't it?

Even so, Come quickly Lord Jesus

 

I was supposed to preach this morning, but due to heavy rains and those rains still going on, we are flooded out. My wife cannot even drive out of our driveway. The field behind us is as flooded as it was back when Katrina came through Northwest Mississippi (or was that Rita?).

Anyway, I wonder what kind of response I would get from the congregation if I had stood in the pulpit this morning and told them Waengongi's son was speared for us?

Galatians 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
Galatians 1:9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any [man] preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

Waengongi may be the word for God in the Waodani language, but even so, I do not agree with the message that 'his son was speared in our place.' Yes, Christ was speared, but that was after His death, after all that He went through before His death. Just saying He was speared waters down the suffering of the cross.

Isaiah 53:5 But he [was] wounded for our transgressions, [he was] bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace [was] upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.

 

Well, if He does, it appears that you are "standing firm".

 

"If we, as Christians refuse to go to see it, it will send the message even quicker. The less that the company takes in, the better the chance that they will not produce films like this one again."-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Standingfirm, Keep this in mind though. By all accounts the producer, the guy who started the company is a conservative Christian. This is his first movie. Why would you not consider it the christian thing to do? Since this is his first movie, shouldn't you give him the benefit of the doubt. You can write letters and tell him of this error in judgment. But if you were able to cause a successful boycott, you could kill the company. Why would you want to stone a company to death over their first and only offense? Would you be this ungenerous with a new convert in your church?


You know that one person called you ignorant in that one most ungenerous post. I defended you immediately, for various reasons. Your point that the message of spearing Jesus is a bad one and you would not use it in the pul-pit is telling me something. Take a moment and digest this. I don't think anyone should stand in the pul-pit and use such imagery. But this is the critical difference that you are not getting. This is not a pul-pit. It is not a sermon. This is a true story. So it tells what really happened from the natives point of view. The missionary telling them that God, "Marked a trail" in the bible, and that weangonni's son was speared for them make perfect sense. This was the opening dialogue between the missionaries and this stone age tribe. Do you see how your wise decision to not relate to Americans this way in the pul-pit, does not compare in any way to what the missionaries were doing. The tribe was completely stone age. They would have no concept of a Roman empire and a Sanhedrin nailing folks to the cross for legal and spritual offenses. But I am sure that they got the details latter on. But the movie does not deal with later on. It deals with first contact, mostly. It would be years before missiaries could create an alphabet, teach them to read, and give them translated Bibles.

 

I have never seen a conservative christian reading homosexual magazines.

If a new convert was shown to be reading homosexual magazines, or taking part in anything that is sinful, it would be my responsibility to reveal it, and not to condone it.

The company is far from christian. Not only do they apparently think it is ok to read filthy magazines, but they also make films with nudity in them.

This was their first movie, but they also did a documentary on the missionaries in which they had nudity as well.

A true christian should be appalled at the production, and not promote it by paying to see it. Period.