My real blog as I experiment with this one

If you got here by a WordPress link from Chris Anderson's site, my real Blog is located at http://athinkingmansthoughts.blogspot.com.  I am thinking about migrating over here to Word Press and accidently posted my comment with it set to come here.

Frank

Next Post

How about stats on this thing?

I am wondering about how to view stats on the Word Press blog?  Hopefully it will be obvious to me soon.

 

My real blog as I experiment with this one

If you got here by a WordPress link from Chris Anderson’s site, my real Blog is located at http://athinkingmansthoughts.blogspot.com.  I am thinking about migrating over here to Word Press and accidently posted my comment with it set to come here.

Frank

Hello world!

Welcome to WordPress.com. This is your first post. Edit or delete it and start blogging!

The End of The End or only The Beginning?

If you have been in anyway reading the Christian blogosphere over the last couple of weeks, you have surely read about the controversy surrounding the movie, The End of the Sphere.

For the two of my readers that may not be aware of the movie and have missed out on the controversy, the story around which The End of the Sphere is based is about the martyrdom of five missionaries by the Auca (now Waodani) tribe in South America in 1956. These five men – Jim Elliot, Roger Youderian, Nate Saint, Pete Fleming, and Ed McCully – desired to reach this tribe with the saving message of salvation through the blood of Jesus Christ. When the tribe killed these missionaries, some of their widows and other family members came back and managed to reach many in the tribe with the Gospel of Jesus Christ. (Elisabeth Elliot’s books, Through Gates of Splendor and Shadow of the Almighty are great sources for further reading on this topic for those who have not read them.)

The controversy over the issue has centered on two issues. 1. The watering down of the Gospel message in the film and 2. The selection of homosexual activist Chad Allen to play the two parts of Nate Saint and Steve Saint in the movie.

Pastor Jason Janz, an Assistant Pastor at Red Rocks Baptist Church (formerly South Sheridan Baptist Church) in the Denver area, has written a lot on this topic in the last couple of weeks on his blog SharperIron. Since I kind of assume that almost everybody who actually reads my stuff has probably already been to and regularly visits Sharper Iron, I don’t want to be too redundant with what is already over there. If you have not kept up with this, but would like to do a little catch up, Jason has posted a Summary of the Movie Controversy that gives the relevant information and links.

I have been kind of reluctant to post anything about the issue over here for a couple of reasons. 1. I have been waiting anxiously to read Jason’s post on the lack of Gospel content in the movie, and 2. The topic is pretty much everywhere else and I am just one more voice adding to the noise and I think most of us are getting very tired of the subject. I actually have only even posted over there about three or four times regarding this issue.

On a side note (and hopefully humorous to you as it was to my wife and I), there is a new poster over at SI that goes by “Frank”. My wife, who in general has been kind of negative about SI, was reading SI the other day for the first time and was reading the comments by “Frank” and becoming more and more upset – at ME! She had to stop reading and ask me (in essence), “What are you thinking?” because she thought that “Frank” was me and could not understand how in the world I could be making the kind of arguments that were being made by that person and she said, “this doesn’t sound like you at all”. She was incredulous that I would make the kinds of arguments being made there. Thankfully, I was able to relieve her fears and explain that I was not the poster named “Frank” and pointed her to a couple of my posts on the topic, which restored her confidence in knowing her husband. (BTW, “Frank”, if you are reading this, please do not take offense – my wife knows me and was sure that what you were saying would not match her thinking about what I would say about this topic or how I would say it.)

Back to the issue itself. Just a few random thoughts.

1. I wish that somehow the issue of the lack of clarity of the Gospel message in the movie had taken a larger role in all the hub-bub about this movie.

As I said in an email about this to some friends a couple of weeks ago,

To be honest, I don’t look for Hollywood to ever present a clear presentation of the Gospel in a favorable light. I don’t go to movies and I don’t rent movies (not condemning others here, just stating where I am at) and I don’t get this latest “evangelical” obsession with viewing every movie that may have some remote Christian connection as the “next great thing” in the way of evangelism – e.g. The Lord of the Rings, The Passion, Chronicles of Narnia, Left Behind, etc.

2. I am tired of seeing this issue equated with secular movies that Christians like also having homosexuals playing key roles (e.g. Eric Liddell in Chariots of Fire).

This is not the same issue for a couple of reasons.

1. The company that made this claims to be a Christian company.
2. The company that made this has claimed that they made this with a Christian goal.

The films that they are comparing it to were made by secular companies with the primary goal of producing an interesting and profitable story.

3. I am also tired of seeing the comments that this is only an issue because of Chad Allen’s homosexuality – and that if it were a different sin, then it would not be an issue. Usually comments like this are made in the manner of “if it was an adulterer, no one would have objected.”

The reality is that this is confusing a couple of factors. The issue not really one sin versus another. The issue not only involves the sin itself, but the promotion of that sin and the antagonism against Biblical Christianity in that promotion of the sin. Chad is not merely a homosexual actor, he is a homosexual activists. IF the choice had been Tom Cruise to play the part, I would have a problem with it as well – not just because of his (alleged) fornication with Katie Holmes (?), but more importantly because of his outspoken advocacy for the cult of Scientology.

4. I am really annoyed at the treatment of Dr. Kevin Bauder by ETE and the NY Times (assuming that the NY Times is reporting the words of ETE accurately and they really did call the FBI over his comments). The way that they have twisted his words to turn a non-threat into some type of threat is disgusting, if not libelous.

5. I am as disappointed in the justifications for the actions and the follow-up comments that have been made by Mart Green and Steve Saint as I am in the original casting decision. They have used a “dream” as justification. They have said (or at least been quoted by Chad without disputing Chad’s quotes) some things about Chad and his sinful lifestyle that make it appear as though they condone it (which I am pretty sure they don’t).

6. It is disappointing that what Chad seems to have gotten out of the movie is that it is a message of forgiveness and love, without having an understanding that both of those concepts are centered in Christ if properly understood.

7. I am reminded again of the fact that no man is an island (HT: John Donne) and all that we do and say has potential to effect others.

8. I pray that God manages to use the story and the controversy for His glory and rejoice in the fact that God is in control.

Just my thoughts,

Frank

Consider this

What is greater in number than the population of Wyoming, Vermont, North Dakota, Alaska, South Dakota, Delaware, Montana, Rhode Island, Hawaii, New Hampshire, Maine, Idaho, Nebraska, West Virginia, New Mexico, Nevada, Utah, Kansas, Arkansas, Mississippi, Iowa, Connecticut, Oklahoma, Oregon and Washington, D.C. – COMBINED?

I am sure there are a number of things that could answer that question, but the answer I am looking reveals a scandal that has infested our nation for the last 33 years. The answer I am looking for is, of course, the number of abortions in the United States since the Supreme Court handed down their decision in the case of Roe v. Wade, 33 years ago on January 22, 1973. That number is 46 million (that is also 10 million more than the population of California, as well.)

Last Sunday, I preached on the need to expose sin and used abortion as an illustration. I was trying to edit the sermon for turning it into a post, but after trying to edit a couple of times, I still end up with seven pages and that is just too big to post.

So, having said that, I would encourage you to take a look at Abort73.com. It is the best site on abortion that I have ever seen.

Just my thoughts,

Frank

The Book of Daniel – Cancelled!

Does “Speaking Up” Make a Difference? Apparently So.

It is easy some times to wonder if speaking up about an issue is worth it. Sometimes you wonder if by talking about a controversial issue, the controversy itself helps the thing that is controversial. It is encouraging to learn that the voices of the people have made a difference in the case of NBC’s The Book of Daniel.

A couple of weeks ago, I posted an article about a new TV show on NBC called The Book of Daniel. The title of my article was called NBC’s Newest Venture into Blasphemy and it explained some of the issues regarding this show.

Thankfully, there were many others who felt the same way and called and wrote their local NBC affiliates and the advertisers and NBC has cancelled the show.

I don’t have a lot to say about it right now and I working on a bigger post, but I heard this today (HT: Jason Steffens – a poster at SharperIron). The article that Jason links to a World Net Daily really gives a lot more details on the story, the controversy and the decision to cancel it. It is called NBC Pulls the Plug on the Book of Daniel and is worth a look if you want more information.

The Christian’s Relationship to the World

In the high priestly prayer of Jesus Christ in John 17, the Lord Jesus Christ prays for His disciples as well as for those of us “which shall believe on me through their word.” To consider the very fact that while Jesus Christ was on earth He was praying for me is encouraging, but, of course, we understand that even now He “ever liveth to make intercession” and this high priestly prayer just serves as a precurser of His continuing role of intercessor. I may want to explore this concept further on another post, but, for now, I want to consider a different aspect of this prayer of Christ.

As Christ is praying to His Father, he uses the term “world” 19 different times in 14 verses during this chapter. It is obvious that as Christ was preparing to finish His earthly course, He was concerned about the relationship between His disciples and the world.

Some of the important aspects of that concern is shown in His discussion of the position of the disciples regarding the world (“in the world”) as well as the influence of the world on the lives of the disciples (not “of the world”).

In verses 15 and 18, Christ speaks about the fact that the disciples are “in the world.” In verse 15, Jesus specifically says that He prays “not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil” indicating that it is Christ’s desire and intention for us that we remain “in” the world.

Unfortunately, one of the things that seems to be happening more and more frequently in American Christendom is that Christians are becoming increasingly isolated from the people in the world around them. Many Christians (as other Americans) do not know our neighbors. Our children do not know and play with any children from the neighborhood. We are sequestered in comfortable homes and are involved in “Christian” sports leagues, “Christian” schools, “Christian” schools, and even “Christian” diet groups. Many of us do not have a clue about how to even relate to unsaved individuals. I know of one Youth Pastor who actually would go through and teach his (predominately Christian school and home schooled) teens about how to talk with unchurched teenagers.

Now, I am not against Christian schools or home schools. I am not even against church softball leagues. What I am concerned about is that believers need to be careful not to seclude ourselves into some type of monk-like existence in a world of isolation all alone, but rather that we are indeed “in the world.” I believe this must be INTENTIONAL. We are “in the world” for a purpose.

Notice John 17:18

John 17:18 As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world.

Jesus indicates here that not only are we in the world by default (i.e. we are not dead), but that we are also in the world because Christ has “sent” us into the world. In other words, we are to be “in the world” on purpose. If that is the case, then I think it behooves us to consider ways that we can interact with the world around us in an purposeful manner. (Perhaps in a future post -or in the comments section – we can interact about ways to do that in an uncompromising fashion.)

It is interesting and sad, however, that not only has much of modern American Christianity somehow missed the concept of being “in the world” but we have also gotten the concept of not being “of the world” wrong as well.

Christ did not only indicate that Christians are to “in the world”, He also clearly indicated that Christians are not to be “of the world.” I believe that (at least in part) this is signifying the fact that believers are not be the products of the world and full of the world’s influence in our lives.

Yet, again, as we look around us, it seems that we have missed the boat on this as well. When you consider the results of numerous polls such as the ones put out by George Barna, you find that repeatedly Christians are just like the world around us in regards to what we allow into our lives. Christians watch the same type of shows (and movies). Christians have developed the same relativistic attitudes and thinking processes. Christian children often watch the same cartoons and shows. Christian teens often listen to the same music. Christian adults are consumed with the same “self-help” agenda or latest psycho-bable as expounded on Oprah or Dr. Phil. Instead of intentionally influencing our world around us for Christ, we are being subtly and consistently influenced by our world to think and act contrary to what Christ intended.

Be “in the world” not “of the world” – it seems so simple, yet it seems like far too often modern Christianity (myself included) has found itself “of the world” yet not “in the world.”

Just my thoughts,

Frank

NBC’s Newest Venture into Blasphemy

It is not that unusual to find the entertainment industry denigrating Christ and Christianity and promoting a value system that is diametrically opposed to Biblical values. As Christians, this should not surprise us. The Bible clearly indicates that the world system and those who follow it will be against Christ and Christians.

James reminds us that being a friend of the world (as in the concept of the world-system) is to be an enemy of God

James 4:4 – Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.

Jesus told us that the world hated him and that likewise the world will hate us.

John 15:18 If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you.
19 If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you.

The most recent attack of which I am aware is a new show that is debuting on NBC TV tonight called “The Book of Daniel.” All one has to do is to see the commercials promoting this show to know that this show is designed to ridicule Christ and is taking the entertainment’s long standing war against Christ even further than before.

In this show, the main character is an Episcopal minister with a prescription drug problem who has dysfunction surrounding him in the form of a pot-smoking daughter, a fornicating son, a adulterous father (also a minister), and a lesbian church secretary. So far, it seems about normal for your typical Hollywood portrayal of a minister and his family.

The writer, Jack Kenny – an open homosexual, apparently did not think that was enough, so he adds in a generous dose of a “Jesus” character (white robe, long hair and all) who speaks to the minister and repeatedly gives him unBiblical and unChristian advice. An example of that advice has the character of “Jesus” telling the minister “He’s a kid; let him be a kid” when dealing with the 16-year old son’s fornication.

Belief net comments on more of Kenny’s religious beliefs.

Kenny “is, as he puts it, ‘in Catholic recovery,’ is interested in Buddhist teachings about reincarnation, and isn’t sure exactly how he defines God and/or Jesus.
“I’m a spiritual person,” he says. “I don’t know specifically what’s going on up there. I think there must be something going on, whether it’s an energy we’re all connected to or an old white man with a beard and a robe.

The full story can be found here.

As a society, we have moved past the point of things like this being “shocking.” In a sense, we have come to expect it. As Christians, we understand that the hatred and mis-portrayal of Christ by the world stems from a rejection of His person and a rejection of His salvation. I wonder, however, if we are failing to be salt and light when we don’t take our objection to such a blasphemous show to the powers that be in charge of our local affiliates.

According to this story and this story, it appears that just such a response worked in Terre Haute, Indiana, as the local affiliate there has decided against broadcasting and promoting this blasphemy.

On a tangential note, can you imagine the outcry if NBC had decided to do the same type of show centering on a Muslim Imam with Mohamad showing up and giving advice contrary to the Koran?

Information about this show can can be found at CitizenLink and BeliefNet. Even Tom Shales of the Washington Post has some things to say about this latest venture of “entertainment.”

Just my thoughts,

Frank