By this time you would have to be comotose to have missed the news, controversy, interest, furor, and joyous anticipation of Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ." According to various minister who have previewed the film it is the most powerful depiction of the final 12 hours of Christ's ministry they have ever seen.
On the other side, according to many Jewish leaders it is a blatent attempt to smear Jews and blame them for the death of Christ. Gibson and James Caviezel, who played the role of Christ, have both gone on record that every effort was made to adhere to scripture while avoiding any depiction that would be construed as inflamitory towards the Jewish people. Still, those who look for a reason to be offended can always find what they are looking for. No matter what is left on the cutting room floor. I suspect that had the original story been changed to explicitly release the Jews from blame, these people would still find fault. It's not the movie that is the problem for them, it is their own fear of the possibility that Jesus was in fact the Messiah.
And it's not just the Jews, people of any background who refuse to accept Christ's atonement for their sins will look for and find reason to point a finger of blame. This to divert attention from their own short comings. Am I any less to blame for the cross than the man sitting on death row, than Pilate who ordered the crucifixion, than the high priests and Jewish leaders who sought his death to protect themselves from someone they percieved as a threat to their control over the people?
This is a story that long precedes Mel Gibson. It has been told since the crucifixion itself. Men have used the crucifixion to advance their own agendas from Constantine to the KKK and white separatists. Hatred and Christianity are antithetical to each other. Yet men will decieve others, and cause harm to true believers, by using Christianity as a cloak for their own weakness and personal agendas.
Don't let the anger and controversy keep you away from seeing this movie. My personal take is that the uproar truly does mean something. It means this is one of the most powerful means of advancing the gospel message to come along in a while. Satan's worried.
Other links:
The Passion of Christ (Unofficial site)
Christian Spotlight on the Movies - Review
Plugged In - From Focus on the Family (Review available Feb 24)
Crosswalk.com - Article
Conservative Jewish Leader Denounces ADL for Gibson Critique
Search Google News for articles.
Thursday, February 19, 2004
Wednesday, February 18, 2004
This past Sunday night/Monday morning I was working the President's Day holiday at the Post Office and listening to the radio. Sometimes, when I can get reception, I'll listen to the Coast to Coast radio show, an over night talk show that often delves into some strange and interesting subjects. I rarely agree with the guests, but it's interesting food for thought. UFO's, time travel, aliens, out of body experience, ghosts, prophecy, Nostradamus, world climate change, and occasionally someone like Tim LaHaye.
The guest on this holiday morning was Aaron Donahue who is a proponent of remote viewing, the supposed ability to mentally transport ones self to another place and/or time and gain knowledge from that "journey". This is not a rare subject for this show, it enters into conversation often. What was so different about this was Mr. Donahue's views on what must happen for human survival on this planet. First of all, remember that this show is decidely secular and often references to religion and Christianity merge into a convoluted and weird New Age twisting of scripture. So I listen with a very jaded ear towards spiritual subject matter. The scenario Donahue painted left me cold. I won't include a link to his site, I want no connection.
He is a Luciferian, one who follows and worships Lucifer/Satan. His diatribe included a complete twisting of scripture including that angels have dominion over the earth and have deceived men, leading them down a path to destruction. Man will become extinct in a few centuries and the only possible path to survival is to submit to a one world government run by a benevolent dictator.
All people must change their thought processes and religious views and will be placed in camps to facilitate this. If they refuse they will be turned out from "society" and left to fend for themselves until they starve to death, unable to buy or obtain food. He call this not punishment or inhumane treatment, but a result to choice.
I won't go further, but you get the picture. To me the scenario painted was taken right out of end-times prophecy, with the twist that in his version, the evil was good and the good became evil. Just as we believe the anti-Christ will twist the things of God to turn people away and control them.
I have to tell you, I really made me realize how close we are to the coming of Christ and the playing out of the end-times prophecy we've heard and studied all our lives. To realize that there are people out there, right now, who are plotting and scheming, with great delight, to usher in the time of the anti-Christ and the Great Tribulation.
"People get ready, there's a train a comin'." Jesus said, "This is war, and there is no neutral ground. If you're not on my side, you're the enemy; if you're not helping, you're making things worse. (Luke 11:23) MSG
The guest on this holiday morning was Aaron Donahue who is a proponent of remote viewing, the supposed ability to mentally transport ones self to another place and/or time and gain knowledge from that "journey". This is not a rare subject for this show, it enters into conversation often. What was so different about this was Mr. Donahue's views on what must happen for human survival on this planet. First of all, remember that this show is decidely secular and often references to religion and Christianity merge into a convoluted and weird New Age twisting of scripture. So I listen with a very jaded ear towards spiritual subject matter. The scenario Donahue painted left me cold. I won't include a link to his site, I want no connection.
He is a Luciferian, one who follows and worships Lucifer/Satan. His diatribe included a complete twisting of scripture including that angels have dominion over the earth and have deceived men, leading them down a path to destruction. Man will become extinct in a few centuries and the only possible path to survival is to submit to a one world government run by a benevolent dictator.
All people must change their thought processes and religious views and will be placed in camps to facilitate this. If they refuse they will be turned out from "society" and left to fend for themselves until they starve to death, unable to buy or obtain food. He call this not punishment or inhumane treatment, but a result to choice.
I won't go further, but you get the picture. To me the scenario painted was taken right out of end-times prophecy, with the twist that in his version, the evil was good and the good became evil. Just as we believe the anti-Christ will twist the things of God to turn people away and control them.
I have to tell you, I really made me realize how close we are to the coming of Christ and the playing out of the end-times prophecy we've heard and studied all our lives. To realize that there are people out there, right now, who are plotting and scheming, with great delight, to usher in the time of the anti-Christ and the Great Tribulation.
"People get ready, there's a train a comin'." Jesus said, "This is war, and there is no neutral ground. If you're not on my side, you're the enemy; if you're not helping, you're making things worse. (Luke 11:23) MSG
Tuesday, February 17, 2004
Hallelujah! While I'm a strong believer in freedom of speech, (wouldn't any blogger?) I despise telemarketing calls. There was a time when I found perverse enjoyment in leading a telemarketer on for a lengthly period before finally shutting him down.
For example, if he called trying to sell vinyl siding I'd let him go on about the attributes and benefits of his product, asking questions and letting him get into it, easy to clean, will last for 20+ years, hard to damage, etc. Then I'd drop the question, "Do you install over the existing siding or rip off what is already there?"
He'd usually respond, "Our estimator would have to come out and look to see what you have, but usually we can go right over your existing siding." To which I'd respond, "You mean you'd put your vinyl siding right over my existing vinyl siding that's only 5 years old?" "Uhh, well, thank you, good-by."
Maybe I'm getting old, but the game isn't so much fun anymore. I hate being disturbed by these people, and I hate even worse that they can't take No! for an answer. So I signed up for the National Do Not Call List last fall, only to learn it was being challenged and put on hold.
Today the 10th Circuit Appeals Court upheld the program. While I understand there are many people who support themselves and their families as telemarketers, the industry has brought this on themselves through aggressive, unresponsive, insensitive use of my telephone.
I do disagree with one element of the ruling. The original rules exempted charities and political groups. The court said it didn't find these groups to be as intrusive as commercial telemarketers. Excuse me, but many of these groups, often contracted out to commercial telemarketers, are very intrusive. With the added caveat that a high percentage of the "charitable" monies they are trying to collect often go to the company making the calls, sometimes as much as 90%. So not only was the call intrusive, but it was deceptive as well. If you want to check out a group before you give, (you really should) check them out on Give.org.
Now, with the ruling upheld, the calls will continue to diminish, and we will respond to those who insist on pushing their way into our home uninvited with, "We do not respond to unsolicited telephone calls, good-by."
For example, if he called trying to sell vinyl siding I'd let him go on about the attributes and benefits of his product, asking questions and letting him get into it, easy to clean, will last for 20+ years, hard to damage, etc. Then I'd drop the question, "Do you install over the existing siding or rip off what is already there?"
He'd usually respond, "Our estimator would have to come out and look to see what you have, but usually we can go right over your existing siding." To which I'd respond, "You mean you'd put your vinyl siding right over my existing vinyl siding that's only 5 years old?" "Uhh, well, thank you, good-by."
Maybe I'm getting old, but the game isn't so much fun anymore. I hate being disturbed by these people, and I hate even worse that they can't take No! for an answer. So I signed up for the National Do Not Call List last fall, only to learn it was being challenged and put on hold.
Today the 10th Circuit Appeals Court upheld the program. While I understand there are many people who support themselves and their families as telemarketers, the industry has brought this on themselves through aggressive, unresponsive, insensitive use of my telephone.
I do disagree with one element of the ruling. The original rules exempted charities and political groups. The court said it didn't find these groups to be as intrusive as commercial telemarketers. Excuse me, but many of these groups, often contracted out to commercial telemarketers, are very intrusive. With the added caveat that a high percentage of the "charitable" monies they are trying to collect often go to the company making the calls, sometimes as much as 90%. So not only was the call intrusive, but it was deceptive as well. If you want to check out a group before you give, (you really should) check them out on Give.org.
Now, with the ruling upheld, the calls will continue to diminish, and we will respond to those who insist on pushing their way into our home uninvited with, "We do not respond to unsolicited telephone calls, good-by."
Monday, February 16, 2004
The secularization of society has turned many away from the truth of history and the impact of Christianity on the founding fathers. I mourn the loss of moral values and spiritual awareness, of tenderness towards the things of God. Still...do I want "government" to bring back Christian beliefs? I'm not so sure I do. When a government mandates those values, morals and beliefs, history shows that too often the humans who make up government get it wrong. We have the Crusades of the 11th and 12th centuries. The repressive Islamic governments of today.
The past century in the US has seen the church abdicate its Biblical responsibility on social issues to government. Care for the poor, women and children. The education of our children. The management of our God-given natural resources, and on and on. While we as a church we must be careful these issues don’t overshadow our primary purpose, to spread the Gospel, we are tasked by God to extend our compassion and influence to these areas. The failures of our welfare programs, our government schools and our overbearing environment policies are a result of the Church saying, “we don’t want to spend our time and resources on these things, let government do it.” Some churches are recognizing this and are again taking up their role in addressing the social needs of others.
While it is important for Christians to be involved in the leadership of our country, to extend the influence of the faith to the halls of government, the things of God cannot be thrust on man through government. He will resist, it is in his sin nature to rebel. While government can and should promote and support an environment favorable to Christianity, or at the least remain neutral, the change we all want can only come one way, through a change of men's hearts, one by one. The revision of the historical impact of Christianity on the founding of our country is not a government problem, it is a sin problem. Government doesn’t care if Christianity is promoted, repressed, or left alone. Satan does.
Do I want to see the truth of our history known, studied and discussed without revision, yes. Do I want to see a renewed hunger for the things of God in our country, yes. Do I have a responsibility to use my influence, my vote, my voice, yes. Do I want men to use government to change the desires and heart of man...no.
The past century in the US has seen the church abdicate its Biblical responsibility on social issues to government. Care for the poor, women and children. The education of our children. The management of our God-given natural resources, and on and on. While we as a church we must be careful these issues don’t overshadow our primary purpose, to spread the Gospel, we are tasked by God to extend our compassion and influence to these areas. The failures of our welfare programs, our government schools and our overbearing environment policies are a result of the Church saying, “we don’t want to spend our time and resources on these things, let government do it.” Some churches are recognizing this and are again taking up their role in addressing the social needs of others.
While it is important for Christians to be involved in the leadership of our country, to extend the influence of the faith to the halls of government, the things of God cannot be thrust on man through government. He will resist, it is in his sin nature to rebel. While government can and should promote and support an environment favorable to Christianity, or at the least remain neutral, the change we all want can only come one way, through a change of men's hearts, one by one. The revision of the historical impact of Christianity on the founding of our country is not a government problem, it is a sin problem. Government doesn’t care if Christianity is promoted, repressed, or left alone. Satan does.
Do I want to see the truth of our history known, studied and discussed without revision, yes. Do I want to see a renewed hunger for the things of God in our country, yes. Do I have a responsibility to use my influence, my vote, my voice, yes. Do I want men to use government to change the desires and heart of man...no.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)