The No Kool Aid Zone

Spoken like a true cultural elitist who has lost his grasp on reality.

Don ~ Jan 16, 2006 at 6:05 pm

Thank you for getting his response. I suggest everyone who is upset with the casting of Chad go and reach out to a gay person, show them the love of Jesus and shut up their griping about a movie. Live Jesus.

Carole Turner ~ Jan 16, 2006 at 9:09 pm

I am not going to comment on the director’s remarks, but to Carole, I think that your first point is well-taken, but as to your second, exercising discernment is about “living Jesus”.

Byron ~ Jan 16, 2006 at 9:22 pm

“Shut up…?” What a tolerant thing to say. Why do people automatically assume that because we disapprove of the gay lifestyle we must also hate gays? Talk about being judgmental. It’s not very loving to tolerate a lifestyle that results in pain and destruction. The fact is that the Jesus who said “suffer the little children to come unto me” is the same Jesus that drove the money changers out of the temple and told the adulterous woman to “go and sin no more.” Jesus demonstrated that real love does not mean tolerating sin. He suffered and died on a cross to pay the penalty for sin and to free us from the slavery of sin. Righteousness and love are not mutually exclusive. They are both living Jesus.

Don ~ Jan 17, 2006 at 9:39 am

Let me start by saying that if you are offended by Chad playing this part, I have no problem with you not going to see the movie….. I believe one should look at this on an individual basis, how you respond could differ on where you stand in your walk with God….thus I do have a slight problem with a pastor suggesting to his church that they should not see this film, in doing so you only hinder the story being told and assist in Chad’s “agenda”. If a Christian goes to this film without knowing about Allen, and is inspired, is this individual to be rebuked?? or told that he/she should have had a different reaction?? I agree with ETE’s response, this is a movie about an incredible story about an Amazing God, not about the advancement of homosexuality. If Mr. Allen desired to be in this film God can surely use him. To say that you are being “tolerant” if you go see this film is a bit much in my view….

josh ~ Jan 17, 2006 at 8:54 pm

Not sure, Josh, who you’re addressing vis a vis “pastor”, so let me tell you what I decided to do/say this past Sunday. I thought about telling folks that they should not see the film, but then decided against it, saying that it was up to them (duh), but that I was withdrawing my own personal endorsement of it. I did not want folks going to the film because I had recommended it, and then finding out later that Chad Allen had been cast in the role.

I do not have a problem agreeing that this is probably “an incredible story about an Amazing God”; I have no thought that ETE is doing this to advance homosexuality; would never accuse them of that. I’ve said in many forums on the web that God certainly can use this film; He uses what He chooses to use. I don’t think Chad Allen is necessarily using this film to further his agenda; I have no clue what his motives are.

My beef with the whole thing is that a Christian company is telling an explicitly Christian story (setting it off in my mind from films like Lord of the Rings and Narnia–a Disney production), and used no discernment in their choice of actors, but rather chose someone who not only is homosexual, but an activist in the cause, to play the role of a sold-out man of God like Nate Saint. Then, this company promotes it to my church as a spiritually-uplifting thing. It’s not Chad that offends me; it’s a “Christian” company using a total lack of discernment that bothers me. I do not want to patronize the film for the same reason that I don’t want to listen to Jimmy Swaggart preach nor Amy Grant sing.

If we are Christians, our desire ought to be to do God’s work God’s way. Telling the story is God’s work; IMHO, using a homosexual activist in a leading role to help tell it is not doing it God’s way.

Byron ~ Jan 17, 2006 at 9:53 pm

Before I begin my long statement of what I believe and why I believe it, I would like to state that all my beliefs are based upon what the Bible says as I believe that the Bible was inspired by God himself.

“In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth” he also created all that is in the earth. When looking at what the Bible says as a whole, one must first understand that we are a people of sin or that no one is perfect. It says in the Bible that no one sin is greater than another, they all share equal weight in heaven when we stand before God on His appointed Judgment Day; therefore my belief is that homosexuality is a sin but that doesn’t prevent me from having compassion toward all people. By no means am I a perfect person, as I have stated earlier no one is perfect; therefore, we as imperfect people, myself included, must even rethink the choices we make. These choices can either hinder our relationship with God or help us have a stronger relationship with God. Though I am a Christian I still am not a perfect person, but knowing I am not perfect I try to do what is pleasing to God by conforming my life more to how God wants me to be, even when I do face temptation and sometimes I give in to that temptation, I still know that I am weaker than God and I need to depend more on him to get me through my temptations.

My point is, we should not judge others for being what they are, in the end it is God that judges people, not people judging people. Why tell others of their imperfectness when you yourself are not perfect? We as Christians need to understand that to be a testimony to others you must be a friend first, because it is hard to be a friend, but it is not hard to judge others of what they are rather than who they are. When we take the easy way out and judge others, we do nothing to proclaim the greatness of God, but when we conquer the hard, people have noticed and the testimony of the conqueror will be that he couldn’t have done it on his own. In the end it was with the help of God that he was able to conquer the hard. The latter part of what I was saying should be the effect of this movie on a person as these missionaries and their families have conquered the impossible and after so many years their lives are affecting others and their legacy lives on. If an imperfect person can do that then think of what God can do in all walks of life and his legacy will live on forever. Just remember a stone is worth more than gold in God’s eyes.

Stephanie ~ Jan 18, 2006 at 3:42 am

On Larry King, Chad said words to the effect that folks were upset with him for being in “End of the Spear.”

My beef, like yours Byron, is not with Chad, but with ETE. Had they not promoted the movie so heavily amongst evangelical Christians, the opposition to the movie would not be so strong. Their credibility is diminished, and they are going to have a more difficult time promoting their future movies amongst evangelicals.

JohnBrian ~ Jan 18, 2006 at 7:49 am

Stephanie, I agree with all of your paragraph of stated beliefs, with the one exception that I’d challenge you to show me where in the Bible it says that no one sin is greater than the other.

To your second paragraph, my first question is, “who is being judged?” Chad Allen has admitted that he is a homosexual activist, and I have spent exactly no time dwelling on that or castigating him for it. Is agreeing with him “judging” him? Further, the issue is about Every Tribe Entertainment; I AM judging that they made a wrong decision to cast Mr. Allen in the role. But if it is wrong for me to “judge” ETE, then was it wrong for Martin Luther to “judge” that the Catholic church was teaching heresy, or for the Nicene Council to “judge” that Arius was teaching heresy, or for evangelical believers to “judge” that Mormon theology is wrong? Of course not; we all judge; we all SHOULD judge; we all MUST judge. The question is what yardstick we are using, for Jesus commanded us to judge…He said, “judge righteous judgment”. In other words, make your judgments—for we cannot help making judgments—on the basis of honesty and truth, rather than our own predilections.

It is not by any stretch of the imagination some vendetta I have against Chad Allen that causes me to reach the conclusion I do; again, my beef isn’t with him but with ETE. My strong preference would be to support this film; if you read all of the things I’ve written, going back to my first post, you read that I truly, truly hate to take the position I have taken. And yet, because I believe that God’s work must be done God’s way, and because I believe that that is not the case here, I must speak out. The church in America is anemic because we fail to be discerning.

Now, it’s surely possible that I’m wrong here, but do understand that I’m not getting my jollies by trying to tear down this film. I do believe that God can use this film; so many of us have been challenged through the years by this story. God can use anything, and I have no doubt that He will use this film. That is a different question, though, than whether or not things were done right in the first place.

Byron ~ Jan 18, 2006 at 9:25 am

My beef, like yours Byron, is not with Chad, but with ETE. Had they not promoted the movie so heavily amongst evangelical Christians, the opposition to the movie would not be so strong. Their credibility is diminished, and they are going to have a more difficult time promoting their future movies amongst evangelicals.

Maybe I feel differently because I had heard no advance hype from ETE. I hadn’t heard the film was being made until last weekend.

But there is a difference, in my opinion, between seeing a movie and seeing an actor. I think anyone with a lick of discernment can watch the movie without being convinced that homosexuality is OK. Personally, if my ISP had been out for a month, I’d have never known anyone was gay, nor would I have worried about it. It’s a movie, after all.

Myself, I don’t send people out to see movies. We saw “The Passion” as a group because of its intensity. Aside from that, I’ve recommended no film. But if anyone asks, I’ll tell them that it’s a great story and that there is a homosexual actor in it, but that doesn’t make homosexuality OK. I doubt anyone will have a problem figuring that out.

rev-ed ~ Jan 18, 2006 at 4:26 pm

My comment was dealing with pastors in general, but I was curious if you (Byron) planned to share your view with your congregation. I thought that I read somewhere in this massive blog that you planned to encourage FCC not to see it. Our church encouraged its congregation to go see the movie a few weeks back. I just don’t feel a worship service is the correct place to promote or dis-credit any movie…but I could be wrong…thanks for your feedback

josh ~ Jan 18, 2006 at 8:45 pm

What I had done, Josh, was to use the documentary on the missionaries’ killings as the backdrop for our entire service on 1/8. In that context, I mentioned that the film End of the Spear was coming out, and that it would tell this story. Having said that, at the very end of the 1/15 service, after everything else was done, I said that I had to withdraw my endorsement of the film. I hadn’t spent but a few seconds the week before (to my remembrance) mentioning the fact that the film was coming out (sure didn’t cheerlead for it in a major way), but having said that, I felt that I needed to retract those statements. I actually spent more time promoting The Passion than this.

Byron ~ Jan 18, 2006 at 8:56 pm

The casting of Chad coupled with the target marketing to evangelical Christians might certainly be listed in the “What were they Thinking!?!?” category, (especially if they were supprised at the backlash). That being said, to assume that someone who may not meet a “Gold Standard” for their own walk on this earth is reason to disqualify that individual from being used in a highly visible manner is to misunderstand some of the primary messages in the Bible:
Christ came to save ALL
ALL have sinned and fall short of the Glory of God
Christ himsel CHOOSES and USES many who at first blush may not meet the ideal. (Truth be told, there is no one who does and anyone who says he does could use another look in the mirror)

Remember the RESULTS?:

Paul- the infamous killer of Christians
Rahab- the harlot of Jericho

Thoughts:

How many people will see this movie BECAUSE Chad Allen is in it who would otherwise not given it a second thought?

I don’t know Chad Allen, but I am CERTAIN of this: The whole story of Chad Allen hasn’t been written – It isn’t even complete yet! … and all those who believe they can predict the ending do so at great peril!

Lee ~ Jan 19, 2006 at 4:35 pm

Lee, I have to say that I agree with most all of what you say: Christ came to save all; all have sinned; Christ uses the most unlikely of people. I don’t misunderstand any of that. The whole story of Chad Allen has not been written, and sure, maybe there’ll be some folks who see this because Chad is in it. But all of that said, I think you’re missing some things:

Paul was chosen by God as he was, but he was changed by God prior to his being used for the purpose of proclaiming the gospel. Rahab is listed in the heroes of faith, indicating that she, too, was a changed individual. No one argues that God can use people from awful backgrounds, but God changes them prior to their being used. True, God used unregenerate folks for His purposes, but that was for things like judging His people Israel, not proclaiming the gospel.

The issue involves whether or not a Christian entity, wishing to publish the message of the gospel (and this is certainly what is being portrayed to churches in the promotional material), should use as messengers those who are engaged in the wholesale undermining of the message of the Bible. The promotion of homosexual marriage, just one of the things that activist Chad Allen is engaged in, is very contrary to Scripture and will, if enacted, undoubtedly hasten the demise of our culture. This is not a person that I believe should have been chosen by a Christian entity to portray the character of Nate Saint, any more than Eminem shouldn’t be cast by a Christian movie company as Billy Graham one day nor Snoog Dogg as E. V. Hill.

Byron ~ Jan 19, 2006 at 5:00 pm

Dude…who’s Snoog Dogg?

Don ~ Jan 19, 2006 at 5:29 pm

“SnooG” Dogg is SnooP Dogg’s brother. Everybody knows that…dude…

Byron ~ Jan 19, 2006 at 6:09 pm

I first read about the movie in an interview with producer Mart Green in Christianity Today.Was impressed by Mr.Green’s ministry attitude and his undertaking to make into film a story that has inspired many.I feel so disappointed when I read about the casting of a professed homosexual for reasons that Pastor Byron pointed out clearly in the Jan 17 posting. Of course we can reach out and hug a homosexual.Of course Hollywood can do what they please.But the attitude conveyed by the casting decision makes this film not much different than a Hollywood production, falling right in line with its trends.”What are they thinking?”is right.

Penny ~ Jan 20, 2006 at 5:22 am

ETE:

I am deeply grieved by your company’s willful failure to screen the background of the actors taking part in your films. Chad Allen’s involvement in sodomy has already destroyed the film’s credibility.

It also seems that you are not ashamed of Allen’s participation in “Corpus Christi.” This play, which depicts Jesus Christ as a homosexual who engages in sex with his disciples, is proudly displayed on the “End of the Spear” website as one of Allen’s credentials.

I strongly advise you to honor God and pull the film. Since this is unlikely to happen, I encourage you to ensure that this movie will never be sold after it runs its cycle in the movies.

In regards to Jim Hanlon’s comments of the film never having been made if you “only [worked] with people who were completely sanctified,” I find them lacking a Scriptural foundation. Jesus Christ does indeed completely sanctify the person who accepts His shed blood as payment for sin, and there are many extraordinarily talented, sanctified actors. Please do allow your business endeavors to get in the way of your Biblical studies.

I will pray that the Lord would cause those involved in your company to make some significant changes before more damage is done to the cause of Christ.

Michael ~ Jan 20, 2006 at 11:59 am

I heard the director of the movie on The Way of the Master radio today and he said they did not know Chad Allen was gay until after he was cast and that once they knew, they let him know they did not agree with his lifestyle. Sidenote: if he is such a gay activist, why have I never even heard of him or seen him in the media since he was a child actor?

Nonetheless, I do not understand the hub bub. God uses imperfect people all the time for His kingdom – I’m sure Paul was not perfect immediately after his conversion (i.e. I do what I don’t want to do, etc).

Main point: being gay is no worse than a Christian actor who deals with another sin (impatience, overeating). Yes, a Chrsitian man may have repented, but is imperfect nonetheless.

But those who have such a problem with Chad Allen being cast are not the ones who need to see the movie anyway – I pray that gay people will go see this movie and will repent and be born again.

Heather ~ Jan 20, 2006 at 1:12 pm

As a pastor who was sought out by ETE to help market End of the Spear, I feel betrayed now that I find out about Chad Allen’s casting as Nate Saint. Everything he is living for in his private life subverts the Gospel of Jesus Christ and the reason those five missionaries went to Ecuador for. I agee with JohnBrian – ETE’s credibility is diminished and they certainly will have a difficult time promoting their future movies with me.

If for no other reason, I think their decision to cast Chad was wrong and very unfortunate since his personal lifestyle and agenda get in the way of telling the otherwise deserving story of love, forgiveness, devotion to Christ and faithfulness. It just amazes me that so many in the American public compartmentalize issues like this. It reminds me of Bill Clinton’s re-election. By the time that election rolled around, the American public had enough evidence to prove his poor character and discredit his integrity, but they re-elected him anyway. Most did so with the notion that his private life is just that and that it didn’t have any bearing upon his professional life. Bologna! And in this instance, Chad Allen’s private life that he chose to make very public upstages the real story that ETE was trying to tell and they blew it completely by casting him in that roll. Futhermore, it is sad that Steve Saint is quoted as being in support of this casting.

Pastor Sam ~ Jan 20, 2006 at 1:54 pm

Heather,

I’d encourage you to read some of the other posts in order to get a feel for the “hubbub”. As I say repeatedly, God can use who/what He chooses, and none of us are perfect…but those are beside the point. I’d encourage you to read some of the other rationale posted on this site!

Thanks,
Byron

Byron ~ Jan 20, 2006 at 2:18 pm

Heather,

Gay people will not get saved as a result of seeing this movie since the Gospel of Jesus Christ is not shared in the movie. There is no call to repentance of sin and faith in Christ from what I’ve read from those who have seen the entire film. How can they be saved if the Gospel isn’t given? The value of this film is more directed to a Christian audience to inspire them to greater devotion and service to Christ and His kingdom. Sadly, because of Chad Allen’s casting as Nate Saint that won’t happen.

Pastor Sam ~ Jan 20, 2006 at 2:23 pm

Bryon,

Reading your posts I get the idea that you are the kind of pastor I like to fellowship with. More people need the discernment that is so evident in your posts. May our tribe increase!

Pastor Sam ~ Jan 20, 2006 at 2:29 pm

I think Christians often misunderstand tolerance; let’s instead go to God’s Word and act on His truth.

I haven’t heard anyone mention the important truth in 2 Corinthians 6:14 which is pertinent to this discussion: “Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness?” Keep reading verses 15 to 18; it clearly speaks of the DISTINCTION we are to have from the world. “What does a believer have in common with an unbeliever?” Chad Allen is an unbeliever with his own ideas about God and morality. Nate Saint was a believer in Jesus Christ who stood firmly and unashamedly for the gospel. What do they have in common, in life or in film?

God raised up 5 humble, godly men in a remote jungle to influence the world for Christ; each was BORN AGAIN, which made all the difference. ETE should have taken that very seriously. Let’s pray for Chad Allen, friends; he has been exposed to the truth of Jesus Christ, and God may yet use that to change his heart.

Nanette ~ Jan 20, 2006 at 3:27 pm

I am amazed at some of the comments I am reading here. I purchased four tickets Sunday, asked both of my sons to go. We have always worried about our older son, I believe he is living in a homosexual lifestyle. I thought this would be a great film, hoping that God could use it. ABSOLUTELY, I would never in a million years go now! That would endorse the entire behavior.

There is a HUGE difference in a person that sins (we all do) and one that it is his practice, it is his lifestyle, all of you so called accepting people get your Bibles out. Read 1 Corinthinas 5:9, and 1 Corinthians 5:11, and 1 Corinthinas 6:9-11. Have nothing to do with sexaully immoral people! Sure we are to love them, but not to validate their lifestyle!

Stu ~ Jan 20, 2006 at 3:41 pm

One thing to remember here is that Chad Allen is an actor. This is his job. His being gay is not the issue but whether the story is being told accurately. I must admit I was a bit surprised to hear he had been cast in the role of Steve/Nate Saint but I’d rather see him as an unbeliever do a great job than see a Christian cast & do a not so good job. He’s not pushing his gay activities while in this role.

Jean ~ Jan 20, 2006 at 4:23 pm

Ok, that was pretty goofy to say, Jean. What is going on with Christians today? In the last day many will be deceived. Dear God, please don’t let me have blinders on. Don’t let me sit idley by for the sake of political correctness. My younger son, who is 22yrs. would flip out at this. he would totally croak if he went to this and found out he was gay. It doesn’t matter what anyone says, make it sound good, make it sound like “he’s just an actor this is his job”. It is ludicrist!!!! Very, very bad judgement!! While were at it, why don’t you say it doesn’t matter what you believe, all rhodes point to heaven. GIVE ME A BREAK! Many “so called Christians” are going to be some of the very one’s that make it possible for many to think they are allright, there is balck and white. And I believe this is one of those instances.

Stu ~ Jan 20, 2006 at 4:46 pm

What is not being considered is beyond the “face time” of Chad on the screen. As Christians, we are called to use our minds to the fullest and be excellent in all things, and therefore, we must consider this: by allowing a homosexual man to star in this film, we can assume that people will want to find out about him…especially our children. They will think he’s “cool” and he will have influence on them as does every other actor in film or TV. Should we be giving the homosexual community a platform? Automatically, for the reasons I’ve stated above, they infiltrate and we are called not to let that happen. Secondly, if this was meant to bridge a gap between Christians and homosexuals, because you can also assume that homosexuals will be attending the movie, there could be a much better way to reach out to them – perhaps at the end of the movie, give people a call to action to learn more about having a personal relationship with Christ and spending eternity with Him instead of in Hell. Thirdly, we are to be good stewards of our money, and to attend this movie will help to make Mr. Allen prosper. He is a homosexual activist, believes in homosexual marraige, homosexual adoption of children, has been in plays that degrade Christ and Christianity (Corpus Christi), and if we as Christians allow these actions, then our society will certainly continue to deteriorate and families will disintegrate, which will change everything about life as we know it. I will not fund any of those causes listed above. I think we all know that Mr. Allen will use this movie to further his own agenda, which is pushing the homosexual lifestyle. So, dear bloggers, this is much bigger than simply your own feelings and thoughts…we are called to live as the Bible tells us to live. The ramifications of doing nothing about this are much larger than “shutting up” and turning a blind eye toward what could quite possibly be a hidden agenda. Jesus was radical and while I am all about loving people, I love them so much, that I want to help them spend eternity with the Almighty, not with the great deceiver who is doing a great job in duping many of us into thinking it’s perfectly fine for a homosexual man to make a star appearance in a story about a deeply Christian family. Let’s start thinking about what we’re doing, the effects it will have on the world around us and our families, and let’s not be afraid of what people will think if we take a stand for what the Bible actually says. If Mr. Allen or any other homosexuals get angry with us for a little while while we witness to them, it’s a small price to pay for Infinite True Love. That is the outreach I’d like to see all of us have…not this wimpy, lukewarm, careful “love” that Jesus Himself never displayed. Thank you.

Christine ~ Jan 20, 2006 at 4:53 pm

I like the word shut up, which to some seems harsh but to me people lost in the gay lifestyle have heard all this over and over again. How we “love the sinner and hate the sin” they don’t see it but they hear it loud and clear. It’s not working, they are running the show and all we do is run our mouths. The fact is this guy is in this movie, use it to talk to your kids about the gay issue, start a discussion with a gay person about it, use this to reach a gay person for christ. Or better yet, serve a gay person like Jesus would and maybe your actions will speak louder then your words. We are here to reach the lost, not talk about how lost they are till we are blue in the face.

Carole Turner ~ Jan 20, 2006 at 5:55 pm

“If we are Christians, our desire ought to be to do God’s work God’s way. Telling the story is God’s work; IMHO, using a homosexual activist in a leading role to help tell it is not doing it God’s way.”

-from an earlier post

God forbid we should ever be so arrogant as to assume that we do God’s work. We don’t do God’s work; God does His work through us, if we submit to Him (John 15:4-5.) God doesn’t give a rip about what we can do for Him; He cares about what we will let Him do through us. I believe God told the story exactly the way He wanted to tell it. The fact that ETE was unaware of the situation (but God knew) lends some confirmation to that, and I believe that Steve Saint and ETE acted rightly once they found out. We don’t know all of the ways God is working through this film, and all the seeds that have been sown in the process. Allowing this man to act in this film involved him in the story, to the point of him spending some time in the jungle with the Waodani. If he came away from that experience unaffected, he must be a hard soul indeed.
Wait and see what fruit is produced, then decide. It won’t be a tough call: a bad tree can’t produce good fruit, and a good tree won’t produce bad fruit. I believe Stephanie is right–sin is sin–but some sins are certainly more dangerous than others, and right at the top of the list is the sin of pride. Watch out for that one, my brothers and sisters–it was the one that got Satan.

Dean ~ Jan 20, 2006 at 7:08 pm

HU?? Use it to speak to your children about gays? What are you going to say, it’s ok, it doesn’t matter, we should condone their lifestyle? That is exactly what staring this gay man in the movie is doing. I don’t think so. The guy that cuts my hair is gay. My heart hurts for him, he is such a sweet boy. I am very good to him, I tip him large, I give him money for Christmas, I, in no way would ever look down on him, but to make him think he’s ok, no way that will never happen. That is what casting this gay young man is doing, it doesn’t matter, your ok. I will never do it. I will warn him that he will spend an eternity in hell if he doesn’t turn from his ways, and accept Jesus. It’s in our face everwhere, now in a Christian film. You say we Christians are the one’s that need to change, give me a break. They want to redefine marriage, the Bible and everything God stands for.
And yes, I do feel sorry for them, I don’t look down on them as a human, and yes, I do look down on their sin. Their sick of that, well, that is what being a Christian is. I won’t pretend everything is ok. Because it’s not.

Stu ~ Jan 20, 2006 at 6:57 pm

I am really confused by many comments on this issue. I have read all of them. But according to everything I’m reading, I’m assuming most of you never watch TV or any movies. From many of your arguments, you should be separating yourselves completely from media of ALL kinds – not just this movie.

Heather ~ Jan 20, 2006 at 8:08 pm

Ah, the sin of pride. I’ve heard a lot of vaguely different things said here, but they are variations on a theme: God said we should avoid contact with the big bad gays. “They’re running the show.” “We MUST judge.” “Reach out to a gay person, show them the love of Jesus.” It makes me miss being in the ministry the way I might miss having stitches without lidocane.

I got out of the ministry for just this reason: everybody is so intent on proving that they’re right that they miss the one most true thing in this whole universe–the only sin that can send a man to hell is his refusal of the Grace offered by Christ and His sacrifice on the cross.

Would you say that if something bad happened to a gay person that their lifestyle earned them that tragedy? Do gays deserve AIDS? I’d say no–not any more than a young man might deserve AIDS when he gets it from a blood transfusion, nor does his father deserve to be shunned and run out of the ministry for having a son with AIDS.

Another thing that bothers me is the business that the “ministry” has become. I walked into the Berean store here in Phoenix and saw a cocophany of garbage–candy, toys, t-shirts that said anything and everything a churchgoer could imagine, and books on everything from the blessings of Jabez to the horrors of the end times. Do we need all of this? It’s not a ministry, it’s a moneymaking venture. This movie is no different. Sure, I hope this movie speaks to people; but the company that made it is hoping to turn a profit. That’s what we’re all forgetting.

“The church in America is anemic because we fail to be discerning.” I believe Byron said this. I disagree. We’re anemic because we’ve forgotten that we all have one thing in common: our faith in Christ. Other differences should be set aside. Jesus condemned one group of people–the religious leaders. The only other time He is recorded as losing His temper with anyone is when He overturned the money lenders’ tables in the temple. I don’t think it would be any different today.

We need to stop making such a fuss about this kind of stuff. You only validate the so-called “agenda” of the people you disagree with when you make a crusade out of your beliefs. And if you keep up this way, you will see everything you believe is right being thrown back in your face.

One last thing…let’s talk about the more dangerous lifestyle. My younger sister, as straight as any of you, is an alcoholic, has experimented with drugs, and has lost track of the number of sexual partners she’s had in the last few years. I am a lesbian and I’m celibate. Now you can pass your holy judgement. I haven’t lost my faith or my salvation, but I have changed some of the fine details of my theology. See my webpage at http://www.myspace.com/azcrane or go to www. soulforce.org for more.

Mel ~ Jan 20, 2006 at 9:09 pm

What is wrong with you people? I cannot for a minute believe that anyone who has actually seen this film or knows any of the people involved would even dare to say that this movie does not present the clear gospel or say that the movie is not worthy of seeing because Chad Allen is gay.

I personally know Steve Saint, his family and Mincayni, and I know that the gospel was proclaimed loudly in this movie.

So many of you who are so quick to cast your ugly and demeaning comments go to the movies and watch TV on a regular basis. I find it hard to believe that any of you would be so nieve as to not realize that many of your favorite actors and actresses support causes that are anything but Christian. Many of them lead lifestyles that go 100% against the Word of God. Yet you still watch their shows and view their movies. I am willing to bet that many of you have taken your families to Disney movies and Disney in Florida hosts Gay Pride week every single year. Did you go see Narnia or did you avoid it as well?

How about sports figures, do you have a favorite team? I am willing to go out on a limb here and say that you do, and I am betting we can all find a player on that team that leads a lifestyle that is contrary to the Word. Many have been involved in incidents that are horrible, yet you still support the team.

If you say you don’t do any of the above then I would venture to say that you are not a very honest person.

Do you have anything in your life that you haven’t turned over to God?

Do you think that gay people would go to a movie with a gay supporter in it? Sure they would. And just like the Wadoni tribe who were living a life that was contrary to God so are they. Is it possible for them to turn back to God, sure it is.

It is sad that so many of you seem to have forgotten that it isn’t about casting people out because they are different but leading them and guiding them to a different way, Gods way, walking His trails and not their own, that trail that is not of God.

I say this…. if you are a pastor, or just a Christian…go see the movie…it will touch your life I promise. Get past Chad Allen being gay and see how God worked in the lives of these men, and an entire tribe has changed their ways because God continued to work in the lives of 5 men who gave their lives so that others could live, worked in their wives, their children, the grandchildren and now their great grandchildren. The Wadoni did repent, and that is seen in this film, they did turn from their sinful lifestyle and turn to God’s ways…. it happened for them it can happen for anyone.

Please, I beg you, do not cast an ugly mark on something that God so clearly had His hand in. The theater tonight was packed, sold out as a matter of fact. AMEN! God is still working through those 5 men today.

God can work in and through any person and any situation. He is still in the business of miracles just like he has been since the start of time. Reach out to someone who is different from you… show them God’s trail.

ladigrace ~ Jan 20, 2006 at 11:29 pm

Lee is right in saying that the whole story of Chad has not been written; but mind you, much has been written already.Just go to his fans site chadallenonline.com. The home page has a display:”Vote for Chad for Queer Favorite for 2005″ He “came out” in 2001.But these discussions are not about Chad.He has made choices for his life. He will continue to perform whether he has a role in EOS or not. Our discussion is about the recognition of responsibility of choices we(Bible believing Christians)make within the biblical teaching(example:Nanette’s posting.)We are not holier than “thou”; but we are to desire and live lives holy like Jesus.The casting of a homosexul for a lead role whose character sacrificed his family and life to follow Jesus’ command in the Bible just comes across as inconsistent in what we believe in the Bible. Nothing against the gay as an actor. It’s all about what we say we believe in and what we do.
Pastor Byron, do you plan on forwarding these to Mart Green?

Penny ~ Jan 20, 2006 at 11:30 pm

Hadn’t thought about it, Penny, to tell you the truth. This thread began, of course, with my allowing Jim Hanon, director of the movie and a man with whom I had a cordial email conversation, posting what he wanted to say in response to the controversy; he is a brother in Christ, and I wanted him to be able to give his side of the story. As Christians, we need to be able to talk with each other about these issues without calling names or casting aspersions. I will consider what the best response to this might be when all of the dust settles, and go from there. Thanks for your gracious posting, and for that matter, to all who, regardless of position on this issue, post with Christian grace and tact.

Byron ~ Jan 20, 2006 at 11:58 pm

The five missionaries who were killed reach out to a tribe of fierce killers and changed their lives forever. Maybe by allowing Chad Allen to play Nate Saint (and he did a wonderful job – I saw the film tonight), Chad’s life will be changed also. Imagine if he ends up becoming a Christian because of playing this role. What a testimony that would be.

Michelle ~ Jan 21, 2006 at 12:12 am

I just got back from the movie & wanted to see if there were any reviews…I was pretty shocked that the lead guy was gay. My flesh says that flies in the face of the lives that were given to further the gospel. I hate that this is causing division & controversy, BUT Jesus did that all over the place.Also,I was thinking of the jokes that could be made ..

If Steve Saint or the director knew & cast him anyway. I am grieved. Did they look at his resume & see his previous work?? Look at film on him?? Being an actor myself, I can’t help but think there are some incredible Christian actors that could have filled this role amazingly.

On the other hand in the Spirit, I am thinking I bet Nate Saint & the guys didn’t check fist to see if the natives were gay or not before they went into that jungle to spead the gospel..( neither did Jesus)

As for the end of Chad’s story, I will pray… I am still praying for Charlton Heston (Moses) to receive the Lord.

I believe God is in control & can use all things for the good of those who love him. We love Him and I truly believe people will get saved, gay & otherwise. Our God is in charge not us.His hand allowed this. “Every knee shall bow every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord” God Bless You all & Pray for Chad, the movie is a done deal.

Karen J ~ Jan 21, 2006 at 2:29 am

The casting director said that they did NOT know that Chad was gay when he was cast. When they found out it was difficult to decide what to do. They decided to keep him and show him the love of Christ in the process of making the film, knowing that it was going to create issues. The Saints were part of the decision making process. He also said that Chad was aware of the risk the movie makers were taking for him. (imo, it shows a lack of charity on Chad’s part not to bow out, and causes me to wonder about his motivation, however, he was definitely shown grace by ETE, wasn’t he…I hope that has an impact on Chad’s life)

I saw the film last night and I thought it was a really good portrayal of forgiveness and sacrifice. If you are looking for a movie that will evangelize, this isn’t it. What it does is tell a story of WHAT happened, from the Waodani point of view, but doesn’t get too deep into the missionaries’ motives and purposes. The gospel IS there, if you want to call it “watered down” you may, however, the acting and script are very good and it’s not a big leap to make inferences as to why it all happens. IOW, if you want to compare it to movies like LOTR or LW&W, at least this movie it’s obvious it’s about God LOL !!

The movie is valuable to people who know and understand the story. I would also say that it is an EXCELLENT, EXCELLENT way to start a very meaningful conversation with a non-believer. Pre-evangelistic is how you could describe this movie.

The cinematography was gorgeous. Knowing about Chad Allen’s lifestyle led me to pray for him as I watched the movie.

If you go to the movie expecting it to be a typical Christian production, you will be disappointed.

And those are my thoughts.
Sherry

sherry ~ Jan 21, 2006 at 7:57 am

Michelle,

Regardless of where we stand on this issue, I’d hope that all of us could agree that that would be a wonderful outcome, and worthy of praying toward that end!

Byron ~ Jan 21, 2006 at 9:02 am

Instead of criticizing this movie because of an actor who was chosen…because this negativity will keep people away from the movie, why not focus on the story? What if the Lord himself chose Chad Allen in this role? He chose Paul who was a big persecutor of Christians..and he certainly allowed this young man to play this part for a reason. How do we expect people living in homosexuality to want to become like Christ if all we show them is rejection and disdain?

I will see the movie, because I am familiar with the story. I’ve been a born again believer for more than 10 years, but I do not stand in agreement with those who vehemently attack this young man. That is not what Christ would do…not even close.

Ro ~ Jan 21, 2006 at 2:19 pm

Ro, I’m sure that there are some people who are “vehemently attacking” Chad Allen; that’s not what this discussion is about, though. I disagree with his casting in the part in no uncertain terms, and perhaps there have been some here who have attacked him, but with you, I do not stand in agreement with those who vehemently attack Chad Allen. He should be shown the love of Christ.

Your analogy, though, of Paul falls flat on one major point: God chose Paul out of a lifestyle of persecuting Christians, but He changed Paul before He used Paul, remember.

Byron ~ Jan 21, 2006 at 2:30 pm

I am a Born Again Christian who has served the Lord Jesus in Lay Ministry supporting U.S.Armed Forces and their Families for over two decades of my life as director of “OPERATION:EAGLE”. You can review all about me and “OPERATION:EAGLE” at http://www.operationeagle.org.
I have read The Journals of Jim Elliot-Through Gates of Splendor and Shadow of the Almighty.
In my 20 Years of Lay Ministry to the Troops, I did not stop my own ministry efforts because I might run across someone who was gay or may be a gay activist.
We Christians should rejoice that Chad Allen has become associated with the film END OF THE SPEAR–because and solely because GOD is on the Throne and knows every small detail. Has it ever occured to everyone that maybe-just maybe-GOD is at work in Chad’s own life?
Pray for Chad Allen and all he comes into contact with. Pray that the film will prosper and magnify the Lord Jesus.
We live in uncertain times- where people exists across the globe who are plotting and desirous and want to kill and murder every single solitary “Christian” and American and “Westerner” that lives and refuses to submit to radical jihadists doctrine. Jim Elliot,Nate Saint and the rest of those Missionaries knew the risk and went anyway- because they served a GOD who changes lives. They showed us how to live and die for Christ Jesus by Loving those who were their “enemies”, that taught us what being a true Soldier in God’s Army must consists of .
Today American Soldiers are defending YOUR Freedoma nd Liberty and keeping YOU safe from danger and sacrificing their lives doing so- so that YOU can have this discussion. I have stood in hospital rooms at WALTER REED ARMY MEDICAL CENTER and listened to Soldiers who have lost arms and legs and eyes, and who have been there at the end of the spear, the crucible of the War on International Terrorism. You know what they want more than anything? a Unified people.
Prayer and Mercy and Love for each other.
But this will not happen until and when the salt in our society- professing Christians learn what it really means to be Christian—it means to be Christ-like. Not self-righteous legalistic modern-day 21st century Pharisee’s and Sadducees.
Remember what 2 Corinthians 3:17 says. Memorize it. Live it- Then once having done so–”Go out and do Likewise.”

Chaplain Bill Herrmann
1st Timothy 1:12-15 Isaiah 40:28-31
Matthew 25:35-40
OPERATIONEAGLE@COMCAST.NET

Chaplain Bill Herrmann ~ Jan 21, 2006 at 3:44 pm

Chaplain Bill,

What a great ministry you have! I really commend the work you are doing in ministering to those on the front lines representing our country. You are a front-line guy yourself, and we need more of your kind doing what you’re doing; God bless!

That said sincerely, I cannot “rejoice” that Chad Allen was cast in this role. I think that you have drawn a poor parallel, and so if you wander back here and would care to respond, let me give you what I think is a better parallel, the real issue, because I have “run across” homosexual folks in my ministry as well, and it didn’t stop me either. Frankly, though I doubt this would happen, I’d be thrilled beyond belief if Chad Allen were to visit my church service! He’d be welcome!!! But that’s not the parallel…

The parallel with what’s happening here would be if an unregenerate homosexual activist applied to be a fellow chaplain alongside you in your ministry, a co-spreader of the message of the gospel. See, that’s a closer parallel, to my mind, than the one you drew. Would you welcome this individual to be a representative of Christ alongside you, even without coming to faith in Christ, or renouncing homosexual activism? If your answer is “yes”, I’ll commend you for your consistency—but wholeheartedly disagree with your decision.

God is on the throne; I have prayed and will pray for Chad Allen as well! You’re right; we need Christians to be salt and light, not self-righteous legalistic modern-day 21st century Pharisees and Sadducees!

Byron ~ Jan 21, 2006 at 4:12 pm

There is no such thing as the perfect church, the perfect Christian, the perfect movie. But End of the Spear comes darn close. I actually don’t care about the casting, unless Chad came on at the beginning and said, “Hi, I’m gay and proud of it!” The work of this film is in God’s hands. I gave it a great review at my site. I don’t know Chad Allen even though I was at his site today. There is much to be said about loving/judging as Christians. I am very sad this has all been said. The movie is just too good for this kind of bantering.

cwv warrior ~ Jan 21, 2006 at 5:43 pm

Byron, in Matthew 7 (v. 1-5) Jesus very specifically tells us NOT to judge. That’s why I consider that “pride.”

I went to see the movie before going to work this afternoon. I cried through half of it. I’ve met Steve Saint and Mame (grandfather) Mincaye several times, and somehow Mincaye always remembers me. Any chance I get–I’ve driven to San Diego, Albuquerque, El Paso, Denver, all over to see these two speak–I go to hear the story again. This story doesn’t lay any stock in theology or any of the particulars that we’ve started arguing about here; the emphasis is on the only important thing, accepting God’s Grace and Mercy. Scripture says that if it is true in our hearts, it will show in the way we live.

I have been born again since I was 13. As a little kid, I was always angry, rebellious, and reclusive. When I gave my life to God, I changed in some ways, but I was still unhappy that I felt I couldn’t be myself. I started teaching Sunday school when I was 16, and began teaching anti-gay rhetoric soon thereafter. If anyone had told me then that I would “come out” as a lesbian, I’d have reminded them where liars go. But when I was 24, I realized that I was gay and there was nothing in this world that could change it. I had known it all along, and tried my hardest to change it. I begged God to take it away from me, not because of anything that convinced me in scripture, but because the Christian culture that I had been immersed in from a young age required that I be like everyone else.

Let me ask all of you this: is it the Spirit that’s guiding you, or is it a feeling, an emotion, that makes you so passionate about believing that God hates gays? Jesus very specifically spoke against divorce, but He never–NOT ONCE–spoke about homosexuality. How many of you have been divorced and remarried? And there has been much debate recently about the proper translation of the words we now define as “homosexual” in the English version of the original Greek texts.

When Jesus went to the homes of people He wanted to minister to, He didn’t ask what their sins were. Even if He didn’t know, He wouldn’t have asked. He didn’t care. All He wanted was the person’s heart. That’s all you should care about. While I’ve been where you are now and I understand the whys and wherefores, I no longer agree with you. I don’t think Steve Saint cares, and I don’t think Mincaye cares.

Mel ~ Jan 21, 2006 at 6:58 pm

I’m not familiar with who made this movie, but if it was made by a “Christian” company, why couldn’t they have hired a Christian to play the part of Nate Saint. Chad Allen isn’t the only actor who could have played the part.
The Bible says not to be unequally yoked with unbelievers. That is true in our marriages, close friendships and business partnerships. What fellowship does darkness have with light?

Dianne ~ Jan 21, 2006 at 7:08 pm

Chaplain Bill,
thanks for your insights…
Byron, God is in control, so he allowed this to happen. Will this young actor ever want to be a Christian when he is facing so much rejection from believers. I’ve watched hollywood actors often mimick those people that they play. Perhaps being in the “shoes” of some one as godly as he plays would have a positive effect on him…but there is too much controversy over his involvement, which I’m sure would keep some one away.

Ro ~ Jan 21, 2006 at 7:48 pm

Also, if I went through all of the diatribes and dialogues above…I would cite several cases of attacks on this actor. Let’s just be grateful as Christians we have some representation at the theaters when there are some very overtly homosexual positions out in movies that are “award-winning” and drawing seekers in right now( e.g. Brokeback Mountain, Transamerica, and Capote). By the way, these movies are all played by Heterosexual actors who are actually promoting acceptance of alternative lifestyles and deviance. Those are the things we should focus on and if boycotting is to be done, there is where it should be done.

Ro ~ Jan 21, 2006 at 7:53 pm

Mel,

I don’t hate gays, I don’t believe that anyone else who has posted here does either, and I can’t see where you got that idea at all.

Jesus didn’t waste time asking people what thier sins were, you’re right But He did take the time to tell them what they were – He didn’t excuse sin, He forgave it.

sherry ~ Jan 21, 2006 at 7:55 pm

My latest thought on this issue is this: I have to question if satan is causing this hub bub just to keep Christians away who might be motivated to go evangelize after seeing this movie…it’s a known fact that few Christians share their faith on a regular basis and I think that seeing this movie will give American Christians a reality check that these men were speared to death for trying to share their faith – we face nothing close to that kind of risk (at this point.)

Not that everyone needs to see this movie to be inspired to be concerned about eternal matters such as people dying and going to hell daily, but it is just a thought I had.

So, I will be going conscience free to see it – and I do not condemn anyone who doesn’t. If it is sin for you, don’t go.

Heather ~ Jan 21, 2006 at 8:33 pm

I’ve gotten that impression all my life. Listening to my mom, listening to the people I’ve gone to church with, and yes, I think some people here DO in fact hate gays.

It is irresponsible to speak of gays as though they are in need of a new life. “Reach out to a gay person with the love of Jesus?” I understand the love of Jesus perfectly well, and I enjoy it every day. I don’t believe being gay is a sin the way I used to. You should read “Stranger At The Gate” by Mel White, another man I’ve met and adore.

Hate comes in all different forms. If you spend most of your time working against the so-called “gay agenda,” then yes, I’d say you have an underlying hatred. No one sin should be focused on more than any other. And the problem I see in the church (as it relates to gays) is that being gay isn’t just any old sin to you–it’s THE sin. I don’t expect anybody who isn’t gay to understand my acceptance of this. It wasn’t easy for me to accept. But I am much happier now, and God hasn’t stopped blessing me.

Mel ~ Jan 21, 2006 at 8:37 pm

Mel, Let me ask you if you mean being gay is not a sin, or do you mean living in a gay lifestyle is not sin? Someone may be gay, but not live in the lifestyle, that is not sin, whn they indulduge in the gay lifestyle is when it is sin. Certainly, since you confess Christianity that is your belief.

Stu ~ Jan 21, 2006 at 9:00 pm

Mel, you certainly bring an interesting point of view to the discussion, and I’m glad you’ve joined it. For the record, I don’t hate gays; I don’t have a vendetta against them; I don’t think that homosexuality is “THE” sin; I don’t spend much time working against the “gay agenda” (though I do believe that it is destructive). One of the interesting things to explore, either on this post or in another place, is the actual definition of the word “homosexual”, or “gay”, in common parlance. You said that you were “celibate”. I commend you for that—very honestly! I have some disagreements with you at the same time…but I think that, while there are folks who hate homosexuals, there are many, many of us who certainly do not.

Further, while Chad Allen is the impetus for this becoming an issue, my beef continues to be with ETE. I’ve spent no time (nor will I) “bashing” Chad Allen; in fact, if you read all my comments, you’d see that I’ve mentioned once or twice that I found some things for which to respect him.

But I want to know a couple of things: one, aren’t you judging when you say that you think that some people here hate gays? Two, have you taken the time to interpret Matthew 7:1-5 in its context to find out what Jesus is actually saying? Matthew 7:1-5 gets my vote as the most misinterpreted text in the Bible. You don’t need to go any further than verse 6 to understand that Jesus isn’t giving anything approaching a blanket prohibition on “judging”—for what He encourages us to do (unless one takes the position that he’s talking about not throwing our jewelry into a pigpen, literally) involves judging just who it is that qualifies as “swine” before whom we should not “cast our pearls”. Also, I’ve made two posts now on the subject of “Why I Judge (And You Should Too). I’d urge you to read them and interact with the arguments I make there, on both the necessity of judging, and the necessity of judging with righteous judgment, instead of unrighteous (and how we know the difference).

Byron ~ Jan 21, 2006 at 9:03 pm

And to Ro, perhaps you could judge some of the remarks made to be attacks against homosexuals; I cannot, of course, control who posts nor what they post (well, I can edit out blatantly offensive material, of course). I also hope that you’ll see that my intent is not in any way to attack them, and that you’ll see that I have personally not done that, nor will I.

Byron ~ Jan 21, 2006 at 9:08 pm

I must admit,at first I also had to wrestle with the casting of Chad Allen in the role of a dedicated Christian missionary. After reading the multitude of email thoughts on this I’ve concluded that Almighty God can and will use this film to further His Kingdom. Our God is much bigger than all this controversy. I read a thread on the “Enter the Tribe” section of the “endofthespear.com” website. Some of the production crew told how Chad Allen sensed more loved from them than he even received from his own family. By the way , I think that Chad Allen did a fantastic acting job. He did not diminish the the powerful message of the film. As Brothers an Sisters in Christ let’s focus on the positive…. that this great retelling of modern day martyrs was actually put to film! To see their tremendous sacrifice was moving. To watch the surviving relatives continue to fulfill the mission to reach the Waodanis was personally challenging. Then to see the tribes’ repentance demonstrated before my eyes brought to me new meaning that Heaven’s multitude will one day be of “every tribe and tongue”! Glory to God! Let’s key on the positives of this movie. It’s a film about forgiveness,sacrifice,reconciliation and the power of God to change lives. Maybe The LORD will use Chad Allen’s participation in this film to open up his heart to the true message of the Gospel.That is, that God loves everyone (even Chad) and sent His own Son, Jesus, to die for their sins ( even Chad’s sins). Let’s all unite together and covenant in prayer for Chad’s salvation. Wouldn’t it be wonderful if Chad comes to know the Lord Jesus as his own personal savior?! What a testimony that would be! If God can save the Woadonis ( and you and me ), God will have no problem reaching out to Chad. Read 1 Corinthians 6:11, “such were some of you”. Also take a look at the website “dennisjernigan.com and click on his personal testimony. Dennis was a former homosexual whose life was transformed by God’s power. He now has a completely new identity. He’s a married man with 9 children. He’s the man who wrote that well known christian song, “My All in All”. Let’s pray,” Lord we pray that you will reach out to Chad Allen with your loving arms of forgivessness and salvation. Lord. we ask that you will break down his walls of resistance and soften his heart to the truth that you love him. Help him, Lord, to see his need of forgiveness, salvation and a new life. Speak to him Lord, in a way that only you can. “For God so loved the world (Chad) that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever (Chad) believes in Him ,shall not perish but have everlasting life”!
“whosoever (Chad) calls upon the name of the Lord shall be saved”. In Jesus name we pray, amen.

Mike from RI ~ Jan 21, 2006 at 9:43 pm

I know this has been stated, but are you all aware that Nate Saint’s son wrote the book End of the Spear, Steve Saint along with the other family members all helped and even were in the movie. This issue was prayed over and it was a very difficult choice for them to make. As I have stated before I know the Saints personally and trust me they were allowing God to guide this movie not men, not themselves as He has lead all their lives since before that fateful day in 1956.

That being said I have to ask for those of you who are so outraged at Chad Allen being in this movie, do you not think that God can and will work through this and use this in the lives of people? Do you all trust God and allow Him to have complete control of things? If you do then you must realize that all involved were trusting God and Chad Allen was placed in that role not by men but by God. Nothing and I do mean nothing, happens by chance, God always has a reason, ALWAYS.

I don’t know but I think there is way to many of you more upset about this then you are upset about the souls of men. Instead of debating and trying to figure out the why and why nots of the casting why not pray for the many lost people who will see this movie. Pray for ALL the actors, the families, all involved. You do so much more good on your knees before God.

Have faith in the God you claim to love and stand for. Have faith that with God ALL things are possible.

ladigrace ~ Jan 21, 2006 at 9:48 pm

To Mike from RI – AMEN – very well said.

ladigrace ~ Jan 21, 2006 at 9:49 pm

Can’t imagine anyone here disagreeing with that prayer, Mike, nor that sentiment regarding Chad’s salvation. Thanks.

Byron ~ Jan 21, 2006 at 9:54 pm

I’d like to hear each person’s individual definition of the “gay lifestyle.” Not what others think, I want to know what you think.

Mel ~ Jan 21, 2006 at 11:18 pm

ladigrace – You are right on!

Anika ~ Jan 22, 2006 at 2:57 am

Mel,

I’m not sure how relevant a discussion of the definition of the “gay lifestyle” is – but I am curious about how you came to the conclusion that homosexuality isn’t a sin. You mentioned divorce earlier, and I do know a man (church lay-leader) who carried on an affair for years, left his wife to marry the other woman, and dismissed it all since he’s under “grace”. This is absolutely ridiculous. But he twisted the scriptures to justify his sin. I think that people who struggle with faith and same-sex attraction do the same thing – there’s such a strong desire to make it “OK” to do what we want.

I would also add that I agree that homosexuality is one of “THE sins” as you said that get a lot of focus. Fortunately I don’t have to deal with the same focus on my own worst sins that I struggle with. But all sin is destructive.

I read an excerpt of a transcript of Chad Allen’s interview on Larry King – and it appears Chad has also come to believe that it’s not a sin either. This just stumps me totally. Are there scriptures that you use to support your position?

Thanks.

sherry ~ Jan 22, 2006 at 8:07 am

Mel,
Living in the “gay lifestyle” would mean to be succumbing to the sin, actively engaging in these sexual acts which are forbidden by God to His people. We are all sinners saved by Grace if we have repented of sin. Not only confessing but turning away from it. I was once a person filled with anger…when people told me that anger was a sin…I said no way…this is a natural feeling God has given me. I would say “He wired me that way.” However, through His grace He showed me over time how that anger led me to sin so easily. He also showed me that it was sin itself in some contexts. It was destructive to me and others.

From a previous statement you made about “God hasn’t stopped blessing me.” Do you think when God allows good things in your life to occur that he is giving you the “stamp of approval” on all your acts and choices? If so you are believing a lie. I hear others who are always talking about how “blessed” they are in their lives when their lifestyles and character are in opposition to God (I’m not just speaking of homosexuality…I’m talking of lifestyles of deception, selfishness, greed. Matthew 5:45b says “He causes the sun to rise on the evil and the good and sends rain on the righteous and unrighteous.”

Those of us who are His know that He does not approve of sin, not ours or anyone elses…but through His mercy He continues to let us live so that we may come to Him and to have the opportunity to be sanctified until we leave this earth. We are to show that kind of love to others so that they may see Him in us.

Ro ~ Jan 22, 2006 at 8:09 am

Mel, since you asked, let me offer an opinion that I believe to be Scripturally-accurate and reasonable—even though it will probably hit you like a ton of bricks, but hear me out. You said that you are celibate (which, of course, I commend). If you are committed to celibacy as a matter of faithfulness to God, then I do not believe that you are a lesbian. Now please, it’s not that I’m calling you a liar; that’s not my point at all. It’s that I believe that you are buying into thinking that has its basis in something other than Scripture.

Go with me on this, and please don’t feel threatened! I believe that homosexual activity (ALL sexuality outside of marriage, for that matter) is sinful, and as well that we cannot tinker with God’s definition of marriage. Now then, you stated that you at some point realized you were gay. I do not agree with that analysis. What I believe that you realized was that you had an attraction to people of the same sex. I do not believe that a same-sex attraction, however strong, makes a person homosexual, and here’s why: I do not believe that temptation equals sin. I also do not believe that there is any Scriptural warrant for a person to identify herself on the basis of temptation.

I no more condemn you for your temptation toward homosexual sex than I do a person for being tempted to gossip! In fact, if you have those temptations, and say “no” to them, I commend you greatly! Where I disagree is with your choice to call yourself a lesbian on the basis of that which you are tempted to do. If I am tempted to shoplift, I am not then a shoplifter—until I actually shoplift. Even going a step further, you could make the argument that to wear a title as a label, a person would need to be given over to the commission of that act. For instance, say I stole a candy bar when I was 18 (I’m 45 now, but a young 45!!!). Am I a thief? Well, yes and no! Sure, I would have stolen once, but 27 years later, is my life characterized by theft? Of course not…and thus, it would be more inaccurate than accurate to call me a “thief”.

If you have been tempted by homosexuality for 8-10 years, but have never given in—I do not believe you are a lesbian. In fact, even if you’d given in once or twice, I’m still not sure I’d call you that.

Now of course, what I call you is not necessarily relevant to the way you live your life—but since you asked, I wanted to give you a perspective that I’m quite sure you won’t get from Mel White.

Your friend,

Byron

P.S. This discussion has taken a turn toward homosexuality, which is not the real issue here, and thus, I’m going to make some things clear in my next post.

Byron ~ Jan 22, 2006 at 1:14 pm

And here is that post: this thing with Chad Allen, ETE, and EOTS is categorically not about homosexuality. Period.

Let me elaborate (well, it’s my blog, so you have no choice!). I object to the casting of Chad Allen in EOTS because he is an unbeliever living a lifestyle of unrepentant sin and working to undermine the very message that Nate Saint lived and died for. That does not, by the way, make him the world’s worst sinner; it sure doesn’t mean he’s beyond the reach of God’s amazing grace; it doesn’t mean he isn’t a nice guy; I’d be thrilled to buy him dinner. But he is an unrepentant, unbelieving sinner working to undermine God’s truth.

The point is not that he is a homosexual, nor even a homosexual activist. Let’s envision a different scenario: let’s say that Chad Allen were a non-Christian, a problem gambler 10’s of 1000’s of dollars in debt, and were a leading advocate for not having to pay back money lost via gambling. Or let’s say that Chad Allen were hetero, and a professing Christian, but had divorced his wife for no good (Scriptural) reason, and were a leading advocate to overturn Christian morality on the subject of marriage and divorce. Name any other sin, where the person was justifying open sin and seeking to give his life to the overturn of God’s truth regarding that sin. I would be exactly as opposed to his casting in that role as I am with Chad Allen. Every bit as opposed. Period.

Because it’s not about homosexuality. It’s about how Christian organizations, be they churches, Christian schools, parachurch ministries, or filmmakers, go about the promotion and propagation of the gospel.

Now…we can have a difference of opinion about that, to be sure. When we do, though, the Christian thing is to have a rational discussion on the subject. Do you know perhaps the most frustrating thing about this whole thing to me? I’m going to tell you: it’s that so few Christians want to really think and interact with the issues at hand. We want to emote. We want to feel. We don’t want to deal with the subtleties of an argument, and for Heaven’s sake, the last thing we want to do is to consider the tiny possibility that we might be wrong. Want to talk about pride?

You don’t have to agree with me; I might just be wrong (and many of you think I am). But to call names, to impute motives, and to be so lazy in our thinking that we aren’t willing to try to deal with an argument? That’s what’s frustrating.

Sorry for the rant. Somebody respond with reason and Scripture.

Or just call me a bad name and crucify my motives…I’ve gotten pretty used to it by now.

Byron ~ Jan 22, 2006 at 1:30 pm

It’s pretty funny to see all this overwrought handwringing over the casting choice of an actor in a B-grade movie that will be off the radar screen in 4 weeks. Check out the hypocrisy too: the same people who thought it was perfectly acceptable for the perfect and sinless Christ to be portrayed by a mortal sinner in The Passion are now in a tizzy that a mortal sinner named Saint is being portrayed by a mortal sinner named Allen. Gee, where was all the outrage when the son of God was portrayed by a rotten tainted sinner like Jim Cazaviel? How dare Hollywood allow a man who lies and lusts to portray the perfect Christ, huh?

Kathleen ~ Jan 22, 2006 at 2:11 pm

Let me just that all people are sinners, saved or not. The difference is one is going to heaven and one is not. There is not one single sin that unsaved person can commit that a saved person cannot commit and most cases probably has committed. If any one you think differently then you are missing important scripture.
Rom 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;
Rom 5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:
2Co 13:2 I told you before, and foretell you, as if I were present, the second time; and being absent now I write to them which heretofore have sinned, and to all other, that, if I come again, I will not spare:

I am sure that we could all find something about every person who plays a Christian role and denounce them for a sin or imperfection in their lives.

God can and does use people and situations, both unsaved people and saved people, good and bad situations.

The simple fact of the matter is this as far as I am concerned.

End of the Spear is a touching and awesome film. We may or may not agree on the casting of Chad Allen in the role of Nate/Steve Saint. What matters is this… the story is out there it shows a world that is out to one up each other and kill each other with violence and words and other means that people can turn from their ways and turn towards Gods ways.

I have to wonder if you are even aware of why the Wadoni agreed to do this film. It is because they were told about Columbine and they wanted to show people how they were killing each other and stopped so that maybe we could too.

The point of the movie was not to give glory to men, filmakers or causes but to reach out to a lost world, and show them how God’s grace and goodness can make a difference in a violent troubled world. I don’t think any of you would disagree with the fact that we do indeed live in a violent and troubled world.

None of us are perfect. We all have made mistakes and will continue to be imperfect until the day we join the Lord in eternity.

Do you think that if God didn’t want this movie to go forward it would have? Do you think that if His hand wasn’t upon it that it would have done as well as it did on the opening night?

God is in control. He knew who had been cast in the movie and He allowed it. No matter what you think.

As for my thoughts on the gay lifestyle. I believe it is one that is an abomination to the Lord just as the bible says. I don’t think it is healthy for anyone to be involved in. But I am not going to cast judgement upon these people. I hate the sin not the sinner.

ladigrace ~ Jan 22, 2006 at 3:26 pm

Byron, I absolutely agree on this: we need to be able to have a civil discussion rather than an emotional argument. That’s why I’m here and not in other chat areas. And I understand exactly what your intention was with your post on EOTS, but you had to know that the comments would, in fact, turn in this direction. I haven’t been threatened by anything you’ve said.

I got a lot of the same comments when I started getting my tattoos (people quoting the “abomination” passage from Leviticus). The trouble with quoting the ceremonial law that you’re quoting is simple–have you ever had a ham sandwich? Played with a football? Eaten crab, shrimp, or lobster? All of those are forbidden in the same passage. In his letter to the church in Galatia, Paul climbed all over a group of believers who had decided to pick and choose which parts of the ceremonial law to follow and which ones to ignore–and then chastised anyone who didn’t live exactly the way they did. As for the story of Sodom and Gomorrah, the bible doesn’t say that God destroyed those cities for their “homosexuality.” He destroyed them because of other more ghastly offenses, such as sacrificing children to idols, not taking care of the old and ridiculing the poor rather than helping (amongst other things). Is there anything else in the OT that anyone might have contention with? I know what ideas are coming from the NT, but I’m not going to say it just yet since I tend to write novels every time I respond to someone.

I am celibate because I believe that sexual promiscuity–not homosexuality–is sin. I have some friends who have a new partner every night, and I find no interest in that sort of thing at all. I’m not in it for nothing more than their form of sexual gratification; I want a solid relationship with someone who will love me for the rest of my life. I have a cousin who’s found it. Homosexual behavior has been documented at zoos all over America, and it is typically a species’ defense mechanism–when a group overpopulates an area, some of its members prefer the same sex partners from birth to put a natural stopper on the procreation. I think it’s perfectly natural, and God once forbade it long ago for the sole purpose of making sure the Jews were completely different from ALL other nations. I don’t think anyone is sinning by throwing a winning touchdown with a ball covered in pigskin, nor do I believe it’s a sin to have a same-sex attraction.

It is as natural to me as breathing. If I could choose, I would choose to be straight; my life would be easier ad infinitum. Be that as it may, I’m a lesbian, and I believe God made me that way. As for the aversion to it by most Christians today, I think it’s another emotional response (I could be wrong, but that’s my working theory). Take my brother, for example…awesome guy, awesome soldier, has no objections to women being gay, but paranoid as all get-out of gay men. I think it’s a reaction to something some people don’t understand. I’m not attracted to all women, just as gay men don’t have the hots for every man they see. I want another lesbian; I do not find straight women attractive in the least.

As to why I started this thread, I don’t understand why we have to make a hullabaloo about a gay actor being chosen for a role as a martyr when I’ve come to believe that being gay is not the eggregious sin it’s been made out to be.

Mel ~ Jan 22, 2006 at 5:53 pm

Please see this recent interview with Steve Saint concerning the controversy.

http://www.thechurchreport.com/content/view/873/67/

Carole Turner ~ Jan 22, 2006 at 6:11 pm

Well said, Mel. I see no more reason to view a gay orientation or relationship as a sin than I do to regard eating shellfish or wearing clothes of mixed fibers as a sin just because Leviticus says so. The Old Testament is full of absurd notions — men can’t trim their beards, tattoos are forbidden, misbehaving children should be stoned to death, you can’t touch the skin of a pig — that civilized societies have long rejected.
The Leviticus-quoters would be a lot more convincing if they swallowed all Levitical laws themselves, which of course they don’t do.

Kathleen ~ Jan 22, 2006 at 6:31 pm

Mel and Kathleen,

You are both very off in your rationalization of what is sin and what isn’t. This is what the Pharisees did…always trying to rewrite the law. Homosexuality may be seen in other species, but we are higher beings given a spirit. We were not created as sexual beings first, but as spiritual beings. Both the Old and New Testament condemn the sin of homosexuality, just as many other sins of the flesh are condemned. It is sexual immorality, just like fornication, extramarital affairs and lewdness are.

Please see my earlier post about your views of how “blessings” seem to communicate to you that God approves of your “coming out,” as it were.

Ro ~ Jan 22, 2006 at 6:54 pm

Ro, I believe you are off in your account of what the Pharisees did. The Pharisees were the elite, highly educated, rich religious leaders. They took it upon themselves more often to point fingers at others and excuse themselves, and they used scripture to do it most of the time; the rest of the time they just used their status as “God’s chosen leaders.”

I read your post about blessings. At no time did I say that it was blessings alone that convinced me. It is a number of things. What scripture says, and again in some cases DOESN’T say, spoke volumes to me. I’d like you to name specific scriptures to support your rationale and your reasoning.

Mel ~ Jan 22, 2006 at 7:44 pm

Mel,
These scriptures from the New Testament are what I as a Spirit-filled believer…not a nominal Christian… believe is the Law of the Lord concerning sexual immorality, including homosexuality. It is not something that God condones. You seem to see us as the human race as animals, and I do not see us that way, but more as Spirits within flesh.

I search the scriptures to know the Lord more, not to make it convenient for me to live in a lifestyle that is convenient for me. It is a no-brainer, really. Obedience is true joy and blessing. First, a verse that describes how spirit-filled believers listen to His voice and follow His ways.

3The watchman opens the gate for him, and the sheep listen to his voice. He calls his own sheep by name and leads them out. 4When he has brought out all his own, he goes on ahead of them, and his sheep follow him because they know his voice. John 10: 3-4

I Corinthians 6:13
Food for the stomach and the stomach for food”—but God will destroy them both. The body is not meant for sexual immorality, but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body.

Let us behave decently, as in the daytime, not in orgies and drunkenness, not in sexual immorality and debauchery, not in dissension and jealousy.
Romans 13:13

24Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.

Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion. Romans 1:24-27.

and finally:
“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?’ Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’ Matthew 7:21-23

Ro ~ Jan 22, 2006 at 8:04 pm

The missionaries who went in to the jungle went there to stop the murder that was going on there. They knew the dangers but their love for the Lord lead them there. They weren’t concerned about being around the murderers. They didn’t flee. They didn’t ignore them they didnt boycott them, they went right in knowing that the Lord’s work would be done. Their faith was that strong. Now here we are…we have 1 homosexual man in our midst. I don’t see in the Bible where God tells us that a homosexual is worse than a murderer or an adulterer….The Bible does tell us we are to be thankful for our trials and troubles as they bring us closer to Him…Let us see this as that sort of lesson for us and certainly for Mr. Allen and all of the other Mr Allens this will effect. There are so many levels of focus here…but the movie has been made.. we can’t stop it. How will you show Christ in you brother or sister? That is what we are all asking ourselves….so already the ministry from this movie is working.

Deb ~ Jan 22, 2006 at 8:53 pm

When we eliminate sinners or even those with bad theology from Christian films we will have only animated features. The Passion and the incredible film Most (the finest Christian message film I have seen) feature actors that have been in questionable movies. But the principle character in this film should have been chosen with greater discernment. I believe Mel Gibson did that with the Passion. It really leaves those of us in leadership in an incredible dilemma. This story deserves a retelling, but as a leader of students I struggle to inspire young people with the ethos of Chad Allen. There is also a deeper problem. This controversy will place greater enmity between the two communities that so badly need to have more common ground. How odd that a movie about one of the greatest missions stories of the past 100 years will put outreach, to another hostile group that desperately needs the truth and love of Christ, in greater peril.

randy ~ Jan 22, 2006 at 9:37 pm

Carole, thanks for posting the article where Steve Saint is interviewed. I think that he is using poor reasoning, and confusing God’s sovereign will with His moral will (a mistake some on this thread have made), but I appreciate your providing the link!

Byron ~ Jan 22, 2006 at 9:41 pm

I seriously don’t think Byron that you know Steve Saint, his family or any of the other families involved. I do. I would suggest that before you make comments about his reasoning and confusion that you would take the opportunity to get to know this man and talk to him yourself.

ladigrace ~ Jan 22, 2006 at 9:50 pm

No, I don’t know Steve Saint; I wish I did. I sent an email to his organization, hoping to contact him in order to get his personal take on the story, about a week ago. I made the best effort I knew how, and posted on this blog to that effect. I did receive an email from an associate of his, and I commented upon that.

But why do I have to know him personally in order to read his comments and then reach a conclusion? I don’t follow your reasoning at all. We read the comments made by another person, or the things another person writes, and then we reach conclusions. You did the exact same thing with my words—since you don’t know me—that I did with Steve’s; you reached a conclusion that I was in error. What’s wrong with that? I’ve no problem with it at all! Why should I?

I’d be happy to talk to him in person, but his comments are there for all to read, and I think he’s using poor reasoning; allow me to elaborate! First, the distinction between God’s sovereign will and His moral will: God’s sovereign will, to use shorthand, is that which God allows; we cannot know it until after-the-fact. It fell within His sovereign will to allow 9/11; it didn’t fall within His sovereign will for the earth to blow up yesterday. His moral will (revealed in the Bible, and thus which we can know) refers to that which He desires for us to do: it was not part of His moral will that 9/11 take place. Now…

Fast-forward to Steve Saint’s comments. ‘What happens if I stand before God someday and He says to me, “Steve, I went out of my way to orchestrate an opportunity for Chad Allen to see what it would be like to live as your father did.’ And then I could picture Him looking at me and saying, ‘Steve, why did you mess with my plan?’” I could just as easily say this: “What happens if (Steve) stands before God someday and God says to (him), ‘Steve, you had an opportunity to take a stand for discernment, and graciously request ETE to remove Chad Allen from the film, so that this great work would be carried out in a way that was more pleasing to me, but you didn’t.’ And then I could picture Him looking at (Steve) and saying, ‘Steve, why did you mess with My plan?’” See, Steve has not made a good argument; he has envisioned one possible scenario, but I have envisioned one equally likely (from my perspective, more likely).

Further, when he says he feels it was God’s plan for the homosexual actor to be in the film, it seems to me that perhaps he is confusing the moral will of God with the sovereign will of God, though I could be wrong about that; it is clear that some who have posted here do confuse the two. It’s incorrect to say that, “since God allowed Chad Allen to be in the film, it must have been His will”, if one is saying that whatever God allows must be “right”, in the sense of morally right. We all know that that can’t be true, else there’d be no such thing as evil.

Unless you take the position that Steve Saint, because of the great work he has done, is therefore infallible/above legitimate criticism (and it’d be interesting to see anyone defend that!), then what I have done is perfectly appropriate and legitimate. Gracious, I admire Steve Saint very much, and I’m not running him in the ground or anything to say that, in this case, his reasoning is faulty. But the fact that I don’t know him personally is irrelevant.

Byron ~ Jan 22, 2006 at 10:33 pm

Ladigrace, it may not be my place, but I think you’re getting a little touchy. Byron is entitled to his opinion, particularly here. Even if we don’t agree with it, he is entitled to it and to say it. I’m quite certain he had no intention to offend anyone.

Ro, the only verse you quoted that I’m going to answer is from Romans 1–in the first couple of chapters of Romans, Paul is referring to the priests and priestesses of a specific fertility god that endulged in all kinds of disgusting orgies in their “worship” of said idol. He is NOT referring to a group of homosexuals. The rest of the scriptures you quote speak of sexual immorality and God’s judgement. I will not be one of those God casts into hell, because my faith is genuine and it is from my heart. You have yet to convince me that homosexuality is a mortal sin.

(BTW…Mel is short for Melissa. No offense taken, it’s par for the course when I’m using that name online and folks can’t see me. I am very much a woman.)

I tend to be wary of people who make judgement calls because they “know” the truth due to the fact that they are a “spirit-filled believer.” I used to live in DeRidder, LA, where you are either Baptist or Pentecostal (any other religions don’t admit it). I used to have constant debates with my pentecostal classmates about what constitutes being “spirit-filled.” I believed (as I still do) that once you are saved, God doesn’t take it back unless you renounce it, if you meant it–and God knows your heart. They were all of the very vocal opinion that if you’re saved, you will live a certain way–evidenced in the way you dress, wear your hair, and the “manifestations of the Spirit” when you’re in prayer or worship (and you could lose your salvation if you committed certain unforgivable sins). One day, we were debating speaking in tongues, and I flipped to I Cor 12, where Paul states that anyone speaking in tongues should have an interpreter and anyone without an interpreter should remain silent in the church. One of the girls read the passage out of the KJV bible I handed her, then promptly threw–not tossed, reared back and THREW–my bible back in my face, screaming, “who are you to preach the scriptures to me, you unrepentant sinner?!?” Just to make my point, I asked the stunned teacher who saw the display to let her go and not report her to the principal. The girl who did it never forgave me.

My point in telling this story is simple. My experience with people who passionately tell me, “I’m a spirit-filled believer!” has long been a negative one. I am Spirit-filled, but I don’t make it a point to say it. If I want someone to believe it, I ask God to let others look through me to Him. He’s done it. He’s used me to reach people that nobody here would be able to convince of the color of the clear midday sky. And I know my bible, front to back, so that if someone has a question, I’m ready–in or out of season.

And please, don’t put words in my mouth. I do NOT believe that we’re animals. My reasoning for that parallel is the other scientifically-minded Christians, like myself, who like to try to argue that homosexuality is not natural because it’s not seen anywhere else in nature. I believe, like you, that we are spirits in human skin, frailties and all.

Mel ~ Jan 22, 2006 at 10:48 pm

Mel, thanks for coming to my defense!

Question: what is your source for your take on Romans 1? You state it pretty emphatically as though it’s the unquestioned truth—when I’m pretty sure you’ve staked out a minority position.

Byron ~ Jan 22, 2006 at 10:54 pm

a viewing of the cast list for the film also shows that Jim Elliot is played by an actor who was in a film last year called “Partners” and one of the principal Indians was in a film called “Adam and Steve”. I have no idea what that info means, just found it odd.

randy ~ Jan 22, 2006 at 11:20 pm

Perhaps I am a bit touchy on this subject simply because I do know the Saints personally. I apologize to all of you for that.

To me the movie is wonderful and the story that was portrayed is beautiful. I fully believe and will not change my mind, that God’s hand was upon this and blessed it.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion and I understand that.

ladigrace ~ Jan 22, 2006 at 11:31 pm

I have officially lost 90 min. of sleep I should be getting, by reading this thread from begining to end. Byron, you’re a sharp one. I’ve enjoyed your wise comments. I found my opinion swaying from one side to the other. Very enjoyable (and dizzying) sensation. I am one of those who saw the movie, then found the controversy. I don’t think it would have changed my seeing the movie, and if anything, it may have distracted me from the point. I would have spent the whole time thinking “wow, I can’t believe that guy is gay (and playing this role)”. I’m glad I saw it as an inspiring film and only now it is lively fodder for debate. I’m sorry that for many of you, the “spoiler” is out there. You missed a good opportunity for blessing. After the movie I had a chance to tell my four children about the sacrifice those men made. I drew parallels to Jesus. He didn’t have his life taken away. He gave it up so that we could live. Moments like that are a learning/teaching opportunity. My kids saw a wonderful story and I ran with the opportunity to share the gospel with them. If one person accepts Christ because of a conversation sparked by this movie, wasn’t it worth it? Byron, I see your point about the “sell” to Christian leaders. Could it have been handled better? Yes. Does God take our lemons and make lemonaide? Absolutely. Drink up Christians! God knows what He’s doing. Let’s lose the sour faces and move on. That wasn’t directed to you Byron, you’re clearly not sour. I admire your level-headed debate. Actually, it wasn’t directed at anyone in particular, I just was running with the lemonaide thing and couldn’t stop.

interjector ~ Jan 23, 2006 at 3:09 am

Running with the lemonade? Be careful not to slosh it on the carpet…

I do pray that God will take the lemons and make lemonade, and I believe He will. I’ve prayed for Chad Allen—hey, 10 days ago, I didn’t know Chad Allen existed, so that’s lemonade, right?

Just wish there weren’t lemons in the first place…

Byron ~ Jan 23, 2006 at 9:27 am

Oh, and apology accepted, ladigrace. I sure don’t mean to speak ill of the Saints (well, the New Orleans Saints, maybe…).

I played Nate Saint in a play when I was in high school, and thus have known the story/admired the men for so many years. Understand, that’s a part of the reason why this hits close to home for me, my own deep admiration for Nate Saint (and, since I’ve known of him, for Steve as well).

Byron ~ Jan 23, 2006 at 9:36 am

Hey guys and gals,
Speaking of lemonade from lemons. Maybe, just maybe, in God’s great scheme of things he’ll use this film not only to reach the heart of Chad Allen but also the hearts of some people on this thread. Somehow, Mel has come to a place in her life that she justifies in her mind that God is OK with homosexuality. Please understand that I want to contest this idea in sincere christian love. Romans 1 mentions “the reprobate mind”. Actully it means , a mind void of judgement. How can ever come to a conclusion that same sex unions are acceptable? Jesus himself said, ” Haven’t you read, that he that which made them at the beginning made them male and female, and said for this cause shall a man leave his father and mother , and shall cleave to his wife, and they two shall be one flesh( Matt.19:4:5 ). It’s my personal conviction that when we are “born again” we become “new creations in Christ”, and “old things are passed away , all things are become new” ( 2 Cor.5:17 ). God gives us a whole new beginning and a completely new identity that we can claim by faith! “Such were some of you” ( 1 Cor.6:11 ). PLEASE TAKE THE TIME TO CHECK OUT DENNIS JERNIGAN’S WEBSITE @ dennisjernigan.com.
I’ve met this man several times. What a gentle spirit he has and a crystal clear powerful testimony. God bless you!
Mike

Mike from RI ~ Jan 23, 2006 at 6:46 pm

Mel,
As you consider yourself well-read, I’m sure that you have read Lewis Sperry Chafer’s: He that is Spiritual. That is where I get my understanding of what being a Spirit-filled believer is. A Spirit-filled life is not manifested by charismatic physical expressions or histrionic platitudes, but living a yielded life to the Holy Spirit. The Spirit discerns what is right, wrong and of God. He convicts the believer of his/her own sin and is an agent of santification. If we justify sin and live openly in it…we can grieve and ultimately quench the Spirit.

I’m a behaviorist by trade…quite versed in research both medically and psychologically…just because I’m not pontificating on this blog to impress you doesn’t mean that much has not been considered in my own understanding of God and His word. When His word is spoken; however, as is in the common vernacular “nuff said.”

I’m somewhat amazed that you do not consider homosexuality a sin. By mortal sin…you say that it would not cause someone to be in eternal condemnation…all sin can be “mortal” sin if the person is unrepentent.

Ro ~ Jan 23, 2006 at 8:16 pm

Ro
I enjoyed your post, and agree 100% with you.

Stu ~ Jan 23, 2006 at 9:48 pm

It would have been so greatif a believer had been given the role of Nate Saint. There was surely some faithful and talented young actor who would have been very blessed by that role. That believer would been praying as they acted, which would have benefited the cast, crew, picture, and ultimately, the audience. The role would have also benefited the believing actor, spiritually as well as financially. Our Lord could have gotten a great deal of honor from this. If there was a belief that Chad Allen must be in the picture, he could have been offered a lesser role and still had the experience of meeting Steve Saint and the others.

Michelle ~ Jan 24, 2006 at 1:02 am

Byron, to answer your question, Paul’s journey through Rome took him past the temples devoted to Aphrodite and Diana, obviously run by groups of people who refused to acknowledge that there is only one God and His Son was their only salvation (hence their orgy-laden worship). I find it far more plausible that he was referring to this group than to some mysterious group of homosexuals that NONE of the other scribes seem to have noticed.

I have heard Dennis Jernigan speak. I don’t believe the way he does. If he is happy and God has given him peace, then I’m honestly happy for him! But God has also given me peace in who I am, and it was something I fought for a long time. I nearly committed suicide when I realized that I was gay–I really fell in love with another woman and my emotions and all of the things I’d been taught told me that I was sick and wrong for it. I was a state officer at the time and I sat in my room with my gun to my head for over six hours. I know as I knew then that I was ready to die, but the Holy Spirit stopped me. It took two days for me to recognize that I needed to check into a hospital. It then took six months of begging God to take it away for me to really look at scripture and see that it wasn’t the virulently anti-gay propaganda that “Christians” had used it for for decades.

Scripture tells us to test everything. Don’t go by what you feel, don’t go by what others have told you–genuinely ask questions instead of assuming your right.

When Copernicus offered the idea that the world was round instead of flat, the pope denounced him. John Calvin–a man I studied in seminary–also denounced Copernicus, citing Psalm 93 and saying, “who will venture to place the authority of Copernicus above that of the Holy Spirit?” They were certain that God made the Earth flat, the sun went up and down in our sky, heaven was above the sky and hell beneath the dirt. So certain that they assumed it was the conviction of the Holy Spirit that taught them what we now know to be one of the most laughable concepts in human history.

(Of course, some of you are thinking, “well, the idea that being gay is not a sin is pretty laughable…”)

I’ve heard a lot of people say things like “she has come to a place in her life where she justifies…” I haven’t gone out of my way to justify anything. I don’t believe that it’s a sin to be gay. I am repentant, and the Spirit is not convicting me of my orientation being a sin. And the Spirit does convict me of what really is wrong. Most of my friends think I’m a total prude. I don’t care, either.

The scriptures have been used to justify wars, witch trials, slavery, segregation, holocausts, and the like. The Jews in Jesus’ day were so convinced of what the Messiah was supposed to be that they missed Him almost completely, and to this day there are millions of Jews who are still waiting for Messiah to arrive.

I realize I’m probably not going to change any of your minds any more than I’d change my mom’s. Online conversations will never convince you that I’m saved; you’d have to live around me to see it. But hopefully, someday these kinds of things–like gay men portraying our heroes, who were really ordinary men–won’t be a cause for controversy.

Mel ~ Jan 24, 2006 at 1:04 am

Mel,

I’m still trying to understand what scriptures you use to justify homosexuality. I don’t question your salvation, I’m saved and I still sin, but I’m forgiven. There are ways I sin, that I’m sure I’m not aware of – and I thank God for His grace. There are ways I sin that I am aware of and it causes me grief and I pray for help from God to change. And I still thank Him for his grace. Some sin I have struggled with for years, and continue to struggle. This doesn’t mean I’m not saved if I continue to sin (Paul – “what I don’t want to do I do…”) and it doesn’t mean that if I continue to sin even after asking God’s help that I can conclude that it must be OK to practice that particular sin.

This last is statement is what I hear you saying. I’m not trying to change your mind, I’m asking you to clearly explain to me how you justify something that the bible so plainly teaches is a sin? I know many gay people believe the way you do and I don’t understand why.

There’s a book out there called “make anger your ally” and since anger is a sin that I wrestle with daily that should be a book I would want to read, but I’ll tell you…I steer a clear path from that book because it would only help me to justify being angry instead of conquering my sin and walking in the fruit of the spirit that is peace. But apparrently there are many people who wrestle with anger and rather than work on thier own sanctification they’ve chosen to make this sin thier “ally”. This blows my mind.

It seems to me that’s what a lot of Christians who deal with same-sex attraction have chosen to do as well.

If you see it differently, based upon scripture and not “feelings of peace” (which yoga and TM can bring too, but that doesn’t make it true) will you please share those scriptures?

sherry ~ Jan 24, 2006 at 7:52 am

So many parallels have been made on this site and I agree most are not on target. The issue is that a Christian movie company targeted pastors and churches to promote what is undeniably one of the most inspirational modern day missionary stories that has become endeared to the hearts of Christians the world over. In casting a very outspoken, gay activist to play the part of Nate Saint, a sold-out man of God, that is an outrage! We don’t demand sinless perfection in the actor (I wouldn’t even demand a Christian actor although that would be nice), but certainly someone whose very public subverting-the-Gospel-lifestyle should not have been cast in the roll. To me and many I’ve spoken to about the subject, his lifestyle overshadows the story ETE was trying to tell. All of the rhetoric justifying this decision just doesn’t hold up to the scrutiny of Biblical principles that have been sited in these threads. This was and is a gross error on ETE’s part and I will definitely be wary whenever they come knocking at my door again.

“And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.” – Eph. 5:11

My beef is not with Chad Allen. He is a pitful sinner, lost and undone living in an abominable lifestyle who needs to repent and trust Christ for the remission of his sins. I pray he does so before it is everlastingly too late. One bright spot that I see in all of this is that many Christians have been mobilized to pray for this man! Praise God! Perhaps the day of his conversion is not far away. But that can’t happen until he realizes the “beautiful expression” of his homosexual love is sinful in the eyes of God. If God has changed his mind on the subject, He will be obliged to offer an apology to the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah. Are you listening, Mel?

No, my beef is with ETE and I wrote them an email telling them so. Amazingly, I haven’t received a response. Perhaps they don’t care how I feel, but they should. Perhaps they are inundated with emails similar to mine. I don’t know. What I do know is that they sought my help, I jumped on the bandwagon and promoted their movie, but as I said earlier, I feel very betrayed by them in this casting choice. Certainly, they knew this would be controversial. If not, they are certainly displaying a gross lack of discernment in understanding what the hubbub is all about. I hope the sharp rebukes that they are receiving from all over the country will result in repentance on their part. As for the Saints, I can’t imagine what would prompt them to be OK with this casting decision. Steve’s comments sure don’t hold water and his reasoning is simply not holding up under scrutiny. Too bad this controversy ushered in a cloud over the lives of these five brave missionaries and their families.

Pastor Sam ~ Jan 24, 2006 at 3:21 pm

This thread has basically moved from one to two: first, there is the discussion of homosexuality, and I appreciate Mel’s willingness to be open about things, and to give her understanding, though as she says, most of us won’t agree. Mel, you’ve got guts, lady! I probably am going to respond to you again soon, but others are doing so, and I don’t have to take the lead in that. The tone of the thread has mellowed, and for that I’m grateful; for an example of how not to discuss the issues, go to caprig’s post on “An Email on Discernment & the End of the Spear”. While you’re praying for Chad Allen, pray for caprig…

The other tack is the posts on the issue at hand, the rightness or wrongness of ETE’s decision to cast Chad in the role. Let me throw a new thought into the discussion, and that is this: as a pastor, it seems to me that what took place—and what takes place so commonly that no one notices, or at least bothers to point it out—is that there likely was no input from the church on the subject prior to the casting of Chad Allen. I’m just speculating, and I could be wrong—but I bet I’m not.

Here’s what I’m saying: what we have going on all over the place in Christianity is the diminishment of the local church. We’ve forgotten, at least practically, I think, that Jesus said that the only entity which the gates of hell had no chance against was His church. Now…the church has royally fumbled the ball in so many ways that we’ve lost count; I acknowledge that. But my point—and I do have one—is that all kinds of decisions are made by all kinds of evangelicals about doing all kinds of ministry without the “covering” of the local church. Question: should Mart Green/Jim Hanon have gotten the blessing of their local church(es), and submitted to the leadership of their local church(es), prior to undertaking this project? OK, it’s possible that they did; I’m only speculating. But let’s just assume that they didn’t…shouldn’t they have? Shouldn’t they have, prior to going off to make a film that tells this story, have sat down with the leadership of their churches, and said, effectively, “we submit to your leadership, and we desire to make a film that honors God by telling the story of the 5 missionaries; how should we go about it?”

I’m betting that most readers haven’t even thought of that angle—and that, I submit, is a shame.

When a popular “Christian” singer (who’ll remain nameless) divorced her husband, even though by her admission he had not been unfaithful, and married another man, was there a church who put their stamp of approval on her prior to her getting back up and singing and making albums? I’d bet good money, were I a betting man, that there wasn’t. I actually did some research to try to learn if any church had practiced church discipline on her…but to the best of my knowledge, that did not take place. Where was the church? Why did a record company (do they still call them “record” companies? Hmmmm…) allow her to stand up and represent Jesus without getting such go-ahead from a church body who had disciplined her, and then, after a period of restoration, declared her fit for ministry?

OK, I’m on a rant…but where is the local church in all of this? Where should it be?

Byron ~ Jan 24, 2006 at 4:54 pm

This scripture is for Mel and those in our world that want a specific scripture to tell them that homosexuality is wrong. I think that’s why our modern society has so many issues with this is the fact that the scripture is really only spelled out clearly once…I have to dig to find it everytime I see someone denying what God’s Word has said:

Change through the versions if you like but God’s word still says homosexuals will not enter the kingdom of heaven [without repentance]. This verse is very clear that homosexuality is a great sin just as the sins that we do not dispute. Even if you do not dispute this, it makes no sense to continue to label yourself as a lesbian anymore that Paul ever called himself a murderer or Matthew would have called himself a cheater (tax collecting). Real repentance means you change your title of lesbian to lover of Christ. Temptation may come across your mind to revert to your old ways but your choice to follow Jesus means we lay down our sins and follow him. Also, it is silly for everyone to believe that we are some how pre-programmed to be gay – God made every one of us and the verse below demonstrates that His very Word tells us without doubt that this is sin and He would never put sin into us but rather that it comes from the enemy who causes all of these arguments in the 1st place. I think people often forget that Lucifer knows the scriptures better than we do!

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Corinthians%206:9-11;&version=31;

9Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders 10nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. 11And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

matt ~ Jan 24, 2006 at 4:59 pm

Before this thread comes to a close, I’d like to share some thoughts. I want to appreciate Mel for your courage to tell your story, the grace to engage in a meaningful dialogue with Byron without animosity, the search for answers in holding on to your faith, the sincerity in wanting to be understood. You are a lovely person. Your strength in remaining celebrate tells of your sense of self worth, you want to be committed to someone worthy of your love. Sorry for what you have gone through.
I cannot imagine the strong pull of feelings you have for a woman so much so that you have resolved within yourself to pursue that for your love commitment, against all odds that you know of and have experienced. Feelings are inexplicable. Feelings cause us to be vulnerable because of the pleasure they arouse. A married person can fall if not careful. Words of admiration from a good looking opposite gender co-worker day in and day out can render an otherwise strict minded person giddy, tingly, “jellified” (just coined the word) The flatterer could be an angel to make the day for somebody, or someone used by the devil for his own pleasure. The flattered person can succumb to the pleasure which generally leads to adultery in replacement of principle, or make conscious effort to avoid being sucked into the situation. It may be just staying away from the water cooler, or may be making a great sacrifice in leaving the work place to cut off the attraction that leads to sin. I use this example to show that all are susceptible to temptations, and all of us are admonished to do or try to do what is pleasing to God. Straight people have struggles and are faced with making choices that can be very painful. Here I am referencing I Cor 6.
9 Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders 10 nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God … But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.
Paul is not particularly harsh with the homosexual offenders, but they are clearly on the list, so are we who greed among other sins, but we are all washed in Christ’s blood to be sanctified. We will never understand the strength of female attraction for you. It is not for us to judge your salvation. I believe God is merciful to all of us. With the above example, I want to encourage you to make a conscious effort to stay away from places where same sex people hang out. Participate in activities where you can mingle and make friends with, people who are not exclusively same sex oriented.
One might argue that if greediness (some of us tend to exclude ourselves from how God measure us) is listed there right along with homosexual practices, what is the big deal? Paul says in same chapter that 12″Everything is permissible for me”—but not everything is beneficial. ” At least it is not beneficial for you to have to go through a lifetime of struggles in many ways. God’s grace be with you. We love you.
Thank you Byron for hosting this thread. You have been patient but keen. You do not let issues slip by that need clarification from the Bible even though it puts you in opposing position with the writer. Some may take you on as a debate opponent, but I see you as a teacher.
Seeing the new posting of Byron and Matt, I decided to send this off right now before I go back to the target issue at my next sitting.

Penny ~ Jan 24, 2006 at 7:07 pm

Matt–I was waiting for someone to bring up that scripture. The words translated as “homosexual” in I Cor 9 (I’m guessing you’re using the NKJV, because several translations combined two words to mean homosexual and “male prostitutes” was left out of them completely). The words in Greek are malakoi and arsenokoitai. The way a word is ended in ancient Greek is important, and these two words have thrown many a talented scholar for a loop. It is believed by a majority of scholars, however, that “malakoi” meant “male prostitute” (which we recently started seeing in the newer translations) and “arsenokoitai” actually didn’t mean homosexual–it is strongly believed to have been referring to the type of men who hired said male prostitutes or effeminate call boys (dirty old men, if you will). These words weren’t translated as referring to homosexuality as we know it until 1958. Some translations mistranslate small words in several areas, but those small mistranslations add up to some big issues sometimes.

What I keep hearing from a lot of people is that they don’t understand why I would take the position I’ve taken because they are all still convinced that homosexuality is a sin. What you don’t understand is that I’m not justifying anything. I don’t believe I have to. I don’t see in the scriptures what I once thought I saw. The bible doesn’t say the things it has been used to say, so justification is not an issue. See my first statement for further explanation.

Pastor Sam, it is exactly your type that has left me bitter about the church. You go on a tirade on how gays are unrepentant and incapable of obtaining salvation as they are, then you say, “are you listening, Mel?” The only attention you’re getting from me at that point is irritation. You’re not a drill sgt, so don’t get in my face. I used to be just like you–and as I recall, all I ever did was make people mad (or, in some cases, laugh at me).

Again, regarding Sodom and Gomorrah, in Ezekiel 16:49-50 the sins are listed. Contrary to popular belief, those cities were NOT destroyed for some sort of mass homosexual population. God destroyed several cities in the Old Testament, but somehow these two get the “gay doom” labels. Please, Pastor Sam, if you’re going to try to make me mad, do it privately at t_o_fretmaster@yahoo.com and not here.

Byron, what I like about you is that I can disagree with you and I still like talking to you. There aren’t many people I can say that about–and I know a lot of people all over the world, so that’s saying something. What little contact I’ve had with you has been thoroughly enjoyable.

Mel ~ Jan 24, 2006 at 7:22 pm

I just have one more question, and it’s not directed to anyone in particular…what is the point of knowing so much about God’s word, if you don’t plan on obeying it?

Satan was the Cherub over the Book of Truth. He knew the word backwards and forward, but of course, he got filled with Pride and tried to usurp God’s position among other things. He has also used the word to deceive others and to be so bold as to tempt Christ. I’m not particularly impressed with people who are well “versed” in the word but do not wish to obey it.

Ro ~ Jan 24, 2006 at 8:36 pm

Nor am I, Ro. But as far as I am concerned in this debate, I have yet to hear one person convince me from scripture that being gay or lesbian is a sin.

You are right in that there really is no point in knowing scripture if you’re not going to obey, unless you’re like some of my coworkers who know it just so they can try to prove me wrong.

Mel ~ Jan 24, 2006 at 8:44 pm

*LOL* Yeah, Byron, I did intend to post that on another thread…oops!

My historical sources were read online, in books in the library (I used to spend a lot of time there, then I decided to become an EMT and my free time ended) which I cannot remember all of the names of, and in studying with Rev. Mel White. I haven’t taken anything he said for face value, but when he told me some of this stuff I spent time digging and found some pretty significant evidence that it was true.

Yes, my views are most definitely in the minority. I totally admit that. But if it were to be proven that homosexuality really wasn’t the horrid sin it’s been made out to be, it certainly wouldn’t be the first time man was wrong about God. Mankind is infamous for developing a certain idea about what God is and what He wants only to be proven very, very wrong. And if it turns out I’m wrong, I don’t think God will condemn me for it. Because to a certain degree, I have to take some of what I believe on faith, like every other believer.

I’ve heard your idea about homosexuals not committing homosexual acts from other people. I’ve only heard it from, like, two or three others, but I’m familiar with it. If a person does feel the Spirit’s conviction that same-sex contact is sin, then yes, that person should remain celibate. I view it as being on the same plane as eating meat sacrificed to idols. In Paul’s day, Jews viewed it as direct and vicious blasphemy. I think Paul was dead-on in his interpretation of that situation.

No, I wouldn’t consider the act itself a temptation if it were with the person I had committed myself to for the rest of my life. I’ve certainly been tempted many times to let go of my inhibitions, but that’s as far as it’s gone–temptation.

Mel ~ Jan 24, 2006 at 11:26 pm

I was thinking of our discussions all night and all morning, concerned that we might be wearing Mel down and I started writing my last posting. But, yikes, I think the latest postings today have put Mel on the defensive. I agree with Ro and Pastor Sam on your belief, but with all due respect, both of you come across with the tone of condemnation, without compassion. Ro, with all my good will, your last statement of “not being impressed with people who are”..is condescending, a value judgment that only alienates Mel and counterproductive.
It is not up to us to condemn. If we should think that we are less of a sinner becasue we are not gay, not fornicators, nor adulterors, not drunkards, which we may be none of the above, we should read ICor 6:9-10 again, that the greedy which we all will be at some time or other, shall not inherit the kingdom of God. Until we repent, during the period we harbor greed or act on greed we are the same kind of sinners before a Holy God.Romans 3:23. Lest we should think we are better than others.
Blessings
We are not losing if we cannot convince her. We are losing if we lose our compassion. At this moment, Mel seems not to be convinced. But we dont need to convince her. We have done what we can so far in our discourse. We need to support her in prayers that God himself will reveal His Holy will to her.

Penny ~ Jan 25, 2006 at 12:18 am

I have to just say that being a homosexual is a lifestyle choice. One that is biblically a sin. God’s word shows us that very clearly in scriptures.
Lev 20:13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

To say that one does not have a choice would be the same as saying that God created you as a homosexual and that would mean that God went against His own Word in creating homosexuals.

One who chooses to live the lifestyle of a homosexual chooses to be in disobedience to the Word of God and chooses instead to follow the enemy and live for the enemy.

Am I judging, no, the Word of God does the judging and there are other scriptures to support that the homosexual lifestyle is an abomination and wrong.

My prayer for you if you choose this lifestyle is that you would turn and repent from it and choose God over Satan.

ladigrace ~ Jan 25, 2006 at 6:43 am

I must say I was a litle shocked to hear about them casting a gay actor, but Chad Allen did to a great job playing the part of Nate Saint! And though being a born again christian I do not agree with Mr. Allen’s lifestyle, I can only pray that this new experience would be a light for him that he would walk away from this role with a little conviction.
The seed had been planted people!
Let’s all pray that Mr. Allen would take the next step!
All I can say is,
Love the sinner, hate the sin!

Laura ~ Jan 25, 2006 at 10:26 am

Amen to all that, Laura; amen to that.

Byron ~ Jan 25, 2006 at 10:30 am

Mel,

Is it possible that your irritation is not so much with me and that the scriptures that have been cited are the real problem? I wouldn’t call my post a tirade. Pointed? Yes, but not a tirade. You seem to infer that what I said about Chad Allen needing to repent only applies to him because he is a homosexual. Let me make this perfectly clear. I believe all unbelievers are in a pitiful condition. I was once hell-bound, but praise God and by the grace of God that is not true any longer. Before Christ came into my life, I was a wretch. Everyone who rejects Christ is pitiful (in my opinion) because they face a Christless eternity. I sense that the homosexual issue is your sensitivity since you admit to the temptation, but I agree with Pastor Bryon regarding his post. Temptation is one thing. Giving in to temptation is quite another.

I apologize that you sensed that I was trying to anger you, but I cannot figure out what motivation I would have in doing so. I have committed my life to proclaim the Gospel of the Lord Jesus that people might have the same opportunity afforded to me. It seems to me that you have misjudged me and/or my motives. I can only say that I know the uncomfortable feeling of conviction and the liberating freedom that repentance brings. I don’t know of anyone who enjoys being under conviction, but I can point you to a host of people who are thankful it came.

Frankly, your comments remind me of a conversation that I had in my office with a self professed homosexual man who visited my church a while back when he was visiting relatives who lived in my town. Upon hearing one fleeting comment in the sermon regarding homosexuality he wrongly assumed I hated homosexuals and that I was homophobic. Nothing could be farther from the truth. As I stood at the door shaking hands after the service, he introduced himself to me as follows: “Hello, I’m ________, the homosexual.” His obvious irritation prompted me to ask if we needed to speak privately. He agreed to that, but seemed surprised that I would offer. After a few minutes of discussion on the subject he blurted out “So you don’t really hate me, do you?” I said, “What earthly reason would I have to hate you, we just met?” That was followed by an apology from this man for pre-judging me. After that we engaged in a lengthy discussion on the sinfulness of homosexuality. Someone told this man that his lifestyle wasn’t sinful as long as he was committed to one man. I beg to differ since the Bible makes no distinction on that issue.

I’m glad you mentioned Ezekiel 16:49-50. Pride is listed first on the list along with haughtiness and that they “committed abomination before me.” Re-read the account in Genesis 19. I am amazed at the pride of the men in that city who after being offered Lot’s daughter’s refused and insisted on having Lot’s guests. Even after being stricken with blindness the Bible says they “wearied themselves to find the door.” Lust is a powerful, driving force in one’s life. These men were driven with lust for the men visiting Lot. Their refusal to go home after being struck blind is the epitome of pride, but the Bible also says they committed abomination before the Lord. What do you suppose that was? I refer you to Leviticus 20:13:

“If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death: their blood shall be upon them.”

I suggest your reluctance to accept these verses as proof of the sinfulness of homosexuality is willful disbelief on your part. I’ve seen “Gay Pride” paraded in the streets of America enough to know that the reason this is pushed upon the public is a deep seated need to have society and/or the church to validate it. It’s similar to professing Christians who fall into the sin of adultery who seek consolation from their Christian friends or pastor. Sadly, many are willing to justify sin and explain it all away. After all, at the end of the day they say, “I”m forgiven.” That may be true, but there is consequence to our sin. I sincerely don’t believe that those who presume upon the grace of God saying… “God will forgive me” are really saved. I know I’ll get blasted for that one, but that is not the attitude of a born again Christian. “What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid. Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey: whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?” Rom. 6:15-16.

Honestly, I think the worst pride being exhibited in America today is not what’s being paraded in “Gay Pride” events around the country. That’s bad enough, but the worst form of pride is in God’s church: the pride that keeps Christians from bended knee and humble hearts; the pride that keeps pastors from admitting that they have sat at the table of compromise where Satan deals for the sake of making themselves a name. Christians should know better and there is a great need for us to remove the splinter before tackling our neighbor’s beam.

I’m sorry that some of you got the wrong impression of the kind of man that I am. If there is one thing that I hate about this form of communication is just that – it’s conducive to misunderstanding. I’ve never made it a practice of apologizing for preaching the truth and never intend to. The Word is powerful and convicting and rightly so. It is the power of God unto salvation. Just because a guy is strong in his belief doesn’t mean he is devoid of compassion.

“Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?” Gal. 4:16. To me, the epitome of hatred is holding the truth in one’s bosom and being fearful and/or too timid to speak the truth.

Mel, I sincerely hope you will stop justifying homosexuality. So called pastors who explain away the sin are just that. They are wolves in sheep’s clothing and serve only to lead people astray. Remember, Satan comes to us as an angel of light. He is a master deceiver and the father of lies. At the end of the day, it is God who sits on the Throne and He doesn’t check to see where the wind is blowing so that He can be politically correct. His truth endures to every generation.

Pastor Sam ~ Jan 25, 2006 at 2:14 pm

Penny,
The difference here between Mel and myself, at least as far as I can see is that I admit that I am a sinner. I know that I’m a sinner being saved by grace. I have not used the Word to try and say that any predisposition that I have that I know is sinful is not. The Holy Spirit discerns…extrabiblical text should that would call sin anything other than that is deceitful.

Is warning people the same as condemning them? I suppose a lot of people said the same thing about the disciples…and even Christ. I cannot abide the flagrant denial of sin…It is God’s holiness that I speak from, not my own. My spiritual gift is that of prophesy…to warn and to ascribe truth.

Ro ~ Jan 25, 2006 at 7:31 pm

Also, Mel, I did go to your website/blog as you had placed it on a thread here. Some of the ways you have presented yourself here are not consistent with information you have there, such as describing yourself as a Buddhist…and in a committed Lesbian relationship. Have things changed since you placed that information on the blog?

Ro ~ Jan 25, 2006 at 7:32 pm

I was going to ask that same question, Ro, of our friend Mel at some point, because I am truly curious what caused her to do that.

I’m going to take up for Mel just a bit here, in this sense: I am not ready to say that she is justifying sin. Hear me out: there are people (and I disagree with them!) who try to make the case that Mel is making. One of the reasons I’ve asked Mel what her sources were involves just this, and I’m real, real curious to know if the sources she has consulted are people who take the Bible as the inerrant Word of God. That’s why I’d really like to know the specifics. There are any number of liberal/neo-orthodox scholars who come up with any number of interesting takes on a whole range of subjects, homosexuality being only one of them. I tell my people, and mean it sincerely, that if I did not believe the Bible to be without error (in the original manuscripts, and preserved remarkably well by the Holy Spirit so that we can say, “this is the Word of God!”), then I wouldn’t waste their time preaching.

Also, Mel, I hope you don’t feel like you’re being ganged up on here…you take as much of this forum as you’d like to give your viewpoint (did you notice that a couple of days ago I added a couple of things at the top of my sidebar? Did that partly with you in mind, lady!).

Byron ~ Jan 25, 2006 at 9:59 pm

Wow, all it takes is one gay guy to torpedo and sink a whole Christian film — all that money and effort down the tube.

I’m guessing this was God’s plan all along — after all, he’s in control, right?

Don’t worry, tho. You can still cling to the hope that maybe the movie will make Chad Allen covert to heterosexuality. Of course, after all this time, he’s just as gay as he ever was, so I gotta wonder what you’re pinning your hopes on that would make him suddenly develop a craving for hetero-style sex.

Let’s see: by my count, this $15 million movie has gotta be the most expensive heterosexual-recruitment effort on record. And Chad’s still gay. Maybe Jesus wants you to spend another $20 million, eh?

Kathleen ~ Jan 25, 2006 at 11:44 pm

I was going to wind down my first experience in blogging (time consuming) but found myself hopelessly hooked because of the wisdom and non threatening openness of the host, and the sincerity of some of the writers.
I was marveling at the sharp, witty, and to the point remarks Kathleen made and trying to guess where you are coming from, and saw Byron’s equally witty and sharp response (not in a negative sense)
Much has been said on the theological and biblical basis, reviewing them is helpful.
On the practical side, Randy’s concern as a youth leader deserves consideration.
With or without the powerful story in EOS, and with or without the great performance of the actors whether gay or not, God’s deity is visible in the creation for those who seek Him. That’s what Christians believe according to the Bible. Romans 1:19-20.”19since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.”
We also believe that if we help someone to come to the knowledge of God through any means or media, we are only the vehicle, conversion is from the work of the Holy Spirit. We are not worhy unless we confess our sins, profess Him as Savior, and serve under His redeeming grace. This may explain why people of the evangelical community hold certain expectations of one another because of the belief we share.
I hope all these feedback will go to Steve Saint and Mart Green with love and prayerful support for them to find the answers from God.
Our expections would not be the same if this film is made by secular Hollywood without claims of God’s meesage as pitched to the pastors and the christian community.

Penny ~ Jan 26, 2006 at 3:33 pm

Dear Kathleen, sister in Christ.

God IS in control. I know his movements may not make sense to you, they rarely make sense to me. But the most fulfillment I get from my walk with Him, comes from the trust I have, and safety I feel, when walking next to Him.

Forgive me for saying so, but I don’t think we would be having this conversation if Steve Saint had said
“…so I gotta wonder what you’re pinning your hopes on that would make the Wadoni Tribe suddenly develop a craving for Jesus”

Jim Randell ~ Jan 26, 2006 at 6:04 pm

I will say again what I’ve said before about “justification:” I do not believe I have to justify anything. After a lot of time spent studying both the bible and historical texts, such as cultural periods, I have come to the conclusion that Christians have put words in God’s mouth. I’m not saying it was done intentionally, but that’s my take on it.

As far as Sodom and Gomorrah go, I’ve already addressed that, but let me add this point–the men of the city weren’t lusting after other men. It was customary then for men to rape outsiders and enemies. Soldiers did it on the battlefield, groups of citizens would do it to outsiders to prove who was in charge. You can get that from several shows on the History Channel, not to mention several books on that time period. I believe that was a large part of God’s reason for forbidding man-on-man rape; because if you notice, the passage applies to men only, women are not mentioned. When two armies went to war, the soldiers left standing would literally gang-rape the survivors of the losing army; it was their way of ultimately degrading their enemies. If you notice, earlier in the passage when the men arrive in Sodom, Lot runs to them and practically begs them to stay with his family rather than in the city square. Why? Because he knew that outsiders were marked and summarily “put in their place,” so to speak. God destroyed those cities for a lot of reasons–homosexuality as we know it now was not one of them.

As for my comment about the tirade, Pastor Sam, you used a lot of very negative words and comments, followed by, “are you listening, Mel?” That, on the internet, is very easily taken as an instigating rant. When I read that I pictured in my mind the “pastor” who stopped me on the street a couple of months ago, not knowing who I am or anything about me, and got in my face and screamed at me (his face was red, he had a vein popping out of his forehead, and I was showered in his spit) on the assumption that I was a “fag,” in his words. What you wrote sounded very holier-than-thou. And no, my irritation is not with scripture. It is with being looked down upon as though I were somehow spiritually inferior. I’ve been yelled at by enough people in real life and gotten enough hate email that my walls go up real quick when I get the impression that someone’s getting snippy.

Ro, you remind me quite a bit of my mother. My mom, love her as I do, has not once in my 27 years of life on this planet ever admitted the remotest possibility that she could be wrong. She says the exact same things that you do. All you’ve said is a plethora of all the same things I’ve had thrown at me before, and when I don’t give you a satisfactory answer, you keep asking me for statements that I’ve already made. As for my website, I never entered a religion because I didn’t know I could; I was also unaware it was listed as Buddhism (although I have studied with Buddhist Shaolin monks from time to time and have no problem with a person studying the philosophy side of Buddhism). I am in a relationship; it is not physical as of yet. Kelly is a cop in San Diego, we are very interested in one another, and if things work out, we will commit ourselves to each other. Any other questions?

One thought I’ve had…if EOTS had, in fact, been made by a Hollywood company–such as Miramax–would it have been possible even for them to have made it without the gospel being present? Yes, it is likely they would have tried to skew the message, and many of us would have been offended. However, I don’t think it would be possible to tell this story, unless it was so horribly butchered that the story was unrecognizable, without also presenting the drive behind the missionaries’ sacrifice. Thoughts?

Mel ~ Jan 26, 2006 at 7:26 pm

There seems to be a lot of both facetious and factitious behavior of you Mel. I suppose half-truths and lies are not sins in your book either.

Ro ~ Jan 26, 2006 at 9:05 pm

Mel, come again with that last question; I don’t quite get it. Are you saying that ETE didn’t really tell the story, in light of the criticism of some that the gospel is, at best, muted? I really don’t get what you’re driving at.

And I also want you to answer my questions from before. I can buy that you’ve done a lot of study, but what have you studied; what has been their take on the authority/inerrancy of Scripture; and can you at the very least understand that there are some who would find you a little less than unbiased in your analysis?

Not saying that I’m without my biases—I certainly have plenty—but frankly, it’d make things a lot easier on evangelicals in some respects if we could all agree with you (save us getting called by the silly name “homophobe”—I really hope that that’s not a word in your vocab, Mel, ’cause it’s one of those silly reasoned-conversation stoppers). I know you can appreciate that my belief that homosexuality is sinful is based in no way upon a desire to condemn people or feel “holier-than-thou”; it’s a response to what I believe Scripture teaches.

Glad to hear you’re not Buddhist, by the way…that threw me as well! Maybe it’s time to revise the ole site, eh?

Byron ~ Jan 26, 2006 at 10:26 pm

Byron, I tend to be very careful about doing anything myself or listening to others who question the validity of scripture; obviously, it is the foundation of our faith and without a foundation the rest crumbles. My contention is not scripture itself. It is with the mistranslation of a handful of words and the misunderstanding of some cultural practices that have led Christians to believe things that I believe are misguided. I’ll have to dig up some of the books I’ve read, and that’ll take time (between work, school, and training, I barely have time to eat and sleep–I’m doing this on my downtime at work). I used to spend a lot of time watching the History Channel’s shows on culture, practices and archaeology and after watching material on stuff like this–particularly the practices of different nations at different times–I’d go look up their recommended reading. I do not, however, like much of what they’ve produced about the bible. When it comes to that, I prefer to stick to translation of the actual text and nothing more. If I know a text is going to comment on some percieved fallacy in scripture–like the harebrained idea that Christ didn’t really die on the cross, He was just in shock (hope that one gave you a giggle)–I will skip over that portion and move on to the proof, the actual translation.

And yes, I can completely see where people would see me as biased in my analysis. I expect it. I’ve even thought about it; when I first started to dig, I tried to be careful not to just want these things to be true because it was instinct–it was what I’d taught in church. Again, I can’t change anyone’s mind. But I hold onto the idea that while I could be wrong, so could a lot of other people. Personally, I don’t think I am wrong.

As far as ETE goes, I think they told the gospel very tastefully. I was just throwing out an idea. What if a secular company had made the movie, even if they’d cast a straight man in the role? Would we have been happy with the outcome?

And no, I don’t like the word homophobe. I think it’s way overused by the GLBT community and I’ve ruffled a few feathers by saying so. I think, though, that their overuse of it stems from many long years of what was actual hatred. I was at a Steve Green concert years ago when he started talking about his work with a Houston-area AIDS ministry, and people started walking out in droves, and I heard “fag lover” come out of more than one mouth. That sort of stuff isn’t exactly endearing to gays. And you also have to understand that with all of the hate crimes committed against gays, some are paranoid of these ideas and tend to lump everyone who’s against them in the same group. I’m not saying they’re right, but that’s the other side of the coin.

No, I don’t believe you’re holier-than-thou. I’ve rather enjoyed this friendly debate; it doesn’t happen this way very often and I highly prefer it. Now if I could figure out how to change the religion on my page…

And Ro, if you can explain your last comment without insulting me, I’d welcome your elaboration.

Mel ~ Jan 27, 2006 at 12:14 am

Wow! I’ve spent well over an hour reading all of this and am amazed that only a few people (aka ladygrace) had the insight to what has become a marvelous truth.

The story of Nate Saint and Jim Elliot has been very close to my heart since I was in Bible school and first learned about it in the early 90’s. Soon after, I read an article in Guidepost by Steve Saint and it gave me an even deeper respect for him, his family and the other families and what they went through…all by answering the question…am I willing to die in order to share Christ with another? Jim, Nate, Pete, Roger and Ed were. The sacrifice they made is still being felt around the world…through books, word of mouth, and now Steve’s movie. The courage of Elizabeth Elliott and Rachel Saint to move into the tribal village after the deaths of the men is also remarkable. The forgiveness and openness to these people that all of the family members have shown is an on going testament of the dedication of the men to give thier lives for Christ.

I learned of the movie last month and, as most of you seem to have been, was surprised about the casting of Chad Allen as Nate Saint/Steve Saint in the movie. Being about the same age as Chad, I’ve grown up watching him on TV and was aware at that time of his background. However, I quickly thought to myself…”Wow, isn’t this an INCREDIBLE way for Chad not to just hear about God’s forgiveness, but to live it?” I mean, stop and think about it…he is playing the part of a man who gave his life in order to share God’s word with these Indians. He’s playing the part of a martyr’s son who went back to the people who killed his father…how much more forgiveness can one have (my grandfather was murdered and I’m still not sure that I could face his killer…yet Steve has not only faced his father’s killers, he’s lived with them, and he’s taken his children to live with them). Chad had to portray that forgiveness in his job of playing the part of Nate/Steve. So he heard the gospel, but he also experienced it firsthand. My next thought was “what if this is all takes for Chad to become a believer?”.

I “accidently stumbled” into a service last night where Steve and “Grandfather” were speaking and sharing about the movie. Afterwards I discovered that one of the directors/creators of the movie, who is a member of the church I was attending, had the opportunity on set to share the importance of the story with Chad, to share the forgiveness of God with Chad, and TO LEAD CHAD TO THE LORD!! Yes, he’s a homosexual, but people don’t change lifestyle overnight!!

The seeds have been planted and Chad has believed…now let’s all quit griping about a casting decision and thank God that another soul is His and, most importantly, pray for Chad as he has to work through the differences of his new faith and his lifestyle and the changes that will come in his life!!

globhoppr

Globhoppr ~ Jan 27, 2006 at 4:36 am

Also, I forgot to mention one other thought… How would Nate feel about Chad portraying him and his son? After all, here is a man who gave his life so that people would experience God’s love and salvation? Once again, I have to believe that even Nate woule be pleased with the choice…knowing that the role would show Chad God’s love and salvation and plant seeds toward his salvation!!

globhoppr

Globhoppr ~ Jan 27, 2006 at 5:12 am

Ya know, globhoppr, God is a master at taking our lemons and turning them into lemonade. But the end never justifies the means. Praise the Lord for the great things He has done in spite of our blunders. But I can’t help thinking how much more effective this film could have been without all the controversy. The problem isn’t all the “griping,” as you put it. The problem is a lack of discernment whose consequences in this instance have diminished the message of Christ.

Don ~ Jan 27, 2006 at 9:01 am

Globhoppr,

I agree with Don. The trouble with many Christians today is a lack of discernment. I would also add to be careful about professing Chad’s “new found faith” and equating it with salvation. There is a difference between intellectual assent and a heart’s trust. I’ve met my share of professing “Christians” and have come to the realization that people can say about anything they want. “Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.” – Matt. 7:21. I will reserve judgment as to Chad’s reported salvation until there is bonafide fruit of the Christian life evident. You see, there is a difference between professing and possessing.

People do change overnight, but not by their own power or fortitude. One of my deacons was a heavy drinker, smoker, and deep into pornography before he got saved. The day he got saved was the day that God gave him such a hatred for his lifestyle that he poured all the liquor down the drain, soaked two new cartons of cigarettes in water and literally destroyed every pornographic magazine in his house. Some would say he got a good dose of salvation. I would say that God delivered him from what long since had enslaved him. That’s what God does when he saves people. “If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.” – John 8:36. Read the preceeding verses in that passage and you will see that Jesus was talking to a crowd who believed they were saved, but he plainly told them that if they didn’t believe in Him “Ye shall die in your sins.”

It’s dangerous to subscribe to the notion that we can lead people to Christ, they can say a prayer, give lip service to Christ, continue to live like the devil and yet be headed for heaven. In his discourse to the Galatians, Paul gave a stark contrast between the lust of the flesh and the fruit of the Spirit in chapter 5:16-23. He summed it up by stating in verse 24: “And they that are Christ’s have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts.” Wow! Now that’s powerful.

While I certainly hope and pray for Chad’s conversion, the issue in this discussion is ETE’s wrongful casting decision. Let’s keep in mind that they aggressively sought the help of pastors to promote this movie. As a pastor I feel they used my influence to promote something that I never would have endorsed had I known Chad’s lifestyle before they came knocking on my door. To make matters worse, they haven’t had the courtesy to respond to my email and impassioned plea to repent from their sin. I sincerely hope that the reason is that they are overrun with feedback like mine and that it’s simply taking a lot of time to respond. I’m disenfranchised with ETE at this point and it will remain to be seen how I will respond in the future when they come knocking on this pastor’s door.

The hope that Chad may get saved in this quagmire still does not justify poor decision making on ETE’s part. The end, however, never justifies the means. I wonder how much more God would have been glorified if ETE had exercised better judgment.

Pastor Sam ~ Jan 27, 2006 at 11:05 am

Mel,

With all due respect, I will take the Bible over the History Channel anyday. While the practice you speak of may have been practiced, it certainly is not justification for the rightness of it. I must also disagree with your statement: “the men of the city weren’t lusting after other men.” Surely, you jest. The word “know” there is used as a euphemism for sexual intimacy. We know this is Lot’s intended meaning since he wrongfully offered his daughters who he said had not “known” man. He was simply stating that they were virgins and he was offering to prostitute his own daughters. This proposition so angered the men of Sodom that they rose up to deal worse with Lot than they intended to do otherwise. Amazingly, the unnatural and abominable wickedness that the men of Sodom set out to perform still bears their name, Sodomy.

Scripture is very clear as to their end. “Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.” – Jude 7. These men became impudent in sin and proved impenitent in sin. They were chastised with blindness and rightly so because they were deaf to reason. Yes, had the men of Sodom succeeded in raping Lot’s guests, they would have been shamed because they had been violated in the same way a woman feels when a man rapes her.

I stand by the “very negative words and comments” as you call them. I didn’t feel “snippy” when I wrote them and I am truly sorry they were perceived in that way. My experience on the internet with tirades, rants and snippiness is that they are offered in THIS MANNER! Again, I’ll chalk the misunderstanding up to the lack of face to face communication. If you and I had been face to face, I can assure you that I wouldn’t have showered you in spit and you would not have seen veins popping. I don’t call people “fags” (I despise it when others do that) since I don’t care to be called a homophobe because I hold to Biblical teaching concerning homosexuality. Certainly, a little respect goes a long way.

Finally, I am curious since you don’t feel you are justifying your views how you cannot take the following verses at face value.

“For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: and likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.” – Rom. 1:26-27

“If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.” – Lev. 20:13

It seems to me that men with men is an abomination which would stand to reason that when women do the same with women it is equally sinful. Thoughts?

Pastor Sam ~ Jan 27, 2006 at 12:19 pm

Pastor Sam, of course I agree with you; I’m going to offer what I think Mel would say to that last one: there are plenty of Scriptures in Leviticus which proscribe certain actions that we understand do not apply to us today. This, I think she’d argue is one of them. I do not at all agree with that; I believe that we need to apply solid hermeneutics to the study of Scripture, and it is quite clear that there are certain OT laws which were meant in their application to apply strictly to natural Israel, and others which have the support of other passages of Scripture and stand as for-all-time prohibitions—though, of course, no one here is advocating putting to death a homosexual, as the Leviticus passage demands. The word “abomination”, though, is a strong one, one that speaks to me of being well beyond a law that involves the cutting of one’s hair, and again, taken with the rest of Scripture, I believe is a mandate for all of living. But I think that the argument would be to equate Lev. 20:13 with certain of the other Levitical laws which we would clearly understand to be time/situation-limited to Israel.

Not that I by any means agree with that argument…

Byron ~ Jan 27, 2006 at 1:19 pm

Byron,

Of course, I’m not advocating putting to death any homosexual. I merely offer the scripture since it sheds insight into God’s view of the sin. Abomination is a strong word, I agree. I fail to see how God’s description of it as an abomination isn’t applicable. After all, Paul used “vile affections” and “reprobate mind” in his reference in Romans. Would that be more palatable?

Pastor Sam ~ Jan 27, 2006 at 1:35 pm

I do not replace the bible with the History Channel, either. What I said was that I watch it primarily for cultural education. I particularly find interest in the cultural practices of the times during which the events detailed in the bible. I believe that understanding these things can put a lot of things that are said into context.

The OT gives two sets of laws: ceremonial and moral. Lev 20 details the ceremonial law, and a lot of things are called abominations in that set of laws. I have also responded before to Romans 1; I believe, as do many scholars, that Paul was referring to his observing the goings-on in the temples of Aphrodite and Diana, not a group of homosexuals. Other non-biblical texts from the same time period do not record what we know as homosexuality. It is, in my reasoning, a bit far-reaching to believe that Paul would be referring to any homosexual activity outside the temple. Add onto their odd and disgusting worship the fact that they were, indeed, worshipping a false god and there you have it: God gave up on them.

Again, I think too much has been read into the bible concerning homosexuality. The bible is not a book about sexuality in humans, it’s a book about God’s greatness and a guide for how we can share with others what we already know. Not a list of do’s and don’ts.

Mel ~ Jan 27, 2006 at 6:47 pm

I have a suggestion. There is a little known film out there call ” Beyond the gates of splender. ” It is a documentary about the same event. I came across it a couple of months ago. You can see the actual footage and pictures of the people. I got to see faces of these missionaries and the weodani people also. It has touched me so muched that I do not thing this Holywood style reproduction ” end of the spear ” will come close to it. Nor was I interested to go see it. In the documentary , they took the time to show the depth of the characters and their convictions of the five men. Go rent that one from your local video store and forget about who Chad whatever and the not so real characters in ” End Of the spear “.

Wilson ~ Jan 28, 2006 at 12:33 am

Hi. I have never done a “blog” before and have no idea if I am doing it right. I am using a friend’s email and had a few comments and questions. I have seen the movie, love the story, and read Elliot and Saint’s books. I appreciate ladigrace comments on her personal connections with the Saint family. I understand Byron’s comments on discernment with movie makers in thier casting roles. I guess what I am wondering is if Mel can explain to me what is her understanding of God’s purpose of making Male and Female in Genesis and the convenant of marriage? I am a believer in Christ, a Christian, in regular inductive Bible study, ect. I have a few dear friends who were gay and then after coming to Christ, no longer “were in the lifestyle”, though these urges did not change overnight. Are you saying Mel that God made you a “lesbian” and it is not a choice? I also have a sibling who is gay and I am trying to understand their thinking on how they understand Scripture on marriage. Those I know who are gay tell me that by me not agreeing that God made them this way that I narrow minded. I am just trying to have a conversation and understand.

J.A. ~ Jan 28, 2006 at 2:32 am

Thank y’all for all the appends, it is very enlightening. FYI, I looked up my Chinese Bible which was published in early 1900’s and is still being used today, in 1 Cor. 6:9-10 it says, translated into English, “Neither….men who prefers another man…can inherit the kingdom of God”.
God bless.

alfred ~ Jan 28, 2006 at 3:13 am

I have also responded before to Romans 1; I believe, as do many scholars, that Paul was referring to his observing the goings-on in the temples of Aphrodite and Diana, not a group of homosexuals. Other non-biblical texts from the same time period do not record what we know as homosexuality. It is, in my reasoning, a bit far-reaching to believe that Paul would be referring to any homosexual activity outside the temple.

Hi all, this is interesting and I thought I’d pick up on it. I have not yet seen a biblical commentary that holds to the view quoted above. But the passage itself is obviously not just about a specific group of people that Paul encounteed while travelling. (Although I wouldn’t discount that he was aware of homosexual practices in his travels throughout the Roman Empire, and he was certainly aware of the Torah and the fact God had clearly spoken on homosexuality there).
Romans 1:18 – For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all unrighteousness of men. (italics mine)
That is the context setter for what follows – he is referring to all. He emphasises this further by going back to the creation of this world as the starting point in verse 20. And continues on in verse 21 to say because although they knew God they did not glorify him as God – the clear flow is that from the creation of the world God’s attributes have been clear but man has not glorified God. It is a universal description. What follows is a description of the heart of man and the actions pursued.

In context there is no way that the Romans 1 passage is about a couple of temples at one time. Romans was written after other epistles – and is not the first example of Paul writing on sexual immorality. Homosexuality was part of Roman life for some people – and continued to spread. When Paul writes, Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another that is quite clear.

Either Paul wrote a now obsolete piece of scripture that only applied to some people in a certain temple sect, which isn’t supported by the context, or Paul made an observation on what humans do when they exchange the truth of the Creator for a lie. it applied then and applies now.

I would have to echo Byron’s question as to what the sources are for the temporally limited relativistic interpretation. Scripture doesn’t support it.

From the beginning he made them male and female. Jesus referred to marriage between a man and a woman – the two become one flesh. If God created homosexuals then one would expect he would outline their unions in a similar manner. He doesn’t. The theme from Genesis onward is heterosexual marriage. And the scriptures are unambiguous regarding anything outside of that.

At the heart of this discussion is the question of liberation. Jesus can and does liberate people from various kinds of sexual addiction. That hasn’t changed either. But metanoia – a complete change of direction – that is required.

Catez ~ Jan 28, 2006 at 5:39 am

Byron,
I was looking all around your site at the other blogs you have going, and this is by far the most lengthy “thread.” This really has people thinking and talking…

The Kirk Cameron thing really gave me a chuckle.

I’m going to see EOTS today…can’t wait.

Ro ~ Jan 28, 2006 at 8:33 am

Yeah, Ro, and the irony is that this original post wasn’t anything I wrote, but that Jim Hanon did. What, nobody cares what I actually write myself? I’m getting an inferiority complex. C’mon, folks, read a few of my posts…I’m thinking of starting to drown my troubles in a sea of booze or something…

And hey, Ro, I’ll be praying that your walk with God isn’t totally corrupted by viewing this film.

Before I get flamed and abused, that was what we like to call a JOKE here at the No Kool-Aid Zone…

Byron ~ Jan 28, 2006 at 10:05 am

J.A., you did fine in your first post! The hard part is over; now just go with the flow.

I want to take a stab at something you said. Mel knows I respect her and welcome her posts here, so I’m going to take a different position on something. The idea that “God made me gay” is a misnomer, at least in the way I think homosexuals want to use it; at the same time, there is an explanation that I think jibes with Scripture. I honestly believe that, at least for many homosexuals, it “feels natural” to be attracted to someone of the same sex. The question is, “what explains this?”

I have already alluded to my understanding of the situation, that “sexual orientation” is a misnomer, a made-up term, in light of the fact that I agree that homosexual sexual activity—not homosexual attraction—is sinful. What’s going on, in this view? Temptation. Temptation is not sinful in and of itself. But temptation doesn’t equal “orientation”, unless you want to speak of being “oriented” toward everything we’re tempted to do. And yet…

And yet it does “feel natural” for homosexuals. Is this proof that “God made them that way”? No…it is proof that all of us are tempted by different things. True, “no temptation has come upon you but such as is common to man”—there are gazillions of people who are tempted by everything that can tempt a person to sin—but that does not mean that every person is tempted by the same things. Homosexuality doesn’t tempt me, and I can name a bunch of other things that don’t. I can name a whole bunch of others that do, however. It “feels natural” in America to buy easily into the materialistic, consumeristic sin that is rampant in our society; I don’t think 1 in 10 American Christians cannot be labeled “materialistic” to one degree or another (and I’m in that majority, sadly). It “feels natural” to do that. And can’t we all point to many other things that “feel natural”, and yet are sinful? If we’re honest…

But to be tempted isn’t to sin, and to “feel natural” doesn’t mean it isn’t temptation. But one other thing: temptation does not justify acting upon the temptation. There are a whole lot of folks who aren’t homosexual who have strong sexual urges but would be sinning to act upon them. They’re called “widows” and “unmarried” and “divorced” and so on…sexual feelings aren’t diminished by being in these states, but being “tempted” gives no warrant to sin.

None of this probably convinces Mel, I understand; she remains of the belief that homosexual sex isn’t sin. I appreciate Catez’s comments above—and Mel, my friend, I still think you’re skating around my questions…

Byron ~ Jan 28, 2006 at 10:46 am

Mel, apologies: I somehow overlooked a post that you wrote yesterday. You’re absolved of skating!!! I just missed that one somehow. My apologies.

Now stop being a Buddhist…

Byron ~ Jan 28, 2006 at 10:52 am

Hi guys!
It’s been a while since my last (one & only, Jan.23) post.
To Catez:
I believe as you do that the Bible does indeed have relevance to people today. Mel referred to Romans 1 as being directed to the society of that particular day. How can we discount the truth that God is also speaking through this passage of scripture to you and me. The same sexual practices mentioned in chapter 1 of Romans is exactly what is going on this very day. The reason is because human nature has not changed. We are “all” still the same sinfully depraved people that wander away from God, as was Adam & Eve. “All we like sheep have gone astray”and are “all” in need of a savior. On Jesus was laid “the iniquity of us all” Isaiah 53. Praise the Lord!!!

To Wilson:
You mentioned watching “Beyond The Gates of Splendor” and said that it was satisfying enough to the point that you have no interest in see the movie “End of The Spear”. Did you know both films were produced by the same people, “Every Tribe Entertainment”? I thoroughly enjoyed seeing both, for different reasons. The documentary (BTGOS) was very informative and educational. I rented it from the local video store in order to prepare myself better to see EOTS. I’ve got to say that that EOTS more dramatic. Not everyone will rent a documentary, but most people are open to watching a movie. Both can be used to challenge our faith and dedication to serve God and others. Both of these films are a fantastic platform to invite our unsaved friends to view (despite all the controversy over Chad Allen) in order to further share our faith with them.

Mike fom RI

Mike from RI ~ Jan 28, 2006 at 11:31 am

It seems so weird to jump into a conversation. But here goes: I totally agree with Byron on this subject of temptation. You said “Temptation is not sinful in and of itself. Temptation does not justify acting upon the temptation.” I totally agree. I guess I am trying to continue this conversation on this subject with my sibling and others. Whenever we talk on this subject it always comes back to me talking about “temptation” and them saying I need to agree that they are born to “desire the same sex and therefore it is right to act upon it”. I can agree they have this temptation like you said Byron we all have temptations, it is what we do with them that I am trying to make the difference. I still love my friends and sibling but there is always the tention between us. I know this is not due to me but Christ. Each of my friends and sibling say they are Christians though they too can not take the entire scripture to be “God breathed” because then their actions would be sin according to the Bible with sexual immorality outside of marriage between a man and a woman. This is word for word from some of them. I was just wondering if Mel felt similar. Thanks for reading this.

J.A. ~ Jan 28, 2006 at 2:44 pm

I have seen the movie. I have been familiar with this story since my childhood. My parents went to Brazil just about the same time the five missionaries were killed. I did not know at the time I viewed the movie that Chad was gay. I am glad I did not. After further consideration I don’t think it matters any more than the construction worker who is doing the work on my church right now. Most of them are not believers. ETE did not show a lack of discernment anymore than they did if they asked someone to do any other work for them. You get the people you need to do the job. ETE hired various people to do a job for them. The job was well done. All of the criticism of ETE is unfortunate. Now, instead of hearing about the great story, the public hears about all the bickering and censoring.

Steve ~ Jan 28, 2006 at 3:27 pm

I’ve no problem with an opposing opinion, Steve, but what I think is “unfortunate” is that believers who are asking questions regarding discernment are only “bickering and censoring”. I think your analogy of the construction workers is a poor one; no one is asking/expecting them to be involved in the work of spreading the gospel. The argument can be made, sure, that Chad Allen’s casting doesn’t matter, but it remains a valid question to ask, and since ETE urged me as a pastor to use my church to advocate the movie, I have to raise the question. We might disagree on what it means to “do the Lord’s work the Lord’s way”, but it isn’t an irrelevant question to ask.

Byron ~ Jan 28, 2006 at 3:46 pm

I just came back from seeing the movie. It was fantastic. I shed copious amounts of tears and thankfully didn’t take in copious amounts of popcorn. The message was wonderful in depicting forgiveness, grace/mercy, and in teaching others that “revenge” may be what is natural or known to the whole human race and most especially some particular cultures, but it is not what God’s “trail” includes. I wasn’t at all even distracted by Mr. Allen’s known sexual orientation. However, I do hope that he comes to know the Lord in this.

Ro ~ Jan 28, 2006 at 4:44 pm

Amen Ro! I am so glad you got to see the movie and that it sounds like it was a true blessing to you.

What you have stated has been my point all along. See the movie and let God work in and through it in your life.

All any of us can do for anyone that is living a life that is contrary to the Word of God is to pray for them.

And Steve you are right on the mark here with your post. I happen to think your picture of the construction worker is great. Our lives each and every day are touched by people that we don’t agree with and who may even be gay. My thought on that is that God puts people and situations into my life on a daily basis for a reason, I don’t question it, I just pray that I will show love to those people and the light of God.

ladigrace ~ Jan 28, 2006 at 5:50 pm

Oh and just to further show the impact that End of the Spear is having here is an update on the movie and the showing at the UN….just fyi….

At the request of an Ambassador to the United Nations, Every Tribe Entertainment took End of the Spear to New York for a private screening for the Ambassador and her distinguished guests at a theater in Times Square.

Steve Saint and Mincaye attended with some of the actors from the film, and they welcomed the dignitaries as they entered the theater. By the end of the evening, over 75 people, representing 12 countries, experienced this story.

As our distinguished guests were leaving, a man from the Christian Embassy invited Every Tribe Entertainment to a meeting of UN dignitaries the next morning. At this meeting, 11 dignitaries from 9 countries heard this story and talked about its potential on worldwide conflict for nearly two hours.

One of the dignitaries said that he had long considered himself a ‘dealer of peace.’ “But I submit to you,” he said, “that we are not dealers of peace but agents of reconciliation.” On Monday, Every Tribe Entertainment will return to screen End of the Spear at the United Nations.

This time, the film will be experienced from a theater inside the U.N building. The ambassadors from 191 countries have been invited. We ask that you pray for the nations and their leaders who will receive this story for the first time.

ladigrace ~ Jan 28, 2006 at 5:52 pm

Sorry, Byron…I can’t access my MySpace page from work, and the last time I was on I didn’t have time to search for the “religion” preference. I’m probably going to kick myself when I do find it, because it’s probably easier to find than I think.

All I can say about some of the comments made since yesterday is something I’ve said before: it took me a long time and a lot of studying to come to the conclusions I’ve come to. We may have to agree to disagree on some things, such as the context of Romans 1. I used to believe exactly what you do; I even taught it. I don’t believe it anymore. I firmly believe that Paul was referring to the people worshipping fertility gods at the Roman and Greek temples and THAT was why God “gave them up.” My Irish Gaelic bible, when translated to literal English, in passages where English says “homosexual” says something akin to “male prostitute.” It is the closest thing I can translate it as saying. I can’t remember the exact Gaelic word for homosexual, but I did recognize the word for prostitute and it was written in male proper. So we could debate what it should really say all day long from the translations of other languages, but we still won’t agree.

Byron, I have to agree–albeit begrudgingly –that the actor/construction worker parallel doesn’t really fit. The bible tells us that leaders, because they are more visible, should be “beyond reproach” in that they should live their lives as best they can so that people can look through them and see their God. However, I still hold to the notion that ETE is exactly what it’s name suggests: entertainment and not ministry. As such, it still doesn’t surprise me that they would have kept Chad on the movie.

Steve, I do not believe that Christ creates tension. I think we create tension. I do it myself whenever my mother is around; it’s not a conscious thing anymore, because I anticipate an argument any time she’s around. Christ did say He would create divisions, but I don’t think it meant He enjoyed the notion. I believe He said that because He knew (you know, being God and all) that those who lived by His grace would be alienated by those who didn’t understand it. God doesn’t want there to be tension. I hope you don’t fall into the trap of believing that it’s the good Christian soldier’s duty to make your sibling as uncomfortable as you think they should be (and I say that with all the honest sincerity that I can).

And Ro, I’m very glad you were able to look past Chad’s difference and enjoy the movie. Personally, when I saw it, I didn’t see Chad–I saw Nate and Steve.

Mel ~ Jan 28, 2006 at 5:59 pm

Whoops…My last comment was supposed to be for J.A., not Steve. Sorry!

Mel ~ Jan 28, 2006 at 7:25 pm

OK, Mel, then riddle me this: if EOTS is “entertainment”, then should ETE have marketed it to churches, effectively asking pastors such as myself to be promotion agents?

‘Cause that’s not what my job is, to promote entertainment…see my point?

I see that as a bit different than, say, Lion, Witch, and Wardrobe, where Disney didn’t send anything to me, but Outreach Marketing did, saying in effect, “here’s a movie with a (subtle) Christian message; maybe you should seize the moment.” See, I have no problem with that at all (though we didn’t); I did “seize the moment” with “The Passion”, but not because I necessarily harbored any illusions about Mel Gibson’s theology or status before God (not judging either way, mind you). I saw that—and LWW—as Hollywood productions that we might use—piggyback on—to further the Gospel. EOTS, though, was promoted directly by the producers.

I just felt used, that’s all.

Byron ~ Jan 28, 2006 at 10:10 pm

Look at it this way: The Passion made hundreds of millions of dollars, the vast majority of that money coming from churchgoers. I think ETE figured they could capitalize the same way.

I see ETE the same way I see “Christian” record labels: they’re businesses. They can’t operate if they don’t make money. So, they have to sell to the market in which they will make money, which is the church, hence the reason they used you. Key word is, as you said, USED.

I have no doubt that they really wanted to tell the story as best they could. But my point is that they’re still an entertainment group, and therefore they are a business. I’m interested in knowing if any of these “Christian” entertainment groups–movie companies, record labels, publishing companies–have or ever have held tax-exemption status…

Mel ~ Jan 29, 2006 at 12:34 am

Another thing about the “could/should” questions regarding ETE’s marketing tactics: whether or not they should market to churches is a question that can be applied to a million things that are marketed to the same audience. Should some musicians be marketed to the church? Should some books be marketed?

My big question is: “do we really need all this crap?” We should definitely keep up with the culture in our outreach attempts, but there is a limit. We really don’t need to make our own candy. We don’t need t-shirts that say “I’m Narrow Minded.” And we don’t need a Christian Yellow Pages.

Mel ~ Jan 29, 2006 at 12:42 am

Thanks Mel for responding. I too wasn’t seeing the actor Chad in the movie. I saw the story of Nate and Steve. I didn’t even know about Chad’s lifestlye until reading this.
To use the word division is fine when it comes to my family. And honestly I don’t go out of my way to bring up arguements. This conversation about me not agreeing with them “about sexual acts outside of a Biblical male and female marriage is not sin” has only happened twice in the past 10 years. It was once by email and once in a car. There was no screaming or arguing. We differ in our understanding of the Bible and that I won’t agree with them. My sibling has told me that since I don’t agree, that means I don’t accept them. He say’s we can’t agree to disagree on his lifestlye.

J.A. ~ Jan 29, 2006 at 12:51 am

Do you know where half the profit from this movie are going? If you saw the film you should because it was stated at the end. It is going to help indengenious (and I don’t know how to spell that) people in the world. People like the Wadoni who need the gospel. Hmmm doesn’t sound like they were out to make a buck for themseleves.

ladigrace ~ Jan 29, 2006 at 8:28 am

“Indigenous”. You’re welcome.

My reservations about Chad Allen notwithstanding, that is a wonderful thing to do, and ETE is to be highly commended for that. Good show.

Byron ~ Jan 29, 2006 at 11:38 am

Mel, the commendable ETE giving aside, you have hit on a great question, a real biggie that is hardly considered by many Christians today. “Do we need all this crap?” Absolutely not…there’s a post or three coming on that topic, because I think that you’re in the ballpark of something very significant when you raise that question.

Byron ~ Jan 29, 2006 at 11:41 am

I haven’t seen this film. I did see Beyond The Gates of Splendor. I do know the story of the Elliots and the other missionaries who were involved. But I already have something to say in regards to the casting of gay activist Chad Allen in the role of the “Saint’s.”

I’m trusting that God was in the driver’s seat on this one. I agree that much prayer and even hearts of thankfulness are in order, and I believe God knew exactly what He was doing. God is running the show. Think about some of life’s worst case scenarios, and some of the people in them that God has totally turned around, and some through the strangest and oddest of circumstances. Nicky Cruz comes to mind. And think about what their ministries have accomplished. I know in my own life, personally, deeply wayward young men who have given their hearts to God and then become His men – in the pulpit, on the street, working in the ministry full time all the time. Hundreds, perhaps, thousands, of souls saved beause ONE life got turned around. PRAY this is what God will do with Chad Allen. What an AWESOME thing THAT would be!! I feel excited and a sense of thrill at the prospect.

We can never know the mind of God. We can only watch and learn as we are witness to His handiwork unfolding. We cannot underestimate what God can do. Look what He did with the Waodani thru those dedicated missionaries who gave their lives. Think about how Chad Allen KNOWS that story now, and what it must be doing to his heart.

I say “Pray” and “Thank Him.”

Marilyn GS ~ Jan 29, 2006 at 1:19 pm

Marilyn, I can’t argue with that; you’re speaking of the sovereign will of God, the fact that if God allows something to happen, it is within His sovereign will. He can use this film in wonderful ways to bless people, because He can take whatever He chooses and use it as He wills.

The argument (well, discussion!) is not about God’s sovereign will, though; it is about His moral will; those are two different things, indeed have to be, or else there is no such thing as evil or sin. Many folks confuse the two. See a post of mine about halfway back, where I give a (hopefully) helpful delineation between the two. Thus…

I can “pray without ceasing” (not that I do!), and I can “Thank Him” that He is sovereignly in control. I cannot say “thanks” regarding those who violate God’s moral will—and my argument is just that, that ETE violated God’s moral will—even though sovereignly He can take any sin (which is the definition of the violation of God’s moral will) and use it for the sake of the kingdom. Doesn’t let the sinner off the hook, though; it only shows His greatness.

Byron ~ Jan 29, 2006 at 2:36 pm

I commend ETE giving half the profits to I-TEC, and yes, I knew that’s what they were doing. But the fact remains that they were trying to make money. I’m not saying that they were wrong to make the movie. I’m trying to raise the question, as Byron picked up on, as to whether or not some of the things we latch onto are right.

My family is Irish Catholic by background. We started going to a very charismatic protestant church in Houston when I was 11; that church, Grace Community Church, is now very famous. I remember when Grace first moved into the massive redbrick and white column building in Clear Lake. The stained glass window wasn’t in the sanctuary yet. In the three years we were there–my mother worked there as a secretary–the stained glass was added above the baptismal, the balcony was extended, and the bookstore was added. After my family moved away, the building doubled in size! They added a gym, a bowling alley, a skating rink, a MOVIE THEATRE, and all kinds of stuff that a church really doesn’t need. Now Grace is in an even larger building, complete with a fully equipped production studio so that Pastor Steve can put himself on TV every Monday morning.

When that bookstore first opened at Grace, it was big news. I bought more tapes and t-shirts there than I can recall. At the time I was all for “keeping Christian money in the church.” But that’s a ridiculous idea, especially considering what our Christian money is buying in the Christian bookstores (which, by the way, most are owned by other chain stores like Best Buy).

Sorry if this seems like a rant; I had a tiff about this very issue this morning with someone in my neighborhood who is very proud that she only shops at Family Christian Stores (yes, they’re owned by Best Buy).

Mel ~ Jan 29, 2006 at 3:14 pm

You’re cooking with gas now, Mel, hitting on all cylinders. I posed the question many months ago of folks, “what percentage of stuff in Christian bookstores (as well as “what percentage of Christian radio”, and “what percentage of Christian TV”) would you do away with if you could wave a magic wand and have it happen. Personally, I’d do away with less Christian radio than the other two, but Christian TV, I’d do away with the overwhelming majority of, and stuff in Christian bookstores, I’d do away with a significant percentage of.

Do you happen to know of a source which would show “who owns what” when it comes to things like Family Bookstores, Word Records, etc.? I’d really be interested in knowing…

Byron ~ Jan 29, 2006 at 4:32 pm

Well, I know Family Christian is owned by Best Buy, and I believe Berean is as well…I know Word is owned by a secular label, and I believe ForeFront was bought also. I remember back when I was in the CCM industry several Christian labels were bought by secular names and it was big news. I’d have to ask around to find out who bought what.

Again, I’m not advocating that we keep all of our money in the church. POD is one of my favorite bands and nothing lit me up quicker than listening to all the whining and moaning from churchgoers accusing Sonny, Wuv, Traa and Marcos (Truby was hired to take Marcos’ place a couple of years ago) of selling out and not being a Christian band anymore. I’ve been a POD “warrior” since well before they were a big name and I applaud their efforts to be in and not of the world. DC Talk got the same cold-shoulder treatment when Virgin records released “Jesus Freak.” It’s not the bands that openly release albums on secular labels that I question; it’s the artists that don’t. Steven Curtis Chapman is just about the only one that I still like.

I love Jars of Clay, and they were taken to task for having songs on several movie soundtracks (i.e. The Long Kiss Goodnight, Jack Frost). POD just released their third album on a major label. Toby Mac (of DC Talk) has released two solo albums and two remix/extended releases on a major label, as have Michael Tait and Kevin Max of the same band. Why are these people labelled the sellouts?

I went to a Christian music festival at Phoenix First Assembly a few years ago and I’m still irritated with some of what went on. One group, a trio of 13-year-old girls, were dressed in skintight jeans and glittery halter tops singing pop tunes and being sold for their “cute factor.” Another artist, Jennifer Knapp, whose music I loved, was spectacularly rude to all of her fans that night after playing an amazingly blistering set with a crack veteran band. And the song “Jesus Is My Superhero?” Ugh. We don’t need this garbage. It’s all hype, fluff stuff that nonbelievers market to Christians because they can make money off of us.

I’m not accusing ETE of marketing fluff. What I am saying is that there’s a fine line between what’s acceptable and what’s trash and nobody recognizes it. I promise that’s one of the biggest turn-offs to a lot of people about church.

Mel ~ Jan 29, 2006 at 7:33 pm

I went to see the movie last night and at the time I was totally unware of the controversy about Chad Allen. My husband and I have opened the home that God has given to us to those who are living on the streets, coming out of prison, etc. We literally have taken the locks off of our doors. We truely live by the grace of God, He brings in the food, the lights, the gas, the people who He wants to share in this unique ministry that He has established. I followed several of the interviews that were promoting this movie with Grandfather, Steve Saint, Jim Hanon and others. The understanding that I had about the making of this movie is that it was not being promoted so much as a Christian Movie, as an adventure movie about a true story that the ending needed to be told. I was under the impression that you could not miss the Gospel message of salvation, forgiveness, reconciliation, and living the “trail marked by the Father”. I understood the purpose of this movie to present this message in a way that would start people asking questions and wanting to keep coming to see more until they prayerfully find the answers. This movie and its content is very clear on these messages and I deal with many people that are caught in cults of either religion or satanism. This movie is an extremely wonderful tool. Yes, the Christian community was asked to back this film not only as a wonderful rememberance and tribute to what God had done in 5 men’s lives, their families who continue the work, the tribe who no longer walk “badly, badly”, but to send the message that you don’t need all of the other immorality and sinful nature in order to make movies and entertainment sell, even to the Christian community. Philippians 1:15-18 says “15-Some to be sure, are preaching Christ even from envy and strife, but some also from good will; 16-the latter do it out of love, knowing that I am appointed for the defense of the gospel; 17-the former proclaim Christ out of selfish ambition rather than from pure motives, thinking to cause me distress in my imprisonment. 18-What then? Only that in every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is proclaimed; and in this I rejoice. Yes, and I will rejoice.” I had a dear brother that comes to our home often and was extremely angry that I was so excited over the presentation of the lives of those who God has changed, because of Chad Allen playing Nate Saint. This is how I first came to know of the controversy. I saw nothing in “End of the Spear” that went against the Word of God that these men and their families valued to the death for some. Perhaps God appointed a time for Chad to be surrounded some who truely live the forgiveness and reconciliation that God brought into their lives. I agree that homosexuality is an abomination in the sight of God, but I have seen this broken not by excluding these people out of my life, but by including them and letting them see the love of God. They know I do not condone the lifestyle, but that I honestly believe that God can change this in them. I have witnessed this happen in people who attended homosexual churches, were taught from their pulpits that this was an acceptable lifestyle, etc. By not excluding them from the true love of God as He changes lives, I have rejoiced as I have seen the transformation. I pray that those on the set have made that same impact on this young man’s life. The strife of the controversey may very well cause distress to those who are trying to show the love of God in a tangible way. I started thinking about how many of the movies billed as Christian movies and are made by ministries have actors and actresses in them that are non-belivers or lost – yet these movies are praised in our churches and watched by many. Perhaps the question all of us,including myself,need to ask is, “What am I doing in my life to show God’s standards to others?”. I know what God delivered me from, and to be honest, these 5 men had an impact in my life. I grew up with this story for as long as I can remember. I am now 50 and my father often told me of the men who were killed just one and half weeks before I was born. I thank God that these men did not look at the sins of these dear ones, and decide that it was not worth the effort to go. I also thank God that they did not condone the lifestyle of these dear ones, but truely wanted them to also be ready to enter heaven. They did not see the distorted covenant they practiced, and say “I don’t want to go to them.” They went because they loved God and they could see the potential of life for them. My husband and I have been honest with our small congregation and those in our house about the controversey surrounding Chad Allen, however we are still strongly recommending that people go and see the wonderful message of love, salvation, forgiveness, reconcilliation, and now that I have heard about all this strife over Chad Allen, how powerful God is to bring people into lives that truely represent the spreading of the gospel in love, but are willing to suffer in Christ for that message to be brought to everyone. I will choose to rejoice in the message brought, the honoring of the lives of 5 men who truely loved God and the sinner(not the sin), and the preaching of the gospel to the many whose lives have been changed and will still be changed by the people who had the courage to make this film. Perhaps this is the message that we should be taking out into the world! Thank you and May God’s Matchless Love Continue To Bless One And All!!!

Trish ~ Jan 30, 2006 at 1:22 am

Chad Allen is a fine actor and Jesus told us to finish his work. I think we are not here to look down on any person. Jesus accepts us as we are he looks at our inward appearance not our outward appearance. He said our treasure is where our heart lies. He gave each of us a deposit of his love. Love is the treasure we hold within all of us. We can choose to love, hate, or judge each other. The greatest sin is not to believe in Jesus.

BiggSiss ~ Jan 30, 2006 at 2:49 am

Dear Iadigrace,
This is offered as a word of encouragement to you and also to all of those who faced a very tough decision in allowing Chad Allen to continue in the role that he portrayed in this film. Acts 9:26-27, tells us that after Paul’s conversion, when Paul(as Saul) came to Jerusalem and was trying to associate with the disciples, they were still afraid of him and they(men who had actually walked with Christ) were not believing that he was a disciple, a man by the name of Barnabas came alongside Paul and spoke up for him. Along with this, the evidence of Paul’s changed life was there. I wonder what the disciples thought of Barnabas when he first defended Paul. God used both of them to further His message. I have to admit that I had not read all of the postings when I wrote the above comment. I do know that the making of End of the Spear has been a huge encouragement to me in the work that God has given to my husband and me. I am grateful for the example that everyone involved in this difficult decision has given to me. I can only imagine the amount of prayer that went into this and the willingness of Steve Saint to once again let God lead his heart in an issue that was very difficult. This time a new group of people were involved in the decision to continue to show the love of God to someone who needs to know that God’s people are willing to reach out in any and all circumstances, whether it be one soul at a time or an entire village. I had heard the story about Steve telling Grandfather the story of Columbine, and of his refusing to give the permission to have this story told, because this was not his story. I heard of the trip to get the permission from the Waorani and the question was asked about if this movie was made would it help our children to stop “walking badly, badly. Would they stop killing?” The influence that this story/witness has had in my life did not take a true hold until 1997, 41 years later. And it still provides me the encouragement that I need when I am discouraged. Thank you for being Barnabas, and I pray that the true reasons for making this film will not be lost by creating an issue that may not let someone else find this encouragement or see what God’s love, forgiveness, salvation, reconcilliation can do in their lives. I thank God that those who prayed for me, told me the truth in love over and over again, never gave up on me! And that some of the people that God sent in my life took a lot of criticism for not just washing their hands of me. Now I can thank God for the honor and priviledge of being a part of His grace and mercy in others lives. True, they have a choice to accept or reject a life with God, and He will respect their decision, but through the life that He has given me now – I truely know that He desires none should perish, even though some will. I once again will say that I choose to rejoice in the wonderful tool through End of the Spear and the doors that I am seeing opened in people’s lives. Iadigrace, continue to be Barnabas.

Trish ~ Jan 30, 2006 at 3:04 am

Trish,

Thank you very much for your words of encouragement. They are greatly appreciated. It sounds like you know a great deal about the story and the heart of the matter. You do know the heart of the mission and the story that was conveyed, I can see that by reading your words.

ladigrace ~ Jan 30, 2006 at 7:42 am

Big Siss, I couldn’t agree more with what you write. I don’t think anyone here, though, is looking down on Chad Allen; read the posts and I think you’ll find that that’s true. The posts will also indicate that there are many of us, myself included, who think that that’s beside the point that’s being made—even though everything you say is right!

Byron ~ Jan 30, 2006 at 9:17 am

Trish, there is likewise so much to agree with in your comments, and your work is very commendable; keep it up, Sister!

What the issue is, though, involves not the sovereign will of God, and His ability to use the film—most all of us agree that He can—but the moral will of God; i.e., was this film made “God’s way”? I wrote a post last night that I hope you and others will find helpful in clarifying things:

http://www.byron-harvey.com/2006/01/29/confusing-the-will-of-god/

You quoted two passages in your two posts; the first one is one I’ve quoted several times to make the point that God can indeed use this film to His glory, and it’s a good parallel: Paul is not endorsing the selfish motives of those who are proclaiming the gospel; indeed, he denounces some of their means; at the same time, he rejoices that God is sovereign and bigger and will use what is preached. That’s a perfect parallel, because I agree wholeheartedly with both sides of the equation: God is sovereign, but sometimes He sovereignly uses mistakes that we make. The discussion is about whether or not mistakes were made, and I submit that, because the end doesn’t justify the means, ETE erred in their casting choice.

Your second Biblical reference isn’t as good, because the parallel fails. Paul was not an unrepentant activist against the cause of God by the time Barnabas came on the scene; he was “on the team”, just newly-removed from his old lifestyle. We’d have a parallel (hopefully, we’ll have a parallel!) if Chad Allen were a new believer. If he were—and one commenter has suggested that she heard he had become a believer, although that’s not been corroborated—I’ll lead the charge to welcome and defend him!

God is bigger, that’s for sure…and we need to be careful with our words, but the discussion is about Christian discernment, and about honoring God in the means we use.

Byron ~ Jan 30, 2006 at 9:31 am

Apparently my last posting was misunderstood. I was making a reference to Iadigrace that the encourager Barnabas is evident in Iadigrace in the way in which the message that End of the Spear is bringing. Iadigrace is coming along side Steve Saint as an encourager. I apologize that this was not evident in what I said. Thank you for your response Byron.

Trish ~ Jan 30, 2006 at 10:35 am

No need for apologies, Trish; unfortunately, the forum of writing is limited sometimes in conveying what we really think (then again, it has certain advantages, too!). Thanks for joining the conversation!

Byron ~ Jan 30, 2006 at 1:05 pm

here’s my beef with the thing: the bible says that if you trangress one part of the law you are guilty of breaking all of the commandments. so that means no one sin is greater than another. they will all take you to hell. that being said, i do believe there is a difference between blatant sin and sin that you are trying to abstain from.i other words, if you know you struggle with something but aren’t giving in to it, then that’s not blatent sin. if you are activly engaging in it then it’s blatent. so does that mean if you are still smoking or eating yourself to death with obesity or that you refuse to tithe that you shouldn’t play a role in a Christain movie? do you see where it gets a little ridiculous and hypocritical? why is homosexuality seen as the greater sin? again, they will all take you to hell! i think we need to be careful not to judge anyhting before it’s time. i believe this movie will bear much fruit, and the bible says we will know a thing by it’s fruit…and that they will know that we are Christians by our love. what would happen if we loved Chad Allen more than he’s been hurt by the world? is it possible he could find healing from whatever transpired to cause him to choose to sin in this area of his life? why don’t we trying loving him first and see what happens.

jennifer ~ Jan 30, 2006 at 2:42 pm

Jennifer, thanks for joining the conversation. I think if you’ll read the previous posts, you’d see that the issue isn’t Chad’s homosexuality, per se (I posted that a good while back). Also, I’d refer you to my other posts about why and when we must judge—and when and how we must not. There is no contradiction whatsoever between loving and praying for Chad Allen, and on the other hand, questioning the decision by ETE to cast him in the part (our beef isn’t with Chad, but with Every Tribe Entertainment). No contradiction at all.

Byron ~ Jan 30, 2006 at 4:04 pm

My big question is: “do we really need all this crap?” We should definitely keep up with the culture in our outreach attempts, but there is a limit.

Mel the thing here is that in your comments you are really asking us Christians to do just that – keep up with the culture in our outreach attempts. I’m not talking about End of the Spear – I’m talking about the culturally driven pressure to accept homosexuality in the church and the legitimising of “gay Christians” and gay ministers.

I did visit your myspace blog and read some stugff there and saw what you have listed as important to you. And I have read all your comments here. And you make some good observations re: marketing and churches etc. in your comments. But you are also putting forward your views as if you are a Christian.

To be up front – I have personally known a number of gay men and women. One of my friends died of Aids. Some have been liberated from homosexuality and are now Christians. I have worked with or been friends with several people with other forms of sexual addiction too. And I know that it is simply a compromise to entertain the notion of “gay Christians” – it denies the liberating power of the Holy Spirit and creates division in the church. But most importantly – it is not God’s design for a person. And God’s design is the best.

I agree with what Byron said about temptation. I can also say that conscience is key. I think you are sidestepping an important part of Romans 1 which refers to men leaving their natural use with women – natural use. And the verse regarding women is similar. it does not say some were gay and left their natural use to become prostitutes. It refers to heterosexuality as the natural use of our sexuality. That’s hugely important and can’t just be minimised or ignored.

My impression is that you are some-one who has been a Christain, you’ve seen some hypocrisy in the church, you struggle with temptation, and at the moment are celibate but pursuing a same-sex romantic relationship – which is not compatible with Christianity. You are right to say that you cannot just choose to be heterosexual – it is the Spirit of God that changes desires and orientation, and I’ve seen how that is a process for people. But they start by being clear about who they follow and what is now nailed to the cross.

I appreciate your intelligent thoughts here and the way you are civil, but I do want to pick up on the confusion about being homosexual (as an identity and practice) and Christian. It is the difference between some-one saying “I’m a Christian and I am tempted by a same-sex attraction” and some-one saying “I’m gay, and a Christian, and can have same-sex”. They are two different things.

Catez ~ Jan 30, 2006 at 8:13 pm

I just spent alot of time writing a letter to our sponsored Muslim child in Israel using the movie,EOTS, the share the gospel with him. Thank you,Lord, for saving Mincanyani and Steve Saint. Thank you for making their lives illustrations of your transforming power.

candy ~ Jan 30, 2006 at 11:41 pm

Catez, you are saying things similar to comments previously made by other people. I will say again, I don’t see this as confusing.

I can understand why most people, particularly straight people, believe homosexuality to be sin; it’s something you don’t understand, and things we don’t understand make us uncomfortable. It seems obvious to you that homosexuality is a sin, but the opposite is what’s obvious to me. It’s not a temptation. It’s as natural as breathing. I wish I could find better words to explain it.

I don’t believe that God wants to change our orientation. Note the word I used has nothing to do with choice. I used to believe it was a choice, and as I’ve said before I hated myself for a long time because I knew what would happen if anyone knew that I was attracted to the other girls in my youth groups. My fear wasn’t of God. It was of the church, the culture I had been immersed in from childhood.

Does anyone know the name Mychal Judge? You all know what he looks like at the very least. The image of his body being carried away from the WTC in a chair by three of the firefighters who’d known him since they were rookies was one of the first images we saw after 9/11. Friar Judge, a Franciscan monk and the chaplain of FDNY, was also gay. He blessed same-sex unions quietly, not to keep it quiet but because he believed that there was nothing wrong or abnormal about it.

I met Fr. Judge back in the summer of ‘94. My youth group had gone to NYC on a mission trip, and while we were split up in the city we were required to wear our red “Jesus Christ–He’s the real thing” coke-ribbon shirts. Mychal was on his way between his residence and the firehouse and saw us crossing the street and smiled bigger than anyone we’d met that day. At first we thought his Franciscan robe was a joke, but he introduced himself and told us what he did as the FDNY chaplain. I had no idea he was gay until after his death. He was the sweetest, most lovable man I’d ever met and if I’d known then that he identified himself as gay, it unfortunately would have clouded my judgement at the time. Is that fair?

I don’t think he would have been wrong if he hadn’t been a monk and lived his life with a partner, because I don’t believe that being gay is a sin. I still believe that Paul was referring to priests in idolatrous temples in Romans 1.

Mel ~ Jan 30, 2006 at 11:44 pm

I am very sorry but someone who says that being gay is not a sin is not truly reading and understanding their bible. The bible is very clear that God sees this as an abomination and I can’t see where anyone who is a Christian can say otherwise unless they are trying to rationalize their own sin and make the bible say something that it doesn’t.

I will never understand how someone can take the following scriptures and say that they aren’t saying it is wrong to be gay:

Lev 18:22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.

Lev 20:13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

Seems fairly clear to me.

ladigrace ~ Jan 30, 2006 at 11:49 pm

Ladigrace, what I don’t understand is why people keep throwing the same scriptures at me. What you’re quoting is from the ceremonial law; it is separate from the moral law and nothing is said about the issue in the moral law. The same scriptures you’re quoting forbid even handling the skin of a dead pig (there goes football!), tattooing your body, and eating shrimp, lobster or crab.

What I really don’t understand is how anyone has any business judging whether or not I am saved. I have been civil, and I ask you to do the same.

Mel ~ Jan 31, 2006 at 12:02 am

While we are under grace and not the law the scripture is still there.

And what about 1 Timothy 1:9-10 “Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine.”

And why do no verses in the NT ever speak of a union being anything but that of a man and a woman? If God had intended it to be the other way around or which ever way we pleased He would have stated it that way.

ladigrace ~ Jan 31, 2006 at 12:19 am

I think it’s safe to say that any good that this movie could have accomplished for the work of the Kingdom has been overcome by the squabbling of “Christians” about its merits.

Rob ~ Jan 31, 2006 at 12:56 am

Rob, That is not true. There has been squabbling that is for sure, but the reviews on the movie have been tremendous. Many people have seen the movie and there has been a tremendous amount of God moving in peoples lives.

You may ask how I know this, as I have stated before I know the Saints personally. There is also a newsletter that goes out (I believe you can sign up for it at http://www.endofthespear.com) that Bearing Fruit Entertainment does and they asked people to write in about their experience with the movie, the responses have been incredible.

So God is still using End of the Spear regardless of those who wish to denounce it for one reason or another. There is no question that it is a beautiful movie with God’s hand and leading clearly upon it.

My God is bigger than any group of Christians who would opt to denounce a film because an actor in it is gay. My God can and does use people from every walk of life to change lives. Remember Jesus himself set among publicans and sinners.

Does it make the sin of homosexuality right, not by any means but with God all things are possible.

ladigrace ~ Jan 31, 2006 at 7:18 am

Clarifications: Ladigrace, I don’t think that “denounce” is something I’ve done with EOTS; at least I’ve not intended to. I’m not going to see it; I withdrew my endorsement of it before my congregation. I’ve told people, though, that seeing it is their call, and I’m not going on a tirade, of course, against the film, per se; the story is a wonderful one. This is a discussion of ETE’s casting choice—and a legitimate discussion is a good bit different than a “squabble”, IMHO—though that might be in the definitions.

Byron ~ Jan 31, 2006 at 8:20 am

Byron,

You are correct in stating that a squabble is different from a discussion. Denounce may not a be a totally accurate word and I apologize if that has offended you.

As a Pastor you must discern what and what not to recommend to your congregation and I respect that right.

ETE did make the choice of who they cast into the roles, and the Saints had to prayerfully make the choice to keep Chad. Knowing the Saints and knowing how they made their choice and why makes it easier for me perhaps to accept that they truly feel this is what God would have them to do.

I respect that this is an opinion based forum and everyone will have different opinions and views on the subjects discussed on any forum.

What bothers me most about the discussion here is that there are some who just think it is ok to be gay and that it isn’t against God’s Word. That blows my mind. I think that is the more important discussion, that being gay is wrong in the eyes of God, and abomination. Sure I know all the law and grace issues that can be brought up, fact is, God does not condone being gay.

Do I like that Chad Allen played the role, no I don’t, but there are many things that have happened in the past that God has allowed that I haven’t liked. I simply just feel that God allowed Chad to be placed in that role and I accept that.

ladigrace ~ Jan 31, 2006 at 9:29 am

Mel,
There are plenty of people in this world who do good deeds. That doesn’t mean they have license to commit sexual immorality. Sorry – but you cannot serve two masters. And yes, when you try to take two identities that are incompatible then we who are Christians do have scriptural permission to test that and be discerning.

You haven’t given an explanation of Romans 1 that stands up in the context of the passage or in the context of biblical principles on sexuality from Genesis through to Revelation. Sexual union occurs within marriage between a man and a woman. Sexual union outside of that is fornication.

What you are describing is not an innate orientation – it is a process of inordinate affection and lust. Jesus Christ died so that such drives can be forgiven and replaced. His grace and sacrifice are sufficient.

Nowhere in Romans does it say Paul was only referring to certain temples – neither does it say it anywhere else. To add in what is not there is speculation and extra-biblical. But as I’ve said – scripture is unambiguous on God’s designed sexuality for humanity.

I don’t buy your claim that homosexuality is as natural as breathing for you. Engaging in homosexuality requires overriding your conscience. Done repeatedly you may dull your conscience but in the light of His spirit the conscience knows.

It has nothing to do with me being uncomfortable (that is something the gay community promulgates as a straw man). It has everything to do with me knowing that Jesus Christ is able to save to the uttermost those who come to him humbly and in repentance.

There are causes which underly the type of inordinate affection and false comfort you are pursuing. Everyone has their weaknesses and areas where they are tempted more easily than in other ways. Attachment deficits, past abuses, fear of being alone, fear of the opposite sex, idolatry of the same sex, narcissism in response to having to survive psychologically – and others – all of these things can be predisposing contributors to the temptation of sexual immorality. Which is why, having died to self, Christians continue in the process of sanctification – but that is not licence to openly engage in and defend sin.

No matter how much you protest, it is clear that you cannot be a Christian and proclaim a gay identity at the same time. God’s spirit will not be joined to something in such opposition to his liberty, mercy, and transforming grace. That is what you are really debating here Mel – the truth and power of Jesus Christ. And that’s is why I commented – because it is only in his liberation from sexual immorality that you will truly have your dignity as a woman.

Catez ~ Jan 31, 2006 at 10:30 am

Ladigrace, you have to work a whole lot harder than that to offend me!!!

I just want it clear that I think that it’s fine if people want to go to the flick; the story is certainly one people should know about.

Byron ~ Jan 31, 2006 at 10:48 am

Catez,

Amen! The essence of what you have stated has already been pointed out to Mel. She acknowledges that her understanding of the scriptures is definitely out of the mainstream. Not to put words in her mouth you can go back and read her posts on this thread. I think there is a willful disbelief of the truths you’ve stated and I pray that soon she will yield to the truth. As far as I can see in the posts on this site, no one is looking down upon those caught up in same sex attraction or enslaved to homosexual practices. It is a sin, but so are many other sins. What truly amazes me is the seemingly large number of professing Christians who refuse to see that God’s Sovreign will was violated in the decision to cast Chad Allen in this role. Can God use the movie? Well, God can use anything He so pleases and has in times past worked through the messes that men make to bring glory to Himself.

I agree with Byron in that we as pastors were aggressively pursued by ETE to endorse the film and encourage our congregations to support it. Their integrity has been compromised greatly in their decision and they will at least have a difficult time with this pastor when they come knocking on my door again. Like Pastor Byron I rescinded my endorsement of the movie and informed my congregation as to why I felt so motivated. Most of my people that planned to go didn’t go based upon my decision. The few that chose to go will not be ridiculed nor chastised by this pastor for doing so. It’s clearly their decision, but as their pastor I felt a need to let them have the same information that I had received and the reasoning behind my decision.

Will God use ETOS? I’m sure He will and already has to some degree. I simply wonder how much greater it could have been used in His hand had this controversy been avoided? And to those who adamantly defend ETE’s casting decision, I want to ask you… if casting Chad Allen was such a right thing to do, why did Mart Green, Jim Hanon, and Steve Saint wrestle so much in coming to peace with the decision to go ahead with Chad? It seems to me they relied on feelings, dreams and a need to keep on schedule with the filming more than they relied on “Thus saith the Lord.” No where have I read that any one of them hung their hat on a Biblical precedent as to the rightness of their decision. I am of the opinion that the struggle within the spirit of these men was the check of the Holy Spirit putting the skids on it, but in each case they contented themselves to justify their very subjective feelings instead of submit to the very objective Word of God. No one has posted Biblical evidence to date that it is ever OK to violate the Sovreign will of God in order to do right.

Pastor Sam ~ Jan 31, 2006 at 11:17 pm

Hi Sam,
I appreciate the difficulty for pastors. Have you read Randy Alcorn’s statement on this? Among others things expect a retraction in part from Jason Janz on his blog on things he disseminated that were not true regarding the movie producers.

I think the lesson here is to examine the boundaries. I know that other “family entertainment” movies that aren’t Christian are marketed to some churches. Why do churches get into this anyway?

It wasn’t the best casting decision – and the producers admit that (Randy Alcorn’s article, coming from hours he has spent in discussion with them over it is enlightening as to what they have been through).

However I think pastors need to take some responsibility too. A movie may have a Christian story line but if it isn’t marketed to you as a Christian movie by Christians with only Christians involved then you can’t assume. I don’t mean to be heavy with that – I can understand how this all happened and my comment is more of a “what can be learned for the future” suggestion.

I see no problem with seeing the movie and from reviews I’ve read it is apparently quite a good film. However I’d say what can be learned here? I think quite honestly that churches should not be marketing vehicles for movies. In fact I think there is far too much marketing in churches of books, music, and other things. I mean hey, we can do that on blogs!

God bles you. I do understand how Pastors would feel embarrassed by this and that they were put in a difficult position. I recommend reading Radny Alcorn’s article.

Catez ~ Jan 31, 2006 at 11:43 pm

Some of you amaze me…and not in a good way. The movie is very uplifting, courageous, inspiring, etc. Quit focusing on one man and focus on the ONE MAN the movie was about and that’s JESUS!

This is why Christian movies rarely succeed. Because all of us Christian sit back and critique it and tell others not to see it , blah blah blah.

Are you telling me that every movie you watch, you sit back and make sure it “lines up with scripture” according to all actors,directors, etc lifestyles.

When you read a book, do you know all there is to know about the author?

Come on people..we ALL have sin in our lives. Even some of the high and mighty preachers on here have SIN. We ALL need saving. This movie might provoke people to look to God even if a homosexual is in it (and that’s the goal!)

God can use it. Support the message behind it if you really believe that Christ can forgive all sin.

I’m embarrassed that “evangelical christians” act like this. I commend ETE for following their heart even though they knew they might have opposition.

Leave this subject alone and move on to something that is positive, life giving, and non condemning.
Forgive me if I’ve stepped on toes.

Christi ~ Jan 31, 2006 at 11:45 pm

Well, Christi, you’ve not stepped on my toes a-tall, but you have managed to totally sidestep the issues and bring up peripheral points that aren’t really a part of the discussion, a discussion that has really been, for the most part, pretty civil so long as folks try to understand the points being made instead of tossing out red herrings right and left. I’d invite you to seriously engage the substance of the issues, and if you choose to do that, you’ll see that some of the accusations you make don’t stand up to scrutiny once you really read what is being said here instead of what you apparently assume is being said. Christian discernment is always a positive, life-giving thing; to blithely ignore issues is not.

You’ll also find that we are able here to disagree agreeably, and to treat each other with great respect, which we’ll happily extend to you as well!

Byron ~ Feb 1, 2006 at 12:01 am

I’m not sidestepping the “issue”. I see the issue very clear.Some of the people feel they should not “endorse the film” I totally agree with this. I do not think the pulpit is a place to endorse movies.

Also-others feel that ETE is compromising for hiring an openly gay man to start in a “christian based” movie. I remember when Disney and AT&T first stated that they supported gays. I cancelled my phone service with them. Then I heard Waldenboooks (this was about 10 yrs ago) did and Liz Claiborne, proctor and gamble. The list kept growing. I then realized that you can’t avoid other people’s lifestyle choices. It is not humanly possible. There is always something that those around you do that is wrong. Instead, I am learning to embrace others and try to understand., try to love them as God would. NOT BY CONDONING what they do. I totally believe that homosexuality is not the way God intended for us to be.

I just feel that if we keep putting up barriers, then the walls will be harder to break down. I would rather have everyone on here promoting love and ways to get our message out rather than talking about one human being that happens to be a homosexual. I could type all night.
I might not word it as well as others but I stumbled upon this page and was saddened to see what some people wrote.

I don’t want to be all cliche’ or anything but seriosly….do you think Jesus would stay away from Chad because he is gay? I think quite the contrary. He would be right there loving him and trying to show him the ways of the Lord.

Same thing with ETE. Instead of judging who they picked, then why don’t people see that they did wrestle with this decision but after thought and prayer they felt Chad was the one for the part. We can not read their minds or hearts but we can only assume that they did not do this to promote the gay lifestyle and that is what some people are implying.

I am trying to share my heart without hurting another. I do believe we are all entitled to our own opinions and beliefs. Some have different convictions than others. I guess for me this should not be an issue and it is wrong of me to just think others should see it the way I do.

I do like the fact that I can invite my non-Christian friends to this and they will get a very good message out of it. They won’t get that out of “Big momma’s house”. You know what I am saying? They also won’t care if Chad is gay or not.

Just check your heart. If your motives are PURE, then write away. If there is self righteousness, bitterness, self seeking, etc then that is what I have a problem with.

I have a friend that worked on the film as well so that is why I take things a little personal. He is a close friend who is a strong Christian. With your negative comments you affect friends, Christians, non-Christians (who might come to Christ), and the Hollywood industry. Is it really worth it? By “affect”- I don’t mean in a positive light. They even have a sarcastic remark on movies.com where it states to google the movie and see how the movie has “real life controversy” regarding Chad. So sad indeed!

Christi ~ Feb 1, 2006 at 12:27 am

FYI….one more thing. “Beyond the gates of spledor” was also produced by ETE.

Christi ~ Feb 1, 2006 at 12:32 am

I think you have overreacted Christi. It is a discussion – there are different views. I didn’t find your comment anymore helpful than over the top comments from people opposing ETE.

Catez ~ Feb 1, 2006 at 7:57 am

That’s better, Christi; you explain yourself well. One of the posts I wrote talks about the fact that it’s not Chad’s homosexuality per se that is at issue, and of course it’s not that we shouldn’t act as you suggest toward homosexual people; you’re in fact correct. The issue I have isn’t whether Jesus would “stay away” from Chad Allen; He wouldn’t, and neither would I! The question is whether He’d hire him—unconverted and parading his rebellion—to portray Nate Saint.

Yes, ETE also did “Beyond the Gates”; though I’m not endorsing EOTS, I’m not going to dismiss all that ETE does on this basis—although I’m going to be watching with interest to see where they go from here.

Thanks for clarifying!

Byron ~ Feb 1, 2006 at 8:02 am

Pastor Sam, friend, good comments; only thing I’d say is that we argue that it was God’s moral will, not His sovereign will, that was violated by this decision. Here’s my post on that:

http://www.byron-harvey.com/2006/01/29/confusing-the-will-of-god/

Catez, I hope to post later today on this very thing, the Randy Alcorn and Jason Janz thing, and some lessons that I hope we all can learn from this. And later, if I can find the time, your words (and Mel’s from a few days back) on the promotion of so much “Christian stuff” is an issue worth pursuing as well. Thanks.

Byron ~ Feb 1, 2006 at 8:08 am

Just to clarify – the over the top comments from people opposing ETE are ones I’ve seen elsewhere on the web. I wasn’t referring to this discussion.

Catez ~ Feb 1, 2006 at 8:11 am

Byron,

Yes, you are right. I stand corrected. In the future I should be more careful to write my comments earlier when my mind and fingers communicate better. I should have proofed my post before publishing it. I will try to do better in the future.

Catez,

Thanks for the link. I appreciate what Randy Alcorn set out to do, but I don’t think the errors made in Jason’s reporting change the issue at hand. The quotes didn’t originate with Jason, but rather that he quoted from The Advocate. Perhaps a retraction and apology is soon to be heard from the publishers who printed it in the first place. (I’m not gonna hold my breath.)

Embarrassed? Not in the least. Motivated to withdraw my endorsement? Yes. Considering the way it was marketed to us – I would expect a reasonable level of integrity in the casting of the people who are undeniably modern day heroes of our faith. IMHO casting an outspoken, gay activist is simply way over the top of reasonable decision making. I’ve read the explanations of Mart, Jim and Steve and I simply cannot accept their reasoning.

Not to add to the confusion, but I now understand it is reported in Christianity Today that Chad Allen offered to walk away because of the controversy. Is that true? Can it be verified? If it is, couldn’t this whole controversy have been avoided if that offer had been accepted by ETE? I wonder what their comments would be on the subject.

Pastor Sam ~ Feb 1, 2006 at 8:54 am

I saw End Of The Spear the other night but before I did, I watched the documentary “Beyond The Gates of Splendor”. They were both incridible.
The story of these five men (and their wives) have and continue to do so inspire many followers of Christ around the world. It has me.
My comment is that the movie isn t about a gay man or gay men (such as the movie brokeback mountain). It is about 5 men and their wives who lay their lives down to tell an unreached people group about Jesus and they did.
Now don t get me wrong, I m not defending homosexuality. I m just saying that if these 5 men and their wives laid down their pride, legalism and condemnation to tell a group of people who were killers about the love of Jesus Christ, then we can do the same. Not only with the gay community but with all sinners….

Matthew 5:16
Let Your light so shine before men that they may see your good works and glorify your Father in heaven.

Yes Chad Allen is gay but man wasn t he exposed to the light by hearing and participating in this story?

Cally ~ Feb 1, 2006 at 1:19 pm

For those of you who came straight to this post, bypassing my front page, first, shame on you…

Seriously, if that’s you, I’d encourage you to read all my posts on the subject, but especially to follow this link and then the links it links to; this adds to the discussion:

http://www.byron-harvey.com/2006/02/01/end-of-the-spear-clarifications/

As I say at the end of that post, I plan this evening to write what I anticipate will be my concluding main post on the topic, which will include some lessons we all should learn from this episode. I take an optimistic approach: I believe, contrary to some who’ve posted, that this “discussion” is far from a waste of time, but that, conducted as I think we’ve tried to conduct it here, it represents the kind of “iron sharpening iron” that Proverbs says we as pilgrim brothers and sisters should be doing all the time. There is friction when iron meets iron, folks, but the end result is good. As this thread seems to be at least slowing down a tad, let me express my thanks to all who’ve participated. My post is #190 on the topic, which by at least 4 times exceeds the number of comments I’ve ever gotten on any one post—and I hope that at least a few of you have become at least occasional NKZ readers as a result. God bless all (and hey, why not…10 more posts and we get to 200!—though there’s no t-shirt or prize or anything for being the 200th post. Sorry.).

Byron ~ Feb 1, 2006 at 2:46 pm

I think ETE’s next project is an AIDS documentary. I don’t know much about it just that AIDS is the topic.It will be interesting to see what it is like.

Christi ~ Feb 1, 2006 at 3:09 pm

The following is a quote from ChristianityTodayMovies.com and I think sheds some additional light on the subject at hand if proven correct:

Allen didn’t meet Steve Saint until about three months after he was hired, when shooting began in January 2004 in Panama. When they finally met, Allen says he told Saint, “If you don’t want me to do this movie, because I respect you and your family so much and I respect this story so much, I will walk away from this—contract or no contract, even if that means I’m liable for breaking the contract.”

If Chad Allen is quoted correctly in the article it seems to me that his gracious offer to simply walk away and thereby save ETE from this controversy is commendable to say the least. I respect Chad for displaying such sensitivity to the dilemma they found themselves in. Why they didn’t accept his offer is beyond me since I think both parties would have earned great respect for such understanding by many people. I still think it was unwise for ETE to continue with Chad since their reasoning revolves around feelings, dreams, and a need to stay on schedule with the filming. All of the reasons I’ve seen cited by Mart and Steve are subjective and I’m still waiting for someone to cite a Biblical precedent that would stand up to its objective truth.

Pastor Sam ~ Feb 1, 2006 at 4:29 pm

Byron,
Wow! I am very much impressed with the way you have handled yourself with all the comments. I commend you for taking a stand and taking the time to respond to so many of these. It is very rare now-a-days that you find christians who have not wavered from the “truth” just a little and have been deceived with so many issues. I believe that you are a true God fearing man and you have backed up everything with scripture (not just how you feel). Thank you for that, I’m sure God is proud!
I came across all of this today while looking for some movie reviews on “End of the Spear”. My husband and I are youth leaders for our church and were considering taking the teens to see it, but first I wanted to check out the content reviews. I was very disappointed to find out that the main character’s lifestyle is what it is. My pastor and I were talking about all of this and he said, “just remember whatever you take them to see is going to reflect how they look at you”. With that on my conscience, I couldn’t take them to see this movie, knowing that some of them will probably learn the truth about this actor, and in turn believe that our church approves of this lifestyle. And with this in mind I’m sure that’s the way you feel also about indorsing it to your congregation.
I feel that Christians today are so easily deceived into believing that if it feels good, then it must be good. Satan has so many believing also that it must have been God’s will(that he play the part) or else it wouldn’t have happened this way. But God gives us free will to make the right choices to follow what his word says, he doesn’t control everything, or we would be puppets. Why can’t others believe that maybe ETE made a mistake, a wrong choice? Maybe this is now God’s will that they learn something from their mistake. Maybe he knows that their future may have entailed a greater mistake that would have cost more souls for Christ, had they not learned from this one? Hopefully enough Christians will learn of this error on their part and not see the movie. And maybe they will see that true Christians are tired of wavering and giving in a little here and a little there, and giving the devil just enough foothold that he needs to divide us and really get his way. And maybe they (fim makers) will think twice and consult the church, as you have said, the next time they make a movie.
Thanks again for all your God given insight to all of this, may God bless your ministry!

Sandra ~ Feb 1, 2006 at 4:34 pm

I found this interesting link and thought I would share it here. It is an interesting viewpoint from someone much closer to this controversy than any of us posting on this site.

http://www.sharperiron.org/showthread.php?t=2373

It is written by Dan Kachikis. His deceased wife, Beth Youderian, was Roger Youderian’s daughter. Roger was one of those men who died on “Palm Beach” in 1956, at the end of a spear.

Pastor Sam ~ Feb 1, 2006 at 4:56 pm

Wow, wow, wow, Pastor Sam, what a piece by Dan Kachikis. He says what we’ve been saying here—but he speaks from a different vantage point altogether, he and his family being a part of the story. He throws in as well the deafening silence from the very folks who so regularly speak their minds on issues of concern to the Christian community, the Dobsons and Falwells. As a Liberty grad, I’m truly not surprised at Dr. Falwell’s reticence to stand up on this issue; that may surprise an awful lot of my readers to hear me say that, but it really doesn’t. Dobson, though, I’m a bit more surprised by. But Kachikis’ words certainly ought to give us all pause…thanks, Pastor Sam.

Byron ~ Feb 1, 2006 at 7:17 pm

Pastor Byron,

I’m not surprised about Dr. Dobson. I have an email from FOTF in response to a piece I wrote entitled: Act of God Not Mother Nature Destroys New Orleans. In part, their response said that it was impossible for them to accept Hurricane Katrina as anything other than a phenomena of great magnitude. I’ll dig it out of my archives and forward it to you in email. I had a pretty good rebuttal that was never acknowledged nor answered. So, it really isn’t too surprising that the BIG HITTERS in the evangelical community are standing strangely silent concerning this controversy, but I felt Kachikis’ statement was worthy of consideration.

Pastor Sam ~ Feb 1, 2006 at 9:54 pm

I have read the original post about what started all of the comments here. I am curious though if anyone has gone into ETE and read their “Mission” or “About Every Tribe”? I do not condone homosexuality or do I disagree with the moral issues. Earlier I stated what I had gathered about the making of End of the Spear, it was being brought into the theaters as a true story of the lives of all the people that were affected by what happened 50 years ago and what has continued to happen to change lives, as an adventure that would bring hope, the message of God’s love, forgiveness, salvation, and reconcilliation. I also understood from watching the interviews by several people several weeks before the release date that this “adventure” was made in such a way to show the above issues in a way that would get people asking questions and coming back to see more until they prayerfully find the answers. The Mission statement on ETE seems to have been fullfilled even by allowing Chad Allen to be in the film. This is the final sentence of that statement, “We hope to inspire all who view our films as well as those who work with us to create them.” I stated earlier that I saw “End of the Spear” prior to knowing about the controversey surrounding Chad Allen, and I know that I was inspired. Now with all of the controversey, visiting many other sites, reading many statements by many, including some by Chad Allen, I also see that they fullfilled the second half of the sentence. It sounds like something was learned and possibly inspiration by ALL who worked on the set. I am not denying that many of the people who worked on this are Christian. They had no problem admitting this publically, however I do not see any claims to producing movies under the “Christian Movie” catagory. They are simply asking Christians to support “decent” entertainment. I have spoken with several others, both Believer and Non-believer who were truely touched by this movie, and many are asking wonderful questions, including whether Chad could be changed by working so closely with other Christians. With this I will close by saying that I know God is Sovereign and maybe if this much discussion is being generated here, maybe hearts here have also been touched. Thank you for the new experience and being able to participate. God Bless every one in His Matchless Love!

Trish ~ Feb 1, 2006 at 10:00 pm

Dear Iadigrace,
If you are still monitoring, and would ever like to contact me – here’s my e-mail
kingschild770@gmail.com
God Bless you and keep using your gift.
Trish

Trish ~ Feb 1, 2006 at 10:07 pm

This is post #200, by the way; big party at my place tomorrow evening; you guys BYOB, but I’m still Baptist at heart, so if it’s beer, it better be “Baptist Beer” (Pepsi):

I just posted my massive missive, and so as I suggested just a bit back, if you came straight here and didn’t stop by the homepage of my site, after doing 3 Hail Mary’s and promising never to ignore the homepage again, head right on over there now; here’s the link to some final thoughts I have on the subject:

http://www.byron-harvey.com/2006/02/01/618/

Byron ~ Feb 1, 2006 at 11:09 pm

Hello everyone and God bless you. I believe and thank my God that this has come out to the light. That we have known that there is a man named Chad and is a homosexual. I believe that the Lord has brought it out to the light because prayer is so powerful and he wants us to start going on our knees and praying for this person. I believe the Lord wants to do something great with him so he has put him to the light so that we could pray for him and not be upset about who he played but pray for him so that he may not just play the part but truly live it by accepting Jesus in his heart and do what the Lord has called us to do “go” and preach God’s word to all nations.

Luz ~ Feb 2, 2006 at 6:06 pm

Can’t argue with praying that way, Luz!!!

Byron ~ Feb 2, 2006 at 6:23 pm

Aaaahhhhh, now we come to it. The “mainstream.” Let’s talk about the mainstream. I love this topic.

Mankind is notorious for deciding that we know exactly what God is, what He wants, and what He’s about to do. It is well-documented all throughout history, especially in the bible. Israel was very good at making those assumptions. They were sure that the promised messiah would be this conquering king, who would come to violently drive their enemies from the promised land and reclaim the glory of Israel. The prophets even gave a specific timeline for the birth of the messiah, and by the time Jesus was born nearly every mother believed her son was to be this mythic warrior.

We all know how it turned out. Jesus was the exact opposite of what the mainstream just knew He was supposed to be. He didn’t fight, He didn’t get in everyone’s face, and we know very well that He didn’t kiss up to the religious leadership of the day. What I’m about to say is going to ruffle more than a few feathers: Jesus was the original rebel. He set a standard that we have, to some extent, either forgotten or chosen to ignore.

We have, however, taken the same stance that the religious leaders took then–WE are right, YOU are wrong, and YOU can’t possibly know God because YOU are an impenitent sinner. Sound familiar? I do recall in more than one place Jesus warning us to watch what we say; it’s not our place to say whether or not a person’s heart is right with God. I haven’t judged you for that reason. You cannot profess to be a Christian and then put yourself in God’s place by telling a person, “there’s no way you can be a Christian.”

There is a certain amount of truth that we all must adhere to. The most important theme that transcends all denominational differences is the belief that Jesus Christ is the only Son of God, sent to Earth to be a perfect sacrifice for our sin. Past that, there are obviously certain truths that we can’t ignore. But calling homosexuality a sin? I’ve listened to several people here repeat the same things and then say, “it blows my mind that you can believe…” thus-and-so. What blows my mind is that we still take this position on certain things–homosexuality, alcohol consumption, the movies we watch, the music we listen to–and we make rules and have theological debates when the simplest truth of all gets lost in the noise. It really blows my mind that I ever believed what I’m hearing here, because there was a time that I sounded exactly like you.

You don’t know what my conscience tells me. You believe that homosexuality is wrong because you’ve never questioned that belief yourself. Don’t mistake an emotional response or a long-held belief for the conviction of the Holy Spirit. It was never conscience that scared me. It was other “Christians.” And quoting “Godless,” “lawless,” and “conviction” scriptures might hold sway if I believed that they applied to homosexuality. Since I don’t, try another tack, please. Give me something new. I’m not being sarcastic, I’m asking just one person to say something I haven’t heard before. I was never really convicted by it.

Mel ~ Feb 3, 2006 at 12:37 am

Gay people don’t need your prayers… we need you to get a life. GOD MADE GAY PEOPLE AS WE ARE. WE ARE NOT DEFECTS OR DEVIANTS. Scripture says man cannot change his stature nor the hairs on his head – gay people cannot magically become straight. Chad Allen’s sexual orientation has nothing to do with his performance in this movie so get over your overzealous religious fanaticism. The Bible also says “All liars shall have their part in the lake of fire.” Where is your campaign to save the souls of liars (AKA: every person on this planet!)

I have found that being openly gay and proud of it has been a tremendous challenge, but like every challenge, it has been enormously rewarding. God gave me this gift and I cannot reject it.

Dennis Scoles ~ Feb 3, 2006 at 1:11 am

the issue re Chad Allen is whether or not a christian company shoudl employ a gay man…I work for a christian company…a term i hate because a company can not be saved. many of the people i work with are not saved…and are involved in all sorts of sin…i am glad they work with me, it is a great opportunity. chad and others like him need to be reached and not made an outcast.

If I am not mistaken the only gay people who should be outcast are those claiming Christ while willfully living the lifestyle and denying repentance…I belive Scripture says in Matthew 17 to “not eat with such as these” which is not talking about gay people…it is talking about believers who are unrepentant after loving brotherly confrontation.

i think more chad’s should be hired by “christian companies.”

scott ~ Feb 3, 2006 at 10:00 am

Mel,

With all due respect, we know what God is like, what He dislikes, where His passion lies and how He views issues because He has revealed them to us in His Word, the Holy Bible. We can make judgments about these things because He has gone on record and Jesus spoke to this very issue in Matthew 7. To be accurate, I am sure there are many things we don’t understand about God, but we shouldn’t worry about those things as much as we need to be concerned about what He has revealed. We can trust that He has given us enough information because of His goodness and it would be contrary to His character to leave out essential information with the hope that mankind would somehow stumble upon it in time. We can only know the truth in that He has revealed it to us through His creation and in His Word. God is reliable and can be counted upon as such.

For instance, when He says in 2 Peter 3:9, “The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance”, we can KNOW that the will of God is for everyone to be saved. Not that everyone will will be saved, mind you, because everyone isn’t willing to get saved according to His decree. But that doesn’t change the fact that God has gone on record as to His will concerning this issue so that we can emphatically know the trueness of the statement. Therefore, we can accurately make a judgment that any statement contrary to His revelaed will is false or a lie. The Bible, therefore, is the standard by which man is judged. Psalm 19:9 states, “The judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether.” And not only that, but Pslam 100:5 states, “For the Lord is good; His mercy is everlasting; and His truth endureth to all generations.” Once God has gone on record concerning any issue, He doesn’t change His mind according to the direction that political correctness blows on any particular day.

No doubt that many in Jesus’ day formed a wrong opinion about Him as the Messiah. I care not about checking to see where the majority stand on a particular issue. I care rather to understand where God stands and endeavor to make my way to His side – even if that puts me in the minority opinion. You are the one who clearly placed yourself in the minority opinion – or shall we say – out of the mainstream of Biblical teaching in regards to homosexuality. Being in the majority opinion doesn’t necessarily make one right no more than being in the minority opinion would necessarily make one wrong. The standard by which we are to make these judgments is the Bible. Whether we land squarely in the minority or majority isn’t the issue – the issue is whether we stand in agreement with God or in opposition to Him.

You are right when you say that I don’t know what your conscience tells you. However, I do know what the Bible teaches about the order of God’s creation. He made everything after its own kind. “Male and female created He them. And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth… And the Lord God said, It is not good that man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.” God created woman for man and created the first home. God established marriage between a man and a woman. Our sexuality is a beautiful gift given to us by God for the primary purpose of procreation. The marriage bed is undefiled, however, sexual intimacy outside of that bond is fornication and is sinful. It is your willful disbelief of God’s revelation to you that keeps you in blindness. You keep asking for someone to show you something new. I think it’s presumptuous on your part to ask for something new to convince you when He has already given you enough to make an informed decision. I may not know what your conscience says to you, but I do know what the Bible teaches. The assertion that you never “really felt convicted about it” isn’t the issue. God put order in His creation, created man in His image, gave us the instruction manual and expects us to follow the rules. I pray soon the scales will fall from your eyes, that you will stop looking to the Bible through the filter of your own choosing and that you will be liberated from the sin that so easily besets. Simply put – men with men and women with women is NOT the order He put in His creation whether you choose to believe it or not.

And Dennis, if you will take the time to read the posts on this thread, no one has intimated homosexuals as DEFECTS or DEVIANTS. This has been a respectful dialogue. I’m not sure what ax you feel you must grind, but I’m sorry that you feel you must put the blame of your homosexual behavior on God. It’s just as much a sin as adultery, murder or anything else contrary to God’s moral law. I grow weary of hearing people blame their sin on God and thereby seek to justify their actions. We’re not debating Chad Allen’s performance in the movie, but rather the wrongful decision by ETE in hiring him for the job.

Pastor Sam ~ Feb 3, 2006 at 5:54 pm

In danger of being lambasted for doing so, I’m going to stick up for Dennis here–there’s a very good reason why he felt the need to say what he said. I know exactly how he feels. Most gays and lesbians see this kind of discussion, and they don’t care how civil the dialogue is. They have no reason to trust you because of the way other “Christians” have treated them.

Pastor Sam, you believe that the bible says a certain thing about homosexuality based mostly on Leviticus. In the NT, the ceremonial law is denounced by Christians because that is not what brings us to God. That’s what Christ’s sacrifice was for. If you want further elaboration, I’ve offered it before. That is what I believe, and contrary to popular belief, it IS an informed decision. Again, don’t make the mistake of believing that your opinion is the end-all, be-all of what the truth is. Be humble enough to admit that you may be wrong. I have to be, or I make God a joke to other people.

Nobody is blaming anything on God. Dennis, like me, believes that our orientation was intended by God and is a gift to be enjoyed properly. That’s something else I’ve commented on before and what I grow weary of is having to repeat myself.

You believe what you believe because it has been ingrained in you for a long time; you’ve never questioned it. Beyond the obvious truths about God’s existence, grace and mercy, you should question everything.

Mel ~ Feb 3, 2006 at 8:49 pm

One last thing–as adamant as many are here that homosexuality is a sin, there are many others like me who believe just as staunchly that it is not. Just as I am never going to convince you, you will never convince me. I’m not going to ask you to stop praying for me because you fell you’re doing the right thing. But keep that in mind the next time you hold a protest against gay rights or marriage; you’re not winning any hearts by doing that. And God doesn’t care about your politics any more than He cares about mine.

Mel ~ Feb 3, 2006 at 8:52 pm

This whole thread is based on the assumption that homosexuality is a sin from the one or two verses in the Bible that denounce “man with man.” In my opinion, the scripture that points to this is vague and inconsistent. I’m no Bible scholar, but it is my understanding that the references to “man shall not lie with men” comes from the same place in the NT where it says “thou shalt not eat unleavened bread,” which, of course, does not seem to be a big issue for Christians these days. But my point is, these were laws for a select group of people to follow during a certain period of time. Homosexuality is not addressed in the 10 commandments or any other part of the Bible. I also haven’t found any conclusive evidence that homosexuality was the sin of Sodom & Gommorah. In Ezekiel 16:49-50, it states “Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fullness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy.”

I don’t have a problem at all with people’s personal opinions on the matter, but I do have a problem when they try to create legislation and societal regulations based on these assumptions, which not all people share in. This becomes discrimination and inequality towards a minority and that is unConstitutional.

I agree that the comments in this thread have been respectful, but that is not the over-all characterization of those who are anti-gay. It is fear and hate and visciousness that drives them, not religious conviction. And I stress that homosexuals are not deviants because we aren’t deviating from some path that nature has set out for us – we are born gay and it is a deviation to try to change that. The FDA has said that it is unhealthy and harmful to try to alter a person’s sexual orientation. There is too much psychological damage because you are trying to alter that person’s natural state.

When I was a child, I prayed to God every night (usually begging God and crying) to “change me” or “make me normal” but I believe God eventually gave me peace about it and that is why I can speak so confidently that homosexuality is not a sin. My prayers to God were prompted by societal conditioning that made me fear and hate my most basic instincts. Was it God or Shakespeare who said, “To thine own self be true”? Just kidding.

Dennis ~ Feb 3, 2006 at 10:31 pm

You know most people who are living in sin, don’t want to be prayed for. Thankfully there are many out there who continue to pray for the lost and those who are living outside of the word God.

Personally I read the bible and it is very clear to me that God never intended for man to be with man and woman with woman. The bible doesn’t tell a man to leave his parents and cling to his husband but to his wife. You all know all the scriptures as well as I do for the most part.

True, we cannot convince you with our words that being gay is wrong, that conviction or any conviction must come from God and God alone. That is where the prayer comes in, prayer that God will show you the truth of His word and you will turn from what is wrong.

ladigrace ~ Feb 3, 2006 at 11:15 pm

I’m right there with you, Dennis. You’re describing exactly what I’ve gone through.

Ladigrace, I never said I didn’t want you to pray for me. Keep praying! But while you’re at it, pray for everything else that’s seriously wrong with this world. Pray for my little brother who’s in Iraq and the families of our friends who came home in boxes. Pray for the Christians in the Middle East whose homes are raided by Muslim extremists who try to force them to convert by torturing their children in front of them. Pray for the fragile state of the world, the many wars that are possible right now with N Korea, Iran, and the Palestinians.

I, for my part, will pray that God will open your eyes. Then maybe we can all quit arguing about the petty issues.

Mel ~ Feb 3, 2006 at 11:56 pm

Mel,
You are a special person, having gone through a lot in life, showing interest in many things, having to deal with the sexuality issue, and still holding on to your faith.
So many have tried to share their view from the Bible different than your own take, bless their hearts. I dont know any better to convince you. Just want to let you know that some(cant speak for all) of us are your friends and wish the best for you to follow God.
My wish is that as you seek Him, all debates aside, God Himself will reveal His will to you, that the Holy Spirit will
open your spiritual eyes to understand His way for you.
I admire your stamina in continuing this dialogue.

Penny ~ Feb 4, 2006 at 12:38 am

Thanks, Penny. I personally don’t see the point in getting angry about things. That’s why I’d rather be a firefighter than a cop. Firefighters get to help without having to argue.

Mel ~ Feb 4, 2006 at 12:51 am

Penny, you stated that it is very clear that God did not intend for man to be with man nor woman with woman… what makes this clear for you? The verse you referenced about a man clinging to his wife does not indicate that two men should not be together – only that a man who is marrying a woman should leave his parents and create a separate family with the woman he is marrying. This is not a verse against homosexuality. That’s what I’m saying about everything being so vague.

And to continue to say to someone that you will pray for them to turn from their wicked ways is patronizing and condescending.

What I’m saying is that I spent most of the formative years of life praying to God to make me into something that I am not. Instead, He did something so much better – He gave me peace that passes all understanding.

I have a Bible and have read it thoroughly – I have heard the arguments and the philosophies of the Christian right-wing my whole life (born and raised in a Baptist church and school) – so I am fully aware of your side of the issue. I encourage you all to familiarize yourself with the stance of the gay community. Please check out PFLAG – it’s a support group for parents, family and friends of gays and lesbians: “http://www.pflag.org/”

Dennis ~ Feb 4, 2006 at 1:16 am

Wow. Over 200 comments on one man. Get a grip! Do those of you commenters (not all of you) in your collective lofty righteousness, even those of you who speak my mind, realize that
1.Chad Allen wasn’t the only actor, so it stands to reason that
2.Any of the other actors could have sin in their pasts for which the righteous would exclude them from participation in a God based story, (P.S.Ms.Souza performed at an Al Gore event-any comments from the conservative base?)and
3.Boycotting this powerful testimony to God’s intricate plans (revealing His spirit world to the killers) is nothing more than throwing the baby out with the bath water.

All this carping and harping on Chad Allen is catapulting him into super stardom as well as proving to the ungodly their own judgements of exactly how narrow and vicious Christians can be.

Support and promote the story. Don’t let it get lost and forgotten in a slimy quagmire swamp of nit picky diatribe.

Did anyone see The Graduate? The most memorable image from that was the twisted faces of the parents in the church (get it? in the church?) when the bride decided to follow her heart.

What’s the point of the film? How God uses faithful obedience to His calling? Or who tells it?

I see spears here.

Across the Flow ~ Feb 4, 2006 at 10:40 am

Across,

If you see spears…look harder.

Byron ~ Feb 4, 2006 at 12:17 pm

200+ comments is a lot, for sure, and I encourage those “newbies” who might like to talk about the subject to consider my newer post on the issues:

http://www.byron-harvey.com/2006/02/01/618/

Reading back over all 200+ would take a couple of hours, and while my newer post is long, it incorporates some of the things that I’ve learned and that we’ve discussed on this thread. I really, really welcome the discussion here that has “morphed” a bit into the discussion of homosexuality, and that can continue; great! Mel is correct in something she said (well, many things!): my mind isn’t going to be changed on the fundamental issue of homosexuality being a sin (not on the basis of “gay-bashing”, but on Biblical exegesis), and of course my longer post operates on that assumption. But it is an attempt to corral a number of issues into one place, and I’d invite your consideration of that post and comments upon it.

Oh, and before I forget it: is that a CAPITAL “I” or a small case “l”, __adigrace? One commenter took it one way, and I another. Settling that will make this whole thread worthwhile!

Byron ~ Feb 4, 2006 at 12:50 pm

A friend of mine spoke of a family member who had cheated on her husband. Yes, we forgive her, but…and they would repeatedly remind her of what they were forgiving her for.

Was it Wilson or Globhoper who said Chad was led to the Lord on the set? I have scanned through, stopped and read many more comments than I did the first time and come to the same conclusion with a little more clarity.

We shoot our own. We enjoy shooting our own. And after we’ve shot our own, we want to empty the clip just to try an get everyone else to agree to the shooting.

I still see spears of criticism, insistence, gossip, repetitiveness, pointing, self righteous indignation, and point-proving.

If I were Chad and I had sincerely turned to Christianity, and I read all the commentary of my evilness, I would not see any point in going on with my new choice and would go right back where I came from. At least that community says they love me–I’ll never be accepted into this bunch of carpers and finger pointers. Forget it.

Would someone confirm or deny for me information I heard that the root language of “forgive” translates to “drop it”?

The movie’s message is being buried in our righteous indignation.

Across the Flow ~ Feb 4, 2006 at 3:13 pm

Well, sure, there are plenty who believe homosexuality to be a sin, myself included…but who’s bashing Chad?

Insistence? Sure. Repetitiveness? Ditto. There are people joining the discussion all of the time, without reading the points being made, and repetitiveness in this situation is the nature of the beast. Yeah, I think that maybe it’s run it’s course; we’re starting to rehash the old things, which I why as I said I’ve posted the other post to try to bring everything together. I’m not sure what problem there is in “point-proving”—that’s sort of the nature of the beast.

What you’re not dealing is talking about the argument being made—which is better explained in the other post. I’d invite you there—the whole discussion is about discernment—and I could be wrong, sure—but if you want to talk about that, I’ll see you there…

Byron ~ Feb 4, 2006 at 3:44 pm

Homosexuality, like heterosexuality, the conditions, may or may not be a choice. Homosexual activity is a sin. Unmarried heterosexuality activity is a sin. If I’ve read scripture correctly, if you think it, you’ve done it. It’s a big boat we’re in. We all need a savior. We need to be more compassionate toward each other.

I did go to the other post and read the whole thing. The volume of words analyzing the rightness or wrongness of the casting decisions and the rightness or wrongness of calling ETE on it is huge compared to the support of the movie’s message. I only encourage a refocusing of priorities. Move from exposure to closure to support and progress to making this production an effort of love and reaching out to a lost world.

I’ve been a recovering sinner since 1968. I’ve seen too much blood letting in the Family of God. Yes, we need to admonish and encourage each other but this has been a contest. Maybe the nature of the Blog Beast has to be recognized as a potential tool of the enemy. Maybe we need to be careful how we present ourselves as Jesus People in this new world of communication. What we say is how we are seen in this new realm. And if we are presenting ourselves as judges only with no love, no solutions, no encouraging words, who are we? What are we?

Let’s all post something positive on our sites to encourage our readers to view the message in the movie and to see the presence of Chad Allen and any other cast members of checkered pasts as talented people who had the privilege and honor of working with real and solid Christians.

It’s a pleasure to blog with an educated professional, Byron. As a product of the 60’s, let me say, “Let’s show love, not warfare.”

Across the Flow ~ Feb 4, 2006 at 5:10 pm

Thanks for reading, Across, and I can go a good ways with you, but not the whole way. Here’s what I’ll encourage: go and rent the documentary “Beyond the Gates of Splendor”. Same people made it. Read the book “Through Gates of Splendor” by Elisabeth Elliot. Do get to know the story. Don’t write off ETE forever if even you agree with me on their casting choice (I certainly haven’t!).

I don’t know where the line is crossed from a “discussion” into a contest; as I said, I’ve posted my final post on the subject, and I think I’ve probably updated my final update. I can appreciate a reasoned discussion even if folks don’t agree on conclusions; fair enough. What I think frustrates me the most is folks who (probably on both sides) just don’t want to think clearly about the issues. If I’ve been redundant, it has generally been, I think, to answer just such folks, those who want to lob grenades at me for being a “legalist” or some absurdity like that.

I also hope that your words, so true, about the lack of love and the judgmentalism were not said because of what you understand me to be saying, because that’s certainly not my intent. “Speak the truth in love”: so true, so needed, so important—and difficult—a balance to sometimes find.

Byron ~ Feb 4, 2006 at 5:30 pm

Allow me to have the last word on the current subject.

Do you remember Dinah Shore and the variety show she hosted? I was little. Don’t expect me to get all the details correct. What I remember is her parting shot, the same parting shot I give to you regarding End of the Spear.

Dinah put both hands to her lips and gave a big “mmmmmmmwwwww–aaah!”

There ya go, Byron. And no matter where you go, there you are.

I’ll be back and I am linking you on Across the Flow.

Love in Him, Jane

Across the Flow ~ Feb 4, 2006 at 8:48 pm

Dennis, I believe you were responding to ladigrace rather than to me in your Feb 4 posting. I have no words of wisom but to share this thought.
Paul says that no one knows the things of God except the Spirit of God(ICor 2) So to know what God desires for us to follow on this issue of homosexual choice, it will not be through the intellect (head – no words could be convincing since you seem to have made up your mind), nor feelings (heart- peace is relative); but through the Holy Spirit which we received through faith. May you (and me) allow the Holy Spirit to work in you (and me) to know His Sovereign and Moral will (gratis Byron).I hope you dont find this patronizing as I dont mean to be.

Penny ~ Feb 5, 2006 at 3:36 am

You believe that homosexuality is wrong because you’ve never questioned that belief yourself. Don’t mistake an emotional response or a long-held belief for the conviction of the Holy Spirit.

Mel that’s way off. My response is not “an emotional response” – and my comments are not emoitonal responses either. I do have the conviction of the Holy Spirit based on scripture. We don’t have to experience the same sin as another person to know in our conscience it is a sin. I’ve never murdered some-one but I know muder is a sin. You refer to having stamina for the discussion (I think that was what you said) but here’s the thing – the post was about a movie. It was not about legitimising “gay Christians” in the church. You chose to take it into that and after your particular topic died down you chose to revive it.

I don’t think you’ve been upfront here. You sidestep clear scriptural explanations and say “people keep giving me the same scriptures” instead of actually engaging with the exegesis.

Left their natural use with women – Romans 1. In the context of all scripture on sexuality that is obvious. The bible also refers to how the conscience can become seared.

You are asking me to toss aside scripture because you have a subjective bias. If you are claiming to be a Christian then we have every right to point out that your lifestyle is completely incompatible – in fact in Paul’s letters he advises such discernment in the church. He also takes steps against some-one in unrepentant sexual immorality in the church.

As I mentioned before, throughout the bible it is clear that sexual union occurs within marriage between a man and a woman. Anything outside of that is fornication. Yes, lots of people commit fornication and can repent and be forgiven. But you cannot keep doing it and defend it as a way of life and be a Christian at the same time.

Yes, we can know some-one by their fruits. If some-one claims to be saved but their life and identity are centred on something in opposition to God then we can point that out when it is put in front of us.

Relying on old knowledge of God is not the same as being a new creation in Him today.

Begging God to take away temptation is not necessarily the answer – but he always provides the way of escape from temptation, and we are tempted by our own desires, not by God.

God loves us, but he won’t strive forever. I think you need to choose Mel – choose life through dying to self. Life through the cross. I’m pointing you to a lifeline. That’s the gospel.

Catez ~ Feb 5, 2006 at 4:47 am

Most gays and lesbians see this kind of discussion, and they don’t care how civil the dialogue is. They have no reason to trust you because of the way other “Christians” have treated them.

This isn’t logical though. I agree some Christians are very inappropriate – but that doesn’t mean that all Christians are. Most importantly, it doesn’t change who Jesus is and how he can change some-one. He has never been limited in that way and is not limited because some Christians have been inappropriate. Your comment is not an excuse for some-one to refute Jesus. If commitment to Jesus was dependent on no Christian ever offending me then I would never be committed to Jesus. The reality is that people do things which are inappropriate. However, pointing out that Jesus Christ liberates some-one from sexual sin is not inappropriate – it’s very appropriate.

Catez ~ Feb 5, 2006 at 5:07 am

A couple of things before I head off. Firstly, moral and ceremonial laws are not neatly separated in the OT. Sometimes they are in together. It is obvious that the OT verses referring to homosexuality are moral laws.

Sam,
To be honest I disagree that the issues Randy Alcorn raised are “peripheral”. I know that appeared on a blog but I totally disagree with minimising Randy’s points that way. 1000s of people were givn seriously wrong information and numerous blog posts were written containing seriously false information – and that info is still on Google. In the future people looking this up are going to come across a lot of misrepresentation. It’s not peripheral – it had a significant part in how some people responded, and it’s been damaging. I simply cannot minimise it as “peripheral”.

I don’t think casting Chad Allen was the wisest decision, but to be upfront, he is acting. I can still see the movie and suspend my disbelief. I think each person decides. What I don’t like is the way they have tried to influence people away from the movie – which they did do and the whole boycott things was unnecessary in my view.

Every word some-one has said is picked over and analysed. I think Randy Alcorn simply wanted to help bring resolution. I think what he wrote was the best thing I’ve seen on this whole issue.

Catez ~ Feb 5, 2006 at 5:35 am

Catez,

I’m not defending Jason’s mistakes (sins). He has confessed them and asked for forgiveness – a true display of humility. I’m also not saying that Randy didn’t point out some good things and I think his motivation was right. However, that still doesn’t vindicate ETE in their decision. I just wish we would see the same display of humility in them that we see in Jason. All they can muster is defending the indefensible and cannot possibly humble themselves to admit their error. After all, they used subjective reasoning rather than pinning their decision on the objective truth of God’s Word. And let’s not forget that Jason’s sin was accepting at face value what was printed by The Advocate. When will they submit an apology and retraction for their error?

Pastor Sam ~ Feb 6, 2006 at 12:53 am

Mel & Dennis,
I have read through all 200+ messages. I know where you are coming from and in agreement with you. I am also a Gay Man.

The Bibles in today’s world were once held strictly by the Catholic Church throughout Europe. It was forbidden for “common people” to have access to the Scriptures. The rise against the Catholic Church by Martin Luther and Protestants brought about many divisions of Christian denominations. The Bible in print actually did not reach the people until King James of England’s time and beginning of Britain’s colonization of our country in 1600s. England became a open door to America for Europeans seeking religious freedom.

The Bible we have today in America has gone through many translations due to previous generations prior interpretations. In reality, there’s always been gays & lesbians through the generations as a minority. The churches have evolved for the straight majority’s spiritual needs, so the needs of gays & lesbians has been purposely overlooked. Churches often demonized those with same sex attraction. If gays & lesbians felt rejected within their faith, they left to migrate seeking a place of refuge which most likely is a larger city. The churches in small towns & suburbs have habitually chased away people with same sex orientation. We’ve always found safe places where one could live a quiet life and hopefully your sexuality is not an issue. College Education has also opened many doors. Large cities offer tolerance without small minded attitudes.

My same sex attractions I remember as early as age 3. I was never molested or abused. I had both mom & dad and normal Dysfunctional American Family. I was active in a Southern Baptist Church in all youth ministries, choir, field trips, visitations, when the doors were open I was there. I very much wanted to become involved in the Ministry. I too prayed for God to take away these same sex attractions / feelings but it never left me. I knew of doctrinal conflict for Gays & Lesbians. So I quit the church around age 16. I felt if they knew the real me, they would demonize me or attempt exgay tactics. I often got depressed, and a few times contemplated suicide, but realized that somehow God accepts me as me and through faith in Christ I receive salvation with unconditional Love.

In my 20s I got married in hopes that it would “Straighten Me Out”, of course it did not. We were also very active in Church in Montgomery County, MD – burbs of DC. The marriage got nasty between us, she became a religious zealot towards me and took 2 years to get divorced, thankfully we did not have children. And we were entirely monogamous to each other during the marriage.

In my early 30s, after divorce became final, I finally came out accepting who I really am, as a Child of God & follower of the Living Christ & Holy Spirit as a gay man. I found the peace I had been searching my whole life for, my whole being became reconnected and whole. Within 2 years I found my guy and we’ve been together for 13+ years. Everything about how we came together is truly divine with God’s guidance, permission and continued blessings. His whole family, who are active in their churches have never raised any issue about us being together instead there is total unconditional love. Overall, we are very lucky to have each other, happy to be together and live amongst supportive, tolerant and generally good neighbors. We’re now in our mid 40s, have a home, bills, etc. Washington, DC area is very tolerant of Gays & Lesbians. There are plenty of Churches here were sexual orientation doesn’t matter. Church is for sinners not saints.

Mel & Dennis – I hope that the Holy Spirit will lead you both to a safe place where your “little light can shine” and you will have the love of your life with much happiness.

Bryon – Thank you for being open minded in responses with Mel & Dennis. I’ve read very little condemnation from you unlike other posters throughout this thread seemingly eager to pick & toss many stones. You are a man with a compassionate attitude and an inspiration. May God bless your life and your ministry. I firmly believe that Life is a Mystery, severl things we will not understand until we’re in the presence of God, it is meant to be this way. We do have a all loving God.

Gays & Lesbians want respect with acceptance just as our US Constitution Guarantees it‘s citizens. Unfortunately the Bible is often used tool to bash people and it legitimizes mistreatment just as once done towards African Americans. Also the concept of “Love the Sinner, Hate the Sin“ is not working, it sends mixed signals to the youth that it’s OK to taunt, name call, harass, beat-up those and if necessary to kill Gays & Lesbians just because the Bible says so. This all needs to be reevaluated to be fair & just to everyone. Gays & Lesbians are becoming more educated to challenge Christian Religious issues and rightfully so, because Christ also died for their sins & redemption.

Thanks for allowing me to express a few thoughts.
A happy Gay Man secure in his life.

Roger ~ Feb 6, 2006 at 1:26 am

Roger, you’re welcome. I don’t agree with you on many things, but as I put on the sidebar up top, I do respect you as an individual made in the image of God, and your thoughts are welcome here. They will probably be challenged by some of my commenters, and that’s okay; some of us will disagree, and strongly, but we’re all individuals made in God’s image, and that fact should cause us to accord respect even when we disagree. For myself, I’m not going to go too deeply into the subject with you; again, some of my other commenters have respectfully disagreed with Mel and Dennis, and will with you as well, I imagine.

One thing I’d challenge that you said: you said, “Love the sinner, hate the sin” isn’t working; I submit to you that it does. What you describe, it seems to me, is people who don’t get the message at all; none of the things you describe are characteristic of “loving the sinner”. I believe that the message is right; I try to take it to heart, and I know many, many Christians who do. There will be a few who do those things—and I condemn their actions in the strongest terms possible. But those are not truly listening to the message; the fact that the message isn’t listened to by some doesn’t invalidate its truth.

I remember many years ago hearing a well-known (Southern Baptist, by the way—sadly) evangelist speaking in a “crusade” and deriding “queers”; I shuddered at his inexcusable name-calling. I wondered how many folks there in his hearing were just what you described yourself to be. Again, I don’t agree with your take on things; I won’t rehearse all of that because if you’ve read the comments, you know where I stand. But I’m really sorry that some professing Christians think that get a pass on loving as Jesus loved when it comes to certain things.

Byron ~ Feb 6, 2006 at 11:01 am

I am a christian with a few gay friends of my own. I am not here to say that being gay is right, but I am here to say that in Gods eyes, if you do not obey him, you will go to hell. End of story, end of discussion. You can be a believer, a saved believer, but if you continue to live your life of sin without regret or reguard for the way God intends you to live…I am sorry but…there is a line. Its not for me to judge, and all of my gay friends know where I stand…its for them to decide and for me to just love them for who they are and show them Gods love but never step on the line and say that I am okay with their behavior, I can love them, but I will never be okay with the fact that they are gay.

HOWEVER…
this is a christian movie company, and when as christians we have a responsibility to show love and compassion to EVERYONE it is also our role and our responsiblity to show truth. And by casting a GAY actor and saying that it is okay and we are okay with it..thats not being responsible.

It goes back to the whole thing, if by anything you do is causing a non christian to stumble and be confused, then you are not being responsible with your faith or your belief. We are here as christians to set an example, we must not hate but we must set guide lines that are clear and not confusing to a non-christian.

And by casting a gay actor…I think you have ruined the movie and ruined christianity…saying…yeah we are okay with telling the christian story, but we are okay with casting whoever wherever to portray it, especially when this man has portrayed Jesus in a negative light.
And personally…I dont think he did that great of a job in the movie as an actor, so…with all of that said.
I am dissapointed in your choice, in the way you are just trying to cross all boundries and slirring the truth of Jesus.
If you are gay, lesbian, if you do not repent, if you are not baptized…if you have any sexual sin in your life what so ever, if you cheat on your wife(which is also a sexual sin) I dont care if you are gay, lesbian or whatever, if you do not repent do not get baptized then…it is clearly stated in the BIble you will go to hell.
Its not my place to judge, it is my place to speak the truth.
And as christians…we must love everybody and set a good example. The casting of a gay actor…was not setting a good example. You should have been clear, this is a christian movie and the actors that protray this story must adhere to those beliefs because we do not want to confuse anyone.

Cassie ~ Feb 6, 2006 at 3:11 pm

Cassie, you stated:
…never step on the line and say that I am okay with their behavior, I can love them, but I will never be okay with the fact that they are gay.

Being gay is the condition, by birth or by influence. You have equated the condition with the behavior. They need to be separated. Behavior is a choice. Roger’s condition is, according to him, not his choice. According to Biblical influence, he attempted to change his orientation but couldn’t.

Roger, before you conclude I am in approval of your lifestyle, I want to explain that the scripture is clear on same sex behavior. It is now your choice to follow Jesus and abstain from sinful behavior. You can’t have it both ways. I don’t reject you. I clarify the Word for you.

As a wife, I abstain from sex with men other than my spouse. That includes my thought life (OUCH!). I can’t even daydream?? Nope. As a man thinks in his heart, so is he. Somebody give me the scripture reference–I am concordance challenged at the moment.

Cassie, the lumping together of the condition and the activity is what gives the gay community the perception that Christians hate them as people. How can we witness if they already assume our condemnation of them?

God sees the final outcome of Chad Allen’s participation in a Christian movie. It’s Chad’s choice now how he handles the rare privilege of exposure to Steve Saint and company.

Would y’all just get off the legalistic soapbox and let God be God? Once in a while, He does some things that make us scratch our heads. Support His work instead of chopping it up in little pieces. This lemon could be part of some lemonade later. Maybe Chad will be saved “to the uttermost” and make movies that lead gays to salvation even when they think they are there already.

Amen and I need some chocolate.

Across The Flow ~ Feb 6, 2006 at 4:56 pm

Hey, all, feel free to keep a-talkin’ as long as you like; me, I’m heading along with the fam to Cancun tomorrow afternoon, and be gone for a hair over a week, so, uhh…have fun!

Byron ~ Feb 6, 2006 at 8:35 pm

Roger, it’s good to “meet” you (as much as you can meet a person online). I’m always glad to meet another gay brother or sister.

Cassie, I seem to remember a point in the not-so-distant past when most American Christians were just as passionate about segregation and the Bible’s “irrefutable” wisdom on the subject. I’m not bashing the bible, I’m pointing out that there was a time that racism was believed to be directly from the bible. We now know that it was a tragically misguided idea. I can’t imagine what it must have been like for white pastors in that day to have to admit to their congregations that they’d been wrong all that time.

I, personally, think that to point a finger at anyone and say, “you’re going to hell” is a judgement call that NOBODY should make. The word “gospel” means “good news.” Different methods work with different people, but if you keep telling people they’re going to hell you’re only going to make them angrier. That has nothing to do with being persecuted, it has everything to do with calling your punishment on yourself. You have your beliefs and you’re entitled to them. But don’t tell me I’m going to hell when I know I’m not.

And Byron…enjoy the surf in Cancun! I’ll be in San Diego here in a month or so!

Mel ~ Feb 7, 2006 at 7:42 pm

Mel,
I’m glad to see your response, I was concerned that you had been scared away, well because of the condemnation from others. It is nice to “meet” you too in this rather unique way.

Mel hold strong in your faith of The father, Son & Holy Spirit! You’ve undertaken an interesting journey; starting in the Catholic Faith moving into the Protestant Faiths. I’ve done similar personal exploration in the quest for meaning of life, but from Protestant into Catholic and back. I had once dated a Catholic, went to Catholic Services, even once attended an Evangelical Catholic Service in Hollywood (FL) Sportatorium… Now that was an experience unlike anything else!! I have questions from these and many life experiences that I hope to one day personally ask God for better understanding. Overall I’ve found that I love worship amongst a non-denomination Christ centered congregation.

Also Mel, if your career ever brings to Washington, DC for whatever; it would be a real delight to meet you for dinner or lunch. I extend to you an open invitation to just to actually meet you, share our own testimonies and to wish each other continued Blessings from above. I’m a good person and sincerely believe that you are too. Email: varoger@aol.com

Cassie – It would be so easy to toss you a hateful comment, but I wont. You too are God’s child and I doubt you’ll ever be assigned the official gate keeper at Heaven’s Gate; deciding who is or isn’t fit to enter past you. You stated that you have Gay friends? I encourage you to reach out to them sometime when at a mutually agreeable and appropriate time just to get together. Interview them in a non condemning but safe comfortable sharing environment. Ask them pointed questions like about when they 1st felt about their orientation, allow them to open up talk about “life.“ Focus yourself to listening to what they have to say, notice their body language. Please by all means, DON’T CONDEMN them for any reason. If done correctly, doors will open for you to witness your own testimony with them. I don’t know their status, but assuming they may be unsaved and/or have not so good feelings about church. Your meeting may or may not immediately lead them to accept Christ as their Personal Savior or a reconfirmation of their relationship with Christ. In the very least you’ve planted seeds of faith with them, your actions would be pleasing to the Lord and if in the future fruit bears from their soul(s), you will equally be blessed. It really could be an uplifting experience for them and you.
Personally I feel better sharing these thoughts with you than simply tossing a stone your way.

Bryon – you’re in Cancun by now – don’t get in trouble, lol, hope you visit Chichen Itza, Tulum or Xel Ha. I found those places rather interesting.

The primary reason I found & posted in this blog: I became very concerned of apparent “21st Century Electronic Lynching” of the movie The End of the Spear, ETE and Chad Allen, all originating from Jason Janz’s Sharperiron.org. I read through the postings over there and am truly disgusted how demeaning the language of the web log “Christian” Members has gotten. I as a Christian, felt ashamed of their Unchristian Activity. Seems that a hateful situation is easy to form and was festered because folks did not think ETE‘s response was “Good Enough” for them. It’s way too easy for people to nitpick than to work towards an harmonious solution. I wanted to post on Janz’s site, but noticed someone tried to neutralize the comments and that person unfairly became a target of other posters. They chased the guy off… So much for Freedom of Expression – at least on Sharperiron.org. Form all the visual vileness at Janz’s Weblog somehow I surfed
into this blog and began reading the postings.

I do want to Share this:
Back in 1973, Billy Graham Ministries was behind a mainstream movie, “Time to Run.” It was a movie about a young man, his supportive Christian girlfriend, issues with his family and life and his eventual coming to Christ. Amazingly it’s still available! Here’s a link: http://shop.wwp.org/retail/product.asp?dept_id=1&pf_id=077
This movie was a 1st for a well known ministry to bring out a movie with the purpose of witnessing to the general public by conducting an alter call opportunity for the audience to accept Christ and many did!. Alter calls were conducted at the end of every showing in a uplifting non denominational environment. Billy Graham Ministries released this movie nationwide with plenty of “behind the scene” support to make this endeavor successful and a blessing to the Lord. The Southern Baptist Church I attended was chosen to participate during the entire week while the movie ran at a local theater. I and other folks where trained as counselors to witness, pray with people who came forward and provide them information so they could make a decision to accept Christ as their Savior. The new Christians were encouraged to grow with our Church or within a church of their choice. 30+ years later I am still uplifted from this experience. There was SO MUCH JOY!!! 1973 is not 2006. This movie did have some controversy, 1) using a mainstream media to bring the lords message, 2) backlash from non Baptist churches that their members or potential members were being stolen. Certainly the magnitude of controversy never reached the level that End of the Spear has brought us.

OK I think End of the Spear could have been better planned and presented. The story is true. Missionaries are important & vital to spread the Lord’s goodwill of Salvation to people who otherwise would be overlooked. The movie is now in theatres, I plan to see it there or on DVD. Despite the “Controversy amongst Conservatives” , I sincerely hope that this movie will plant seeds amongst its viewers to seek further resources for their own salvation.

Roger ~ Feb 8, 2006 at 12:16 am

Across the Flow:
Hope your enjoyed your chocolate. I’ll share this example with you. There have been times in my professional career where I was ordered by my then superiors to word correspondence, directives, announcements etc to convey messages that “Management” wanted told rather than the real truth. Nothing really “illegal” was done. Sometimes I did not like doing this, but I needed the job, and if I protested, it would be easy for them to say “Your Fired“ and I would be SOL. What I experienced, I am very sure plenty of other people, past present & future have also done what their ‘Superiors” wanted done.

With that in mind…. Putting the bible together as we know it was a major organized endeavor, not once, but several hundreds of times over thousands of years. People wrote it, people translated it, people organized it, all supervised by a “Management Team” composed of humans, most likely men. Management reviewed, approved, revised and tailored all elements to convey the message they wanted. I‘m sure there was lots of discussions (aka endless meetings) during these projects. Because mankind is imperfect, I believe some parts of the bible are imperfect and inaccurately portrayed from the original book writers’ meaning. All this activity happen many generations well before we arrived and present with a copy of the current bible.

Book of Leviticus does has scripture to condemn Men who lie with Men. OK What about all the other laws in Leviticus? Do ALL Christians follow everything in Leviticus to the letter? No, I don‘t think so. Do you? So how & why can one verse be pulled and shouted out with condemnation to your bothers & sisters who are gay? Leviticus and entire Old Testament teachings are meant for the Hebrews, today know as Jews. I have discussed this with several Jewish people over the years, their take is that Christians really have it easy because Jewish Laws pertain to the Jews not Christians.

I once had the blessed experience of Pastor, who was a Jewish man who at age 60 something converted to Christian after his daughter became Christian while in college. This Jewish man was heartbroken enough to read the New Testament to prove his daughter wrong. The more he read the more it made sense to him. Both he & his wife accepted Christ as their savior. Overall theirs was an amazing testimony. He quit his longtime career as an insurance salesman, went to seminary in Oklahoma returning to become a pastor of a large very diverse congregation, non denominational church in Rockville, MD. Montgomery County, MD has a large Jewish community that they were once active in their entire lives. After their conversion, they were publically & privately shunned by other Jews on many occasions. It was saddening to hear the incidents of pure hate they experienced. To a Jew, becoming a Christian is not an ideal thing to do, your life will become hell.. at least from other Jews. Converts are treated like traitors. My Jewish Pastor was a very smart & loving man, he taught even though Christianity did branch out from Judaism, in reality they are 2 different religions with different rules. Some Hebrew Elements like Passover do come over to Christian faith. The Jews are still awaiting arrival of Messiah and that time will eventually come. I was truly enlightened from this experience.

The NEW Testament is meant for the Christian Faith since Christ (God as a human) is introduced into our world and lives amongst the common people. First Person encounters of Christ are given in Matthew, Mark, Luke & John. I particularly love Christ’s parables, it’s storytelling intended to reach to the everyday person. Never once did Christ personally mention nor renounce anyone because of their gay sexual orientation. Christ did tell us 2 commandments to follow, 1) Love God with all your heart, mind & soul and 2) Love one another.

Gay people have always been part of this world, past, present & future. Unfortunately people go around condemning people afflicted with same sex attraction that is to them as natural as a physical attribute as blue, green or brown eyes are amongst the human race. Does this type of condemnation done on a personal level towards gays truly reflect Love and Acceptance according to Christ’s Commandment?

Roger ~ Feb 8, 2006 at 2:02 am

Roger,

I will disagree with you here.. My belief (and the belief of many others) is that “the Bible” (not a particular version or translation) is the inspired Word of God. As a result, bible verses in Lev 18:22-23,1 Tim 1:9-10,Rom 1:26-27, Gen 19, Jude 7 all refer to homosexuality as a sin. Various translations maintain the same context. Murder is a sin and despised in the Bible, as is adultery, and many other sexual sins. Individual interpretations won’t change it anymore than your interpretation of homosexuality in the Bible. Despite all that, we are are ALL sinful and fall short of the glory of God. We all are in different sections of our walk with God, but a sin is still a sin no matter what you might want to call it in your life. We are to strive for goodness, try to be Christlike and to grow in our relationship with the Lord. But I will be careful not to throw stones as I too am a sinner.. and “we ALL fall short of the glory of God.” Praise God for grace!

Back to the whole issue of the movie and it’s main character, I see no reason why this man-made movie can’t be used to God’s glory. Like the Passion, it is still a movie and it isn’t the inspired Word of God. I still celebrate Christmas as a Christian holiday even if it was a pagan holiday in the past. Our hearts will be judged in the end and when we stand before the Lord will it matter “what” sin condemned you? Big or small, you are still condemned in the eyes of our Lord. With Jesus Christ at my side, the penalty will be paid through the blood of Christ.

I have yet to see the movie, but despite the negatives mentioned here (very legalistic IMHO). I think we will make an effort to see it. Since we just returned from Panama, it should be extremely interesting to see the filming as well. May God bless you….

Becky ~ Feb 8, 2006 at 11:34 am

Roger, you are a studied and learned man. I do not look down nor condemn you or your involuntary orientation. I too, as Becky, believe that the message of the Bible is the same through all the vaious languages and centuries it has gone through. We attended the display of Ink & Blood. Google or Yahoo it. The dead sea scrolls found in the 1940’s were not tidy parchments you could lay out and just read. They are in fragments and have taken this long to assemble to readability. The work is not done, there are boucou fragments to go. A section of Genesis was pieced together and translated. Compared to the current day scripture that came through 20 centuries and many hands, it matched WORD FOR WORD.

What broke my heart and humbled me was the number of people who chose to be burned at the stake instead of renounce their faith in Yeshua. This Bible of ours has stood all tests and remains our guide.

I’m a pretty huggy ol’ lady. Check my site. Meet the family. I would hope that if I could find you in DC, we could meet ‘n eat. Hey, I think I just named a restaurant!!

Back to the thread. ETE would have done more harm to Chad Allen and any outreach through him by dismissing him on the grounds we discuss here. I applaud their courage for standing on their first instinctive decision that they prayed over and placing the outcome in God’s hands; unlike the man stranded on his rooftop in a flood, who asked God to rescue him and rejected the boat and the helicopter.

Please, please promote the success of this movie’s message. Get past this first hurdle, link arms, and oh, I don’t know, does anyone know Kum Ba Yah? Or how to spell it?

Across The Flow ~ Feb 8, 2006 at 4:22 pm

Becky & Across The Flow,
It’s great to see some Positive Comments about End of the Spear. All the other negativity got me down.

Hey thanks for the heads up on: Ink & Blood, this year it’s in FL, St Pete now, then in Daytona this summer. Seems to be a worthwhile exhibit to see. Wish they showed more cities where it’ll be beyond 2006. Washington or Williamsburg, VA would great locations for me. In 2005 it was in Knoxville, TN & Lexington, KY. Did you see it last year?

Vacation plans are already made this year, Costa Rica in 2 weeks for 10 days. Then white water rafting down the Grand Canyon in August for 8 days + fly in & out of Las Vegas. http://www.gcex.com I’m excited about getting away from it ALL! A night sky filled with thousands of stars, a full moon, and Earth also passes by the annual leftovers of a long gone comet, so there’s change of seeing falling stars too. Grand Canyon is my present to my significant other’s (so) 46th Birthday.

I’m a tired guy tonight. Type at you later. !!

Roger ~ Feb 8, 2006 at 11:55 pm

Mel, I apologize for the long delay in responding to your comments. I have been out of town for a bit and am just now getting back into my routine now that I am home.

When Dennis said, “GOD MADE GAY PEOPLE AS WE ARE. WE ARE NOT DEFECTS OR DEVIANTS,” he is blaming God for his behavior. Using his reasoning, I suppose an adulterer could say, “God made my flesh and it lusts after many women, therefore I cannot help but to indulge in their love.” The reason that homosexuals are pushing so hard for same-sex marriage and minority status is that somehow people feel better about their sin if others will simply agree with them in it and put their stamp of approval upon it. That’s not just true of homosexuals, but people in general.

I recognize that you see no value in Leviticus 20:13, but I see differently. Chapters 18-20 are addressed to the congregation of the children of Israel. The vast majority of the content in those chapters deal with morality including a prohibition on homosexuality. Chapters 21-22 are directed to the prists regarding their relationships, separation and holy lives. One thing is certain – God has not changed His opinion regarding morality.

You wrongly think that Leviticus is the only scripture that I use to substantiate my position. Perhaps you missed my post on the order of creation. But I would hasten to add that if God states something once – well, that’s enough. The Bible is replete with instructions as to our sexuality. Any sexual intimacy outside the bonds of marriage is sinful. You want new arguments and new scriptural evidence, when I (any many others on this thread) have cited ample scriptural evidence as to the Bible’s teachings.

Now I would like to ask you to show me something. Show me anywhere in the Bible that God upholds a homosexual relationship and/or homosexual union and says it’s “OK.” If it is permissible in His sight, don’t you think he would have held it up as such before mankind and specifically said so? Dennis feels that scriptures forbidding homosexuality are “vague and inconsistent.” I disagree completely. You want more evidence to substantiate our views, would you please show us the irrefutable evidence that God has approved of homosexual behavior?

Pastor Sam ~ Feb 10, 2006 at 8:33 am

Pastor Sam, I agree that the scriptures that “forbid” homosexuality are vague and inconsistent in that they don’t forbid the type of healthy relationship as we know it today. Those scriptures forbid the torturous rapes that were common. I’ve said this before: it was common in OT times for soldiers, thieves and marauders to rape their defeated opponents as a final form of utter debasement. It still happens today–anyone remember three NYPD officers about ten years ago raping a man they’d arrested with a broom handle?

I think the fact that scripture doesn’t, in fact, forbid homosexuality is proof enough that God hasn’t disapproved. I did read your posts on the “order of creation,” and I think you’ve missed some of my comments on what is and/or isn’t said in the bible. It never says that Jesus laughed or went to the bathroom, but we can all agree that even though he was God incarnate, He did both of those things. If sex is only for procreation, then what about couples who cannot reproduce? Is sex a sin for them? Again, the bible is NOT a list of do’s and don’ts. It’s a record of God’s grace and mercy. You seem to have missed many of the things I’ve said, because you’re asking me to repeat them.

Mel ~ Feb 10, 2006 at 8:09 pm

ETE is telling God’s story God’s way. They used imperfect people. Just as God always has done to bring light into a dark world.

Jesus went to a well in the middle of the day when he knew there would be a woman there that needed light in her darkness and gave her an opportunity to accept the light. He called Zacchaeus out of a tree and ate at his house. James and John were known as the Sons of Thunder. David, whom called a man after his own heart was a murderer and an adulter. Etc.

We do not know what God is doing in the hearts of the actors even now. A seed has been planted now we should nurture it so it can grow instead of whinning about this and arguing about it amongst ourselves.

This quote, “My beef with the whole thing is that a Christian company is telling an explicitly Christian story (setting it off in my mind from films like Lord of the Rings and Narnia–a Disney production), and used no discernment in their choice of actors, but rather chose someone who not only is homosexual, but an activist in the cause, to play the role of a sold-out man of God like Nate Saint.” Since he is an activist he is capable of playing an activist. And if we believe God is really in control than he put Chad in that role not the men in charge.

Jesus only criticized the religous people of his time, “For you are like whitewashed tombs, which outwardly appear beautiful, but within are full of dead people’s bones and all uncleanness.So you also outwardly appear righteous to others, but within you are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness.”

The Holy Spirit is very capable of using the film to convict, convert and bring glory to God.

Trina ~ Feb 11, 2006 at 4:01 am

Since I’m on a pay-by-the-10-minute segment machine at an internet cafe, I won’t read all of the recent comments, but just to confirm what Mel wished for me, I am INDEED enjoying the surf in Cancun! Wilma sure did a number on the place down here, but hey, a bad day in Cancun is most certainly better than a good one…well, just about anywhere, eh?

By the way, I’ve finished 3 books in 3 days, and one of them is one of the best books I’ve read in forever; it’s Searching for God Knows What, by Donald Miller, who wrote Blue Like Jazz; this one is better than Blue!

Byron ~ Feb 11, 2006 at 3:09 pm

I agree with Trina. God has used many different people throughout history, none of whom were perfect. It saddens me to think that the Christian community is reacting this way. Because of the arguement and negative publicity it is generating, some people probably won’t see this film. The thing is, it is a story that needed to be told and a story that needs to be heard. The whole thing is about God’s forgiveness to imperfect people (ALL of us), and are we not called to reach out to the presaved? If Jesus had reacted in the same way that many of the Christian community, He would not have gone to see Zacheus, or forgiven the adulterous woman, etc. Jesus was comdemned by the Jewish leaders for reaching out to the “sinners” of His society. He was known as “a friend to sinners.” It is my prayer that as a church, each one of us will follow His example, as we are called, and also be known as “a friend of sinners”. Reach out to those around you who are in need of Him. Each one of us was, at some point in our life, in the same place they are. We were caught up in sin and lost. No one sin is greater than any other sin. Sin is sin. Be thankful that someone was willing to reach out to you and do the same for someone else.

I would like to thank Every Tribe Entertainment for the casting job they did. The cast that was chosen did the story justice. God’s hand was in it, and He will use it for His glory. My hope and prayer is that the members of the cast who did not know Jesus when making the film will be strongly affected by the end product and through the Holy Spirit’s work in their hearts will come to know the life transforming, saving grace of Jesus in their own lives.

Stacie ~ Feb 11, 2006 at 4:37 pm

Mel, Homesexual relationships today are NOT healthy by any stretch of the imagination. The average life expectancy for either men or women who are practicing homosexuals is roughly 50% of the rest of the population. And those statistics do NOT take into account AIDS. What really concerns me is the massive amount of mis-information be inundated into the public on this issue. I’m not asking you to re-state your comments – I’ve read all of them.

Not only is homosexual activity dangerous for those engaged in the practice, but it is damaging for children and the well-being of society as a whole. If homosexuals didn’t rely upon recruiting, why are the children being taught such propaganda in the public schools? I heard of one curriculum that tells them that they should at least try a homosexual encounter to see whether they are or are not homosexual. And I am about to date myself here, but my health teacher in High School taught us as factual that 10% of the population is homosexual. She said, “Look around the class, statistically two of you in here are homosexual.” We now know that that number was grossly exaggerated and it is 2% or less of the population that identifies as homosexual.

I’m sorry, but your argument regarding the rapes in OT times does not hold water. I wouldn’t argue that they didn’t happen during wartime, etc, but that is not what is specifically being forbidden by Old and New Testament Scriptures. What is sad is that you seem content to ignore the plain, straightforward interpretation of scripture regarding the subject. If children didn’t need both mother and father, God would not have ordered His creation as such.

Pastor Sam ~ Feb 14, 2006 at 11:14 am

I have read most of the posts here and I have not read anyonw say what I feel about this movie: I will not see it or encourage anyone in my church to see it for this reason: I will not support a film, or an actor, who will use this money to promote what the Bible clearly calls an “Abomination” Ref: Lev. 18:22 KJV. While I’m not privey to the terms of this actors contract, most actors get a percentage of the films profits: hence I will not support this mans agenda of promoting a sinful lifestyle and also promoting same sex marriage. If people call this decision being homophobic, so be it. I call it scriptural!

Pastor Charles ~ Feb 15, 2006 at 5:55 pm

Pastor Charles,

I was wondering if you have children. Have you ever watched a Disney Movie? Do you pay taxes? The reason I ask is because Disney is a huge supporter of gay pride weeks. Ellen Degeneres was a voice in Finding Nemo. Tax dollars support the gay agenda.

Do you know the Saints? Have you spoken with them?

ladigrace ~ Feb 15, 2006 at 10:44 pm

I just wanted to add that I think as Christians we tend to pick and choose what we will and won’t support to further our own agenda. End of the Spear is an awesome work of God and God has used people since the beginning of time to reach others. He rebuked the sin – saying sin no more. Is your God not big enough to take someone like Chad Allen and use him for the glory of the kingdom? My God is big enough to do that. He amazes me each and every day in the way He uses me. I am a sinner just like every other man who walks the face of this earth but He still uses me and I praise God for that.

I have been silent for a while on here simply letting the posts happen and not speaking. This isn’t about the movie, the actors or the money that was made. If you want to know how the money was used from this project, contact Steve Saint and find out. I think you will be surprised. Did the actors paid? Sure they did. They deserve to be paid, no matter what we think about their lifestyles.

God is all knowing, and He has ordered the steps of the Saint family for many many years. If you know anything about them you could testify to that. I personally know the Saints. I know what they stand for and why they stand on it.

In closing I think we need to really think before we speak. There are tv shows on all day long that have actors in them that I don’t agree with their lifestyles, that go against the word of God. But we still watch. Unwed mothers, divorce, homosexuallity, drug and alcohol abuse, spouse abuse… it is all there every day on film and on tv – no not just in the story lines but in the lives of the people who are on the shows/movies. Not to mention all the horrible things that tax dollars – our tax dollars.

Go see End of the Spear! You won’t regret that you did.

ladigrace ~ Feb 16, 2006 at 8:12 am

Reply to ladigrace;

Yes, my wife and I raised 4 children, which are all grown and on their own. No, we never went to Disney (nor will I go), and of the movies Disney has made, we did not see the ones that we could identify that were connected to the homosexual lifestyle. I served in the military chaplaincy for over 12 years and worked in the White House, so I am not an “insulated” pastor by any means. I just think that we, as Christians, should not support things that we know are connected to the homosexual movement. Yes, the Lord can use people from any background, but I think we are commanded to separate ourselves from as much of the world as we can. I am aware that the Producers did not know this until after the film was in the can, but we need to send a message to them and everyone else that we will not support this lifestyle no matter how innocent it may have started. That sounds cruel, I know, but there is a bigger audience we need to speak to: HOLLYWOOD, needs to see that they will lose money by producing things which we will refuse to spend money on. Once they get that message, things will change!

Pastor Charles ~ Feb 16, 2006 at 8:53 am

Wife and I saw the movie last week. Had no idea of this discussion on Chad Allen, nor any idea of his chosen life style. Not much on movies.

The movie made a powerful impact on us both. What a tremendous chapter in the annals of man’s journey to heaven.

We are believers in Jesus and are beholden to biblical truths. We will pray for the Chad Allens of the world and trust the Lord to deal with that in His way, just as we hope others pray for our shortcomings and sins. Just possible God will touch Chad Allen by virtue of his acting in this movie in ways he other wise would not be touched.

In any event we would recommend and have recommended to our friends this film. It carries a message of sacrifice which is powerful and uplifing to the spirit.

Mike in Florida

Mike ~ Feb 17, 2006 at 8:53 am

Pastor Charles, I understand that we should not support the gay lifestyle and I am in agreement – I don’t think that seeing the movie is doing that any more than taking my kids to Disney, watching a Disney film is. There are many manufacturers that are supporters of gay rights, do I know who they all are, no, and I probably use their products as do most people.

I guess the long and short of it here for me is that we are all sinners and not worthy of the grace that God bestows upon us day in and day out. Chad Allen is a sinner, just like you and me and God uses sinners, for even though we are saved we are still sinners each and every day – I have no reason to believe that God can’t, won’t and hasn’t already used Chad Allen. So many have seen this movie and been blessed.

Mike in Florida – I am glad you saw the movie and were blessed.

ladigrace – Florida

ladigrace ~ Feb 18, 2006 at 10:40 pm

Pastor Sam, you have officially insulted me. By suggesting that I did not make my own decision to accept my orientation with your “recruitment” remark, you make a joke out of my struggle to accept myself the way God made me. I was not recruited, and I do not try to recruit others. And if such a curriculum exists, when you see it with your own eyes, you let me know. There’s a lot of rumors floating around the church about all kinds of things; there always have been. There’s rumors that JK Rowling is a practicing satanist, but that doesn’t make it so. Don’t believe everything you hear. Especially since you’re dealing with such a sensitive issue.

You say homosexual relationships are unhealthy? Everything I’ve learned in my psych classes say that attempting to change a persons orientation is extremely unhealthy. The American Psychiatric Association soundly rejects the notion that homosexuality is an illness for which there is a cure. Go to http://www.healthyminds.org and read what they have to say about it.

Mel ~ Feb 20, 2006 at 10:26 pm

Mel, I’m going to chime in on this too. I’m with you on this… I read his bigoted, disrespectful & genuinely hateful remarks and was going to remain silent, but now have decided otherwise. “Pastor Sam”’s message is pure prejudice since he doesn’t know us as real people also created in the image of God. The internet to some has become a rather impersonal way to invoke condemnation of people, people they don’t even know nor will ever personally meet. His message IMHO, lacks true Christian compassion, it’s a display of complete ignorance, full of misinformation, misleads people, spreads fear and invites everyone to maintain an ongoing hatred towards people who are involuntarily born into this world as Gay & Lesbian. It spreads untruth, ignorance and fear into people’s hearts.

Hate Crimes towards Gays & Lesbians now somehow become justifiable because of such misinformation is presented by a man from the pulpit. Would it make Sam happy that his message is easily misinterpreted to influence an impressionable person to commit the murder of an innocent Gay or Lesbian because of unworthiness? Is that a reflection of a Good Christian? Sam? (Currently there’s been ongoing violent acts worldwide attributable to Cartoons of Mohammed published many months ago in a Denmark Newspaper – excellent example of the harm half truths brings about)

I am a Christian.
I’m in my 40s, DO NOT HAVE AIDS nor HIV POSITIVE. I’m in a very HAPPY &, HEALTHY LONGTERM monogamous relationship that is respected by the community we actively live in and equally fully accepted and loved by our families on both sides
I am well respected by 98.5% of people I meet and I am equally respectable back.
I know of several G&L Senior Citizens who actively live active and productive lives and not ready to die in misery.
I was NOT RECRUITED, nor have I ever known of, nor participated in “Recruitment Activities” (such accusations are delusion)
I have had same sex attraction memories as early as age 3. Through the years, several G&L have shared with me similar stories from their childhood.
I Grew up and very active in the Baptist Church.
I had both a mom & dad who were married during my entire childhood. Equally Loved by both parents.
I’ve never been molested nor had any desire to molest anyone.
I did not grow up in a trailer park.
I do not live a Jerry Springer lifestyle.
I am an employed & productive American, not afraid to pay taxes.
My perception of Ex-Gay programs promoted by various religous organizations, these programs only make participants live life in a miserable hell, suicides are common because the “cure” remains elusive. If there indeed was a “cure” I certainly would have gone for it years ago.

We also attend Churches that All people of much diversity are Equally Accepted and Warmly Welcome to participate in the Worship of a Living God, Christ and Holy Spirit. Christians that are above living the dishonesty portrayed in Pastor Sam’s message.

Pastor Sam – I will only accept a simple apology from you and nothing else. If you’re incapable of an apology, that’s OK but please do everyone here the kind consideration to just remain silent and leave me alone from your further attacks or “Comments.” I’ve heard it all before and as a individual I am entitled to develop and maintain my own beliefs. I’d rather not continue a dialogue with an individual who has an ill-intentioned agenda like yourself or with anyone else’s authoritarianism attitude that doesn’t reflect the true compassion of Christ and his commandments to all of us to Love God with all your Heart and to Love One Another.

Roger ~ Feb 21, 2006 at 4:08 am

Mel, I didn’t say everyone involved in homosexuality was recruited nor did I level an accusation against you as such. I honestly don’t see any reason why you should have taken offense. People have said lot’s of things about Christianity and Christians in general that I don’t agree with, but I don’t take offense at either. Sadly, recruiting does happen and I personally never felt the need to see the curriculum since I received my information from credible sources who spoke firsthand to the students that were taught this propaganda. I am not asserting that is is being taught in every school system, but I don’t doubt that there is an agenda to see it become a reality. I don’t think you personally have anything to do with that push. Please don’t expect me to believe that all homosexuals don’t have an agenda. You may not subscribe to it, but it does exist. It is being pushed on so many fronts and the evidence is so overwhelming that I will not waste my time outlining it in this forum.

Mel, I do not doubt the struggle that you have faced in regards to homosexuality. I never intended to trivialize that struggle and I am sincerely sorry that you took my comments in that way. What troubles me with the argument that: “I must accept my homosexuality as a gift from God” is that it somehow intimates that God made me just the way I am and nothing about me needs to be changed. But we are ALL fallen creatures and subject to manifold temptations. Succumbing to same sex attraction is just as wrong and sinful as giving in to greed or uncontrolled anger or stealing or lying, etc.

You could drop a bag of cocaine in front of me and there would be absolutley not even the least bit of temptation for me in it, but for some people I know it would be a huge temptation. I admit there are so many things about me that are not Christlike and I am painfully aware of changes that need to be made in my own life. Thankfully, progress is being made, but I’ve got a long way to go. To look into the mirror of God’s law, see one’s shortcomings and walk away unwilling to conform to God’s standards is unacceptable. We will all stand before Him one day and held accountable to His standards not man’s.

I spoke with a young man who works with Exodus International who was in his words “formerly gay identified”. He (and many others like him) is living proof that changing one’s orientation is not only possible, but preferable. I think he would have some serious objections about what you call healthy. Having lived in the destructive lifestyle, he is far more articulate and knowledgeable than I about the unhealthy nature of the homosexual lifestyle. He is now happily married and working diligently to help others who are living the nightmare he once lived. I suppose it boils down to who you want to listen to, but I can remember a time when science labeled homosexuality as a mental disorder. While I don’t know that I ever agreed with that statement, it is true that behavior can be changed in the same way that erroneous thinking can be corrected.

Pastor Sam ~ Feb 21, 2006 at 11:04 am

Roger, Thank you for being the authority on “bigoted, disrespectful & genuinely hateful remarks”. Who made you an authority on what is and isn’t “pure prejudice”? I DO NOT nor have I ever advocated violence against homosexuals. Where have I said or even implied that homosexuals are “unworthy”? Where is your outrage that a Muslim cleric has now put a $1,000,000 bounty on the head of that Danish cartoonist? Why is it that a man in the pulpit who proclaims the sinfulness of homosexuality is equated to that type of hatred? To be fair, I’ve publicly preached the sinfulness of a lot of behaviors, but NEVER advocated violence against the perpetrators of such crimes. What you really have a problem with is the conviction with which I stand which IMHO is nothing less than the conviction that you stand on that homosexuality isn’t a sin. Somehow it’s OK for you to be dogmatic in your stance, but it is tantamount to a hate crime for me to do it. I wasn’t attacking anyone and I find it offensive that you question my intentions with such a comparison.

Is it an “authoritarianism attitude” when Jesus declared, “I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me”? John 14:6. To me, that is a very narrow, intollerant statement because it excludes all other means and belief systems. Am I somehow wrong in standing with Him and declaring the same? I suppose one could say He was pretty dogmatic even condemning. Preachers who stand in the pulpits are just the mailmen delivering the mail. I condemn no man, but I will proclaim the truth. “Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?” Gal. 4:16. IMHO it is a lack of true Christian compassion that remains silent and does nothing to bring the truth to those in need. Frankly, I didn’t care much to be told I was a sinner deserving of hell, but I am thankful for my pastor for his faithful warnings. The love he demonstreated to tell the truth was instrumentally used in God’s hands to bring me to Christ and that is the reason why I do what I do and why I have been involved in this thread. The conclusions you’ve drawn about my intentions are faulty. If you care to put away your inflamatory rhetoric, I will be happy to engage in conversation with you.

Pastor Sam ~ Feb 21, 2006 at 1:11 pm

I have not been on for awhile, however I have been monitoring what has been going on here. Also while I was just keeping up on the postings here, I have been taking a look at a lot of the sites that ask the public to rate and review the movies. Considering all of the controversy here, I am seeing the effect that End of the Spear seems to be having on the gereral audience that has seen the movie. In many of the reviews that I have read I can see the impact that this movie is having, and so far what I see is exactly the reasons why this movie was made. Many of the reviewers had no idea what they were going to see until the story unfolded before their eyes. And in many cases, their hearts. The main just of what I am seeing is that people are responding to the message of unconditional love and forgiveness. I have even seen comments by people who are stating that they want to find out about this loving God, not the angry, vengeful God that they grew up with. Some were written by people who see where they need to become more like the Lord in these areas. Many have even commented that they want to see Hollywood produce more genuine movies like this. For those who have said that they did not see the gospel of salvation in the movie, apparently there are many who are now seeing a need to seek this salvation. Much earlier on I said that I had been watching the interviews by many involved in the making of this production and why they were involved. By visiting these other “write your review” sites, I am seeing that everything they wanted to see happen is happening. Including many comments about how well made this movie was, many are waiting to see what is next from them. Some had even heard of the controversy and their comments reflect a positive look at Christian’s who can truely practice what they preach in love and forgiveness. I thank God that those involved with End of the Spear were willing to put it all on the line. I am only sorry that it did not play longer in our area. I am seeing too many seeds planted to ignore and I pray that there are enough of us who love our Lord that are looking with our eyes open to find those seeds and nuture them in love. I have a small handful who have seen the movie and are now willing to take a look at God’s offer of salvation. End of the Spear has opened wide some doors for many. I am glad for the wonderful message that is finally being recieved by people in my area that for the first time are willing to look at the Bible openly without the aid of all of their other materials that add to and subtract from the Word. I deal with many who believe in a religion that wraps up some very cultist beliefs in a pretty package and sells it as the way to heaven. I am grateful for the chance to see what God is doing. Perhaps if we are willing to go out and find the soil that is being prepared and the scattered seeds by End of the Spear, the labor of love will find more laborers, and God’s harvest is increased by even one that now follow the “markings of the Father”, then those of us who have seen this movie can honestly talk to others who are now asking the questions that will change their existance to life. I still choose to rejoice!!!!

Trish ~ Feb 22, 2006 at 3:02 am

Pastor Sam, what you said, whether you meant to express such or not, reminded me forcibly of a very hate-filled sermon I heard once from a well-known I heard on a street corner right here in Phoenix from none other than Fred Phelps. The only thing missing was the “fags are today’s lepers” comments.

Remarking about a so-called 50% life expectancy that doesn’t take AIDS into account is not only wrong but insensitive. It appeared to me–and Roger–that you were calling AIDS a “queer disease” as so many hatemongers do. And no, we do not have a mere 50% less life expectancy. We are every bit as healthy as everyone else. I have a lesbian cousin who is in her 60’s and in the same relationship with the same woman she met when she was 30. Mary and Sharon are both as healthy as can be. I’ve heard the statistic you’ve quoted and it’s untrue. I saw it once on a “Christian psychology” webpage, along with a number of other fallacies about psychology relating to a number of topics.

As for the comment about recruitment and/or curriculum, the only thing I’ve been able to find online that comes close to what you’re describing is a sex-ed curriculum that has a list of frequently asked questions, and the teacher is given a specific set of answers for the questions *IF* they are posed by a student. One of the questions is, “what if I think I’m gay?” The answer is to suggest that the student experiment safely with it. Personally, I don’t think sex-ed should be taught without parental consent, but that is neither here nor there.

You make comments that “homosexuality is not healthy by any stretch of the imagination.” On what knowledge do you base this statement? Are you a psychology expert? I’m not asking to offend you, I’m asking honestly, because if you are I’ll back off. Chances are, though, you have very little psychological training. I’ve seen a site maintained by a “Christian,” anti-gay group (the name escapes me at the moment) that reports a multitude of erroneous statistics based on “research” on a specific group of unhealthy people. I have never seen more biased, incorrect information–it’s like reading something straight out of the segregation era about how God intended whites and blacks to remain separated. The sad thing is that I know a lot of churchgoers who take it as gospel because it’s supposedly run by professionals. Unfortunately it was discovered by The Advocate that all of those “professionals” were disbarred by the APA for their backing of the “ex-gay” movement.

I know quite a few ex-gays. Nearly every single one of them had a very predictable relapse (sarcasm very much intended). The three who didn’t were not in healthy lifestyles; they used drugs, were alcoholics, enjoyed frequent anonymous sex and in general were well on their way to an early demise. Anyone who lives that lifestyle, gay or straight, is going to have two choices: have an epiphany that turns your life around, or die. It is common to hear ex-gays describe lifestyles of alcoholism, drug addiction, extreme promiscuity, and other massively destructive behaviors. My sister lives like that; she doesn’t need to become a lesbian, she just needs to quit blaming her problems on our dad. People in the ex-gay movement are either living like this or they “turn gay” while in jail (very common because of the lack of companionship–I know, I’ve been an officer). They don’t need to turn away from being gay, they just need to make themselves more healthy.

Roger is not off-base here. I’m not saying that just because he was sticking up for me, I’m saying it because I understand exactly where that is coming from. Sam, your tone is very abrasive and whether you meant to or not, you have now twice seriously insulted me. I don’t know you in real life so I can’t judge whether or not you meant to, I can only trust when you apologize you honestly didn’t mean to insult me. You need to start considering what you’re saying, because I’m not the only one who feels this way and it’s not the first time.

Mel ~ Feb 23, 2006 at 8:28 pm

One other thing–everyone says they got their information from a “credible source.” You say you obtained your knowledge of this curriculum from people who spoke firsthand to the students who were taught the supposed lesson, but you not only didn’t see it but never heard the story yourself. People are people; for some reason everybody always wants something to talk about, and if the information they have isn’t juicy enough for their liking they’ll spice it up. I’ve seen nearly everyone I know do it; I’ve caught myself doing it before. I’m not calling anyone a liar, I’m just saying don’t present evidence you don’t actually have. You discredit yourself that way.

Mel ~ Feb 23, 2006 at 11:51 pm

I think we may have travelled down a significant rabbit trail on this issue. I definnately have my opinions on this discussion, but as I think we can see in the comments listed above, this is a HEATED issue. The liklihood that I could mention my views regarding homosexuality in general, and not be attacked significantly by one side or another (or even both ) is slim. But as for the issue of the movie, while I was not as pleased with the production as I was expecting, I don’t find the use of Gay actors to be a horrific issue. Jesus in scripture interacted with the people he was ministering to. He ate with taxcollectors, had private meetings with a Pharrisee, and several up-close and intimate conversations with women of questionable lifestyle and many other such examples. Christ’s message was clear: “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him, should not perish but have everlasting life. For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved.” – John 3:16-17

So for Pastor Sam: My views on homosexuality aside, as Christians we are called to introduce people to a relationship with Jesus Christ. How people are able to know who Christ is, is by the example that we lead. If we are to remove ourselves from a society, with a large and growing population of homosexuals, how will they ever experience the freedom of Christ’s love?

And for Mel: Sam and others have unfettered faith in the Bible. With that in mind it makes sense that they believe things in the Bible about what is and what isn’t sin. Living a life of homosexuality is CLEARLY listed as sinful in the Bible – there is realy not much argument about that. So the question becomes, do YOU believe the Bible? It was written by a God who loves you, more than anyone else ever can or will. He created you, He nit you together… and believe or not, he knows what makes you tick, even why you are homosexual – whether by choice or by birth.(I’m leaving my views out as much as possible.)

In general, if we strive to love the Lord, the Bible tells us to obey His commandments. But God has taught many, so many of us lessons about His commands through a SLOW path of love, discipline, and encouragement. I have struggled with my share of issues that seperated me from the Lord – pride, sexual impurity, slander, anger and others. All of us have – Jesus challenged the Pharisees who had a “holier than thou” mentality to examine thier own hearts… and that applies to us all. If ever any of us say we are perfected, we are lieing to ourselves.

Back to the movie, the actor in question did a good job portraying the individual he was called to portray. That was his job, and he did it. As for his personal life, that is between Him, the Lord and those who are his friends and family. I cannot imagine the pressure that would exist if the production manager for this movie was required to be judge and jury for everyone of the staff members: Did the cameraman remember to read his Bible today? Did the folly artist reconcile with his wife, after he got into an argument with her? Did that grip realize that her outfit was causing certain men on the set to innapropriately fantasize about her? These issues, which are indeed important in the lives of those affected by them are no less important than the declared sexual preference of one of the actors.

“Judge not, that you be not judged. For with what judgement you judge, you will be judged and with the measure you use, it iwll be measured back to you. And why do you look at the speck in your brother’s eye, but do not consider the plank in your own eye?” – Matthew 7:1-3

Sincerely,
Kaleb

PS- Please understand that I am a FIRM believer in accountability and repentance of sin in a person’s life. But if someone is not a Christian, God is going to use His Person to purify that individual – we should not feel obligated to judge them if they fall short of “our” model. It is always a balance – if we have friends who are doing things we consider wrong, we must judge whether we CAN spend time with them, loving them as brothers or sisters, without poluting our hearts with resentment and hatred because of thier lifestyle choices. If cannot be loving, we should avoid contact until God purifies us of our own false-piety, pride and lack of humility. I have asked this of the Lord MANY times, and I expect I will many more. Any good thing in my life is only a reflection of God’s glory, there’s not much here in me worth remembering, just a pile of dust! God Bles!!

Kaleb ~ Feb 25, 2006 at 10:05 am

Now reading my own post, I noticed I might unintentionally implying that Christians should AVOID converting the world, or living as explamples for others. That is the great commission, and I feel we ought to. But we have to be careful to do it by the grace of God, and only by the grace of God.

Kaleb

Kaleb ~ Feb 25, 2006 at 10:12 am

Kaleb,

Thanks for joining the discussion; you came along a bit late in the game, though. I’d suggest that your post is well-worded, but misses the point (your first post), or at least misses the point that I’ve tried to make. There are several other posts which I think clarify my reasoning on the issue; they are here:

http://www.byron-harvey.com/2006/02/01/618/

And particularly on judging, and why your quoting of Matthew 7 doesn’t really solve the issue:

http://www.byron-harvey.com/2006/01/18/why-i-judge-and-you-should-too-part-i/

http://www.byron-harvey.com/2006/01/21/why-i-judge-and-you-should-too-part-ii/

Please don’t read my words in any negative light, but merely to suggest that these other posts might be helpful as you sort through this thing. Glad to have you in the conversation!

Byron ~ Feb 25, 2006 at 12:23 pm

Kaleb–I understand what you’re saying, but my issue is not that he has faith, it’s the way he’s coming across with it. You can’t cram something down someone’s throat and expect that the person isn’t going to get mad. In my experience, the vast majority of my fellow believers have this chip on their shoulder that they just dare everyone to knock off. A lot of them walk around looking for an argument. I’ll never forget when I was teaching Evangelism Explosion, I took a couple of high schoolers from the youth group I was interning for to the mall to randomly try to convert people. One woman, who was very proud to say she attended Phoenix First Assembly of God, wanted to argue from the get-go; she was of the mindset that anyone who would try to talk to her about Christ must be a different religion and as such she needed to argue. It was very off-putting, but I didn’t realize that many of the people in my own church were just like her. They just weren’t like that with me.

Petra (slap me on the wrist for the heresy of admitting I listened to such sinful music) once did a song called “Seen and Not Heard.” It went something like this: “Too many black sheep in the family/too many stones from a house of glass/they’ve heard the stories/they’ve seen the lines/but talk is too cheap to change their minds/they wanna see some vital signs…” The point is that Christians spend too much time trying to convince the rest of the world that theirs is the only way to God, but all the world sees is a group of angry, self-righteous bigots that have no compassion. My sister used to be a server at Claim Jumper and she hated the Sunday after-church crowd. Why? They gave the worst tips and were the rudest customers. That kind of thing seems trivial to you, but it doesn’t go unnoticed. I used to hate it when I’d be out with other friends from church and they’d refuse to give money to homeless people. Sure, they were probably going to use it on beer–but I look at it this way: God promised to provide for our needs, not necessarily for our wants. If we use what He’s provided for our wants instead, then it’s on us, not on the person He used to provide. So why tell a homeless veteran that you can’t give him any money when your wallet is full of singles and fives?

More often than not, your witness is in the little things. Instead of being insistent that our food isn’t prepared the way we like it and giving a bad tip to a server who was busting her butt to serve a section full of people like you, maybe we should learn to be more patient and forgiving. Don’t leave a tract unless you’re going to give a 30% tip. And don’t jump down the throat of a person who is gay just because it is your faith that says it’s wrong. You’re not going to get anywhere.

(Now I’m going to go listen to some Sheryl Crow to get that blasted song out of my head…I can’t believe I still remember the lyrics!)

Mel ~ Feb 25, 2006 at 5:49 pm

Mel, I’m not spicing anything up. First, I don’t offer apologies that are not heartfelt. You say my tone is abrasive. I beg to differ. I have endeavored to be truthful and considerate. I haven’t used demeaning language and how one can ascertain my tone by written words on a page is beyond me. Please refer me to specific comments that you feel are abrasive. I am painfully aware that truth can be cutting and painful, but I am not setting out to intentionally “gay bash” or any other such activity. I am defending what the Bible clearly teaches about the sinfulness of homosexuality and for that I cannot apologize. However, I would have every reason to apologize if I were being ugly in defending that position. I am endeavoring to be as civil as I know how. Perhaps you think I’m as clumsy as a bull in a china closet.

I do not believe I have discredited myself by referring to the curriculum issue. You should check out this link: http://www.narth.com/docs/nprhosts.html I dare say when there is legislation being sponsored requiring the teaching of homosexuality to students by the fifth grade it is no stretch (at least IMHO) to believe the testimony of the students that I referred to. Naming them in this forum would be highly unwise. Any reasonable person should be able to accept that on its own merit especially considering the highly charged emotional aspect of this debate.

While we are talking about the recruitment issue – don’t you think it’s the epitome of recruitment every time a practicing male homosexual sexually assaults a minor? Stories of this nature are not isolated incidents, but this activity happens frequently. I’m just asking a question, not leveling a charge against you.

Honestly, I can appreciate the fact that you feel as though I am trying to “cram” my faith down your throat. Truth is… I am well aware that I can’t do that to anyone. Faith exercised in the Bible must occur by the free choice of man or woman. I think you are confusing my strength of conviction with a desire on my part to cram the Bible down your throat.

And by the way, I don’t know what circle of believers you run in, but the vast majority of believers that I know don’t run around with a chip on their shoulders. Don’t you think you might be overstating that just a tad? Isn’t it possible that your impression is more born out of their unaccepting of homosexuality as acceptable?

Pastor Sam ~ Feb 28, 2006 at 4:12 pm

Kaleb, I don’t know that I have advocated anywhere in this thread or otherwise that we, as Christians, should isolate ourselves from homosexuals. The debate in this thread began over what Byron considered an unwise decision exhibiting a lack of discernment on ETE’s part to cast Chad Allen in this part. I agree with Byron that while sovreignly God can and will use this film in spite of Mr. Allen’s appearance in it, certainly the decision was a violation of the moral will of God in doing so. I feel they further stirred the murky water by aggressively marketing the movie to pastors in hopes of their help in promoting it in their churches. I felt it was a gut punch to find out just one day before the opening of the movie that a gay activist who pushes for same sex marriage was cast in the part of Nate Saint. Yes, God used the Apostle Paul to do great works for God, but He did so after his conversion not before. That scenario is in keeping with the moral will of God. God’s moral will desires to use clean vessels, however, no one argues that God can’t use a dirty one. From what I’ve read of Mr. Allen’s comments about his faith, I think there is serious reason to question whether he is or isn’t a Christian. I’ll leave that determination in the Lord’s hands, but he makes some strange comments that don’t seem consistent with Biblical Christianity. Of course, the Lord is the only one who can make an accurate assessment about Mr. Allen’s adherance to the Word of God. I’m merely fulfilling the role of fruit inspector.

I think the Christian community needs to engage the culture in which we minister and strive for relevancy, but not at the expense of Biblical compromise. It’s interesting to me that you quoted Matt. 7:1-3 which may be one of the most mis-quoted passages of the Bible. The unbelieving world (as well as some Christians I know) stop quoting anything after verse one. Jesus didn’t say we should never make a judgment. He simply gave us instructions as to how we should make judgments. Otherwise, how could we truly follow His command in verse six to “Give not that which is holy unto the dogs” if we didn’t make a judgment as to who that would be? or to not “cast ye your pearls before swine” if we didn’t make a judgment as to who that is also?

And Mel, one last thing… you say, “Christians spend too much time trying to convince the rest of the world that theirs is the only way to God.” As a professing Christian yourself are you denying Jesus’ words in John 14:6 when He said, “I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.” I think that statement is narrow and excluding. He didn’t say He was one of the ways, part of the truth, etc. The world would get along with Christianity a whole lot more if we would open the door that there might be other ways to God. Sorry, but I can’t open a door that He won’t allow. Are you of the opinion that there is salvation outside of faith in Christ and Christ alone?

Pastor Sam ~ Feb 28, 2006 at 9:58 pm

Just saw the film on Sunday night and was pleasantly surprised. I think this film can be used as an outreach tool to the lost. It’s a very good movie that communicates some of the most basic Christian principles (God is creator, loves us, thou shalt not kill etc..) in a way that is easy for unchurched and unsaved people to absorb. I am very critical of homosexuals because I perceive them as unremorseful and militant. I doubt that will change anytime soon. Still, if King James could put his name on a translation of the Bible and ‘get away with it’, what is the big deal with a hollywood actor that is gay? Aren’t most of them gay? I personally have more of a problem with King James’ name so closely tied to God’s Word than I do with a gay actor from Hollywood being in a film (Christian or not). Byron, do you think this is a fair comparison?

Mark Merritt ~ Mar 1, 2006 at 1:08 pm

Well…no. I hear what you’re saying about King James—and I’ve never really thought about that a lot, I guess—but the problem is that when you get into comparisons, you can justify just about anything. Pol Pot was a sweet guy compared to Hitler, you know!

Seriously, leaving King James out of it, it really boils down to how people see this film. SINCE it was “marketed” directly to me as a pastor, with the idea being that it could be used as a ministry tool, then I scrutinize it under that lens. Thus, there are means we should employ—and means we shouldn’t—when it comes to ministry. Every person has feet of clay: granted. Paul’s the chief of sinners, and I’m the deputy, okay? That said, Chad’s position is one of homosexual activism, and my position, to answer you but not to start another round with those folks who respectfully disagree with me, is that the Bible clearly teaches the sinfulness of homosexual sex (not of homosexual temptation, by the way). Chad Allen is an activist—maybe not the leading light activist, and maybe a real nice guy, but an activist, nonetheless—for the idea of overturning Biblical morality. I do not believe that he should be acting in this film if it’s marketed to me directly, by ETE, as a ministry tool, which it was. I don’t want, say, Brad Pitt playing Billy Graham, and I don’t want Chad Allen playing Nate Saint (unless/until, of course, these individuals come to faith in Christ and renounce their former lifestyles).

And please, don’t get into The Passion—different situation, different circumstance.

Byron ~ Mar 1, 2006 at 5:23 pm

Mel, Here is an interesting article just posted Feb. 24, 2006 entitled: Lesbian Teacher, Suspected Sex Offender, Uses Post to Indoctrinate Students, Parent Says

http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/2/afa/242006b.asp

Although the alleged victim and her family are unwilling to cooperate with the authorities and charges will not be pursued against the teacher legally, one thing about the story isn’t rebutted.

To quote the article:

Last summer, Wiseman co-led a seminar at the North Carolina Governor’s School called “The New Gay Teenager.” Jim Burrows, whose son attended the pro-homosexual seminar, believes it is clear the lesbian instructor is bent on indoctrinating young people with a favorable view of the homosexual lifestyle.

“This was an agenda that she had,” Burrows contends, “and she just basically took advantage of the situation that she was in to promote her agenda.” He says the lesbian instructor’s “New Gay Teenager” course influenced his son to question his sexuality and also to question Bible passages condemning homosexuality.

And the concerned father has reason to believe the seminar that led to his son’s experience was “obviously was not a one-time deal,” he contends. “Actually, we have had several other parents with kids who went to Governor’s School in past years that have told us that this went on there too,” he says. “In fact, this has been going on at Governor’s school for many years.”

Burrows believes Wiseman and other instructors at the North Carolina Governor’s School are committed to promoting homosexuality to children. For him, recent events have simply reinforced his suspicions about the lesbian teacher having a pro-homosexual agenda and being willing to use her position as an educator to carry it out.

Endquote.

Comments?

Pastor Sam ~ Mar 2, 2006 at 10:23 am

Byron, Who’s Pol Pot? Just kidding! I guess I was doing my best to evade the real issue, eh? I do agree that Chad Allen was a poor choice for a Christian film, I just don’t think that it alone renders the film useless. IMHO.

Mark Merritt ~ Mar 2, 2006 at 4:40 pm

I have not seen the movie but plan to. Growing up in a conservative Christian home I was always taught to hate the sin but love the sinner. I have also struggled with the idea that many people cannot look past the issue of homosexuality in people. I am in no way saying that it should be accepted but it is what they do, not who they are and I view it as something that the individual struggles with, as we all have struggles. My beef with that being stated, I do wholeheartedly believe that while choosing Chad Allen to play Nate Saint was probably not the wisest, most discerning choice for the producers to make God can use this movie despite that choice. However, if we recognize that God is the one in ultimate control He can still use the movie to reach Allen and others! Very possibly a seed was planted in Allen’s life and needs only to take root and grow. It is my prayer that that is what happens. If Allen comes to know the redeeming love of Christ at any point in his life because he was cast in this movie and because f the seeds that were planted in his life, then wasn’t it worth it? We in our finite understanding do not see the big picture and God in HIS infitine wisdom already knows how this will play out.

Melissa ~ Mar 6, 2006 at 2:13 am

Melissa, I certainly agree with most of what you have to say, and certainly at this point, praying for Chad’s salvation, and for God to use this film to glorify Himself, are worthy prayers, ones I have prayed. Here’s one thing to think about, the devil’s advocate to your words about “big picture” and about “wasn’t it worth it?” My premise is that we are seeing the dilution of real Christian faith in America, that we are seeing compromise of Biblical truth all over the place. A watered-down Christianity will result in the salvation of LESS people. The issue revolves around whether or not this is another (of many) instance of the watering-down of Christian distinctives. I see the big picture as potentially being one where our “salt has lost its savor” so that we have no real message to give to a lost and dying world. We already have “preachers” who have so dumbed-down Christian faith that it is fairly indistinguishable from self-help psycho-babble. If ETE’s decision to cast Chad Allen is just another step downward in this path, then would Chad Allen’s salvation be “worth it”–particularly if the result is the weakening of the clear gospel message–resulting in many less people hearing the truth and being saved? That’s where I’d come from, and say, “maybe Chad Allen’s salvation is NOT worth it”.

Thankfully, God is sovereign!

Byron ~ Mar 6, 2006 at 10:12 am

I have been reading your comments and thought I would let you know what I thought of End of the Spear. I found the film to be refreshing and entertaining. The acting was decent (in particular the indians were great), the female missionaries were better developed as characters then the males.
The message was quite clear and I had no trouble with Chad Allen’s acting, he was not too cheesy.
The weakest point in the movie had to be when the missionaries were killed. Bad Acting, directing, editing? I cannot say…I would have to hear from the director or see the working script.

mray

PS: I had no idea that Chad Allen was homosexual “before” seeing this film. I think it’s really tough to find a “perfect” person and if this film leads to people to Christ, so be it!

MRay ~ Mar 6, 2006 at 12:24 pm

Pastor Sam, what do you consider an “agenda?” Do you call teaching kids that homosexuality is okay and healthy is an agenda? I’ve got a student in my martial arts school, a 9-year-old girl, whose mother is a lesbian and she has a “wife.” Only one of the other kids has really been mean; he didn’t understand that some families have two moms or two dads. There’s nothing abnormal about that, though everyone here will look at me and go, “what planet are you from?” So do you think it’s okay to teach kids to hate homosexuals? Would you tell your child they couldn’t play with their best friend if you found out they had two moms just because you refuse to accept the normality of it?

“Recruiting” is not teaching kids that homosexuality is okay, either. When you use that word, I imagine you talking about gays and lesbians trying to “turn” a person (kid) “gay.” That, as far as I’m concerned, is not appropriate if it does happen. And in my extensive networking in the gay community, I don’t know anyone who approves of that kind of thing.

As for the lesbian teacher who had an affair with her student, that’s wrong whether you’re straight or gay. But you more often hear of it happening with straight teachers. Is that okay? I daresay not. There’s a reason for age of consent laws. Don’t assume that just because I’m a lesbian that I condone that behavior for other lesbians. That teacher should have known better. But with the seminar, parents are supposed to be informed of anything outside of the classroom norm. I have to tell you, if my parents had heard of a seminar in any of my schools called “the new gay teen,” they would’ve yanked me out of school for the whole day to make sure I didn’t go. Parents can have a say in what their kids are taught. That’s the way it was in the 90’s, I’m sure it hasn’t changed.

Yes, I believe that Christ is the only way. I was referring to theology. Every single denomination thinks it’s theology is the best, and that irritates me. There is one truth that we all have in common, and we forget it too often: Christ’s sacrifice is the only way to atone for sin. I think homosexuality is a major theological problem, nothing more.

Excuse my touchiness. One of my friends died in Iraq, and Fred Phelps is expected to make a grand appearance at his funeral tomorrow. Suffice to say, I’m pretty upset. That guy is a big reason why homosexuals fight so hard not to have to hear anything “Christians” have to say.

Mel ~ Mar 7, 2006 at 12:54 am

Mel, Now that this is in the archives I don’t know whether you will check back for my response or not, but I am truly sorry to hear of the death of one of your friends. I wish you well and pray your heart will be comforted during your time of grief.

I do not teach nor advocate hate and feel that hatred has no place when we are talking about people to people relationships. I don’t like what terrorists do, but I do not advocate responding to their hatred with hatred. Nor do I think it has a place in how Christians are to relate to homosexuals.

There is a huge divide in the platform from where you stand and where I stand as far as seeing homosexual behavior as normal. It is not normal nor is it permissible behavior in God’s eyes. I cannot advocate what has begun to happen in schools across America as far as conditioning children that it is acceptable and/or normal behavior. It is condemned in the Bible and we do a huge disservice to the generation of children when we teach otherwise. There is also a huge difference in advocating hate and teaching Biblical morality. Too often, those who observe and advocate Biblical morality are accused of hate-mongering. I am also aware that some “professing” Christians act very un-Christianlike towards homosexuals. They are a disgrace.

You don’t know of any homosexuals who advocate seducing children? Have you ever heard of NAMBLA? They have worked tirelessly to change legislation because they feel that homosexual love between men and boys is fine. That’s recruiting in my book as well as perverted. Perhaps you don’t know anyone personally in that organization, but surely you don’t deny their existence, do you?

The educational front is changing since the 90’s. Actually, it was changing in the 90’s and the homosexual effort to get this type of curriculum that I speak of into every school district across the nation is well documented. Ever heard of Project 10? There is video curriculum that has been introduced into elementary schools and anti-Christian bias being promoted in the curriculum. They have told children that it’s not OK to voice their religious beliefs if they don’t accept homosexuality as OK. These types of things are written into the curriculum and introduced to children as young as K-5. In many instances this is happening very quietly without the knowledge of the parents in the community. In communities where the word gets out there have been problems with parents being upset that their children are being taught this propaganda.

What do I consider an agenda? Pushing for acceptance of a sinful lifestyle is an agenda. Pushing for same sex marriage and thereby wholly re-define marriage as anything other than one man and one woman united in the holy bonds of matrimony is an agenda. Working tirelessly to manipulate the judicial system to accept homosexuality as acceptable is an agenda. Force feeding homosexual propaganda into the minds of school children is an agenda. I’m not trying to be ugly here, but you have to realize there are dedicated homosexual activists that are pushing their agenda upon society and trying to ride the coattails of the civil rights movement. If I were a black person I would be outraged that homosexuals are doing such a thing. Black people are born with black skin and that is something they are powerless to change. But homosexuality is a behavior… it is sinful… and I have met people who were once practicing homosexuals and are now heterosexual and happily married. Behaviors can be modified, changed and avoided.

If homosexual sex is healthy and risk free, can you please tell me why a man who has had even one homosexual encounter in the last 27 years (I think that’s the right number) is excluded from donating blood? If it’s so healthy, why is there so much risk associated with anal sex (which I am told most male homosexuals engage)? True, some content themselves to stay with one partner, but research shows that most homosexuals are not monogamous, but actually have many, many sex partners. I have watched video footage of homosexual pride events where sex acts are simulated in front of small children. This has occured in city parks and gay pride parades in cities all across the country. Ever heard of Southern Decadence that takes place in New Orleans each year? There is a similar event in the Florida Keys each year where homosexuality, public nudity and debauchery is flaunted in the streets. I’m really only touching the tip of the iceberg. The list of cities is much longer than I am aware of I am sure, but here are some to name just a few… San Francisco, Washington, Columbus, Charlotte, Philadelphia, Orlando, New Orleans, The Florida Keys, etc.

Mel, you are either terribly sheltered or simply not being honest in this exchange. I’m not red-faced and I’m not yelling, but I am calling it as I see it and not trying to incite you to anger.

Pastor Sam ~ Mar 13, 2006 at 9:02 pm

Pastor Sam, I don’t feel right to remain silent about your postings. I am on your side of the theological position about homosexuality and I respect your conviction to speak up on the issue. However, I wish you would reflect on your tone in communication and what attitude you have conveyed. I wrote before when I felt that your tone would put Mel and others on the defense thereby diverting their attention from the main issues, and indeed she has expressed how you have made her feel, time and again.

You have said some good things in the last posting addressing facts and issues. It would have been nice if you had left it at that. But again, you talked down at Mel.

When you asked “can you please tell me why a man who has had ….”, you take yourself down to a personal level as if you need to challenge the opponent to win an argument. Worse yet, you condemn her again for being “terribly sheltered or simply not being honest in this exchange”.
Why is this necessary?

You had just presented some good facts. Your place is a teacher and a pastor. You deliver the message and with compassion and faith, you entrust the hearers to God. You ask the Holy Spirit to use what you said to reach hearts. You are a vehicle.

But something got in the way. Did you really want to win your argument with Mel?
Has it ever occurred to you that by aggravating her with your judgmental descriptions of her ( terribly sheltered, not being honest, and other previously written descriptions) you have lost the effectiveness of your message; you have diverted the attention from the subject matter.

Please don’t try to respond to me because it may bring about more self justifications of your mode of communication. I sincerely believe that you are not aware of how negative it can be, and this is how you have been for a long long time ( not just with Mel ). If you will, please re-read your discourse with Mel and reflect on what attitude has framed your mode of communication, and what you need to do to embrace someone who has been struggling, and not drive her away from hanging on with her belief in God.
In Christian love.

Penny ~ Mar 14, 2006 at 3:02 pm

Yikes, Byron, 240 plus comments!? You are the man

See, I do come to your blog now and then.

If homosexual sex is healthy and risk free, can you please tell me why a man who has had even one homosexual encounter in the last 27 years (I think that’s the right number) is excluded from donating blood?

Pastor Sam: I understand that such exclusions may be true but I am not sure what point you are making. From a moral point of view, you are not saying that it is worse to have one gay encounter than ten straight illicit ones, are you? Surely not.

Ever heard of Southern Decadence that takes place in New Orleans each year? There is a similar event in the Florida Keys each year where homosexuality, public nudity and debauchery is flaunted in the streets.

Ever heard of Spring Break or Girls Gone Wild or Hedonism III? Pretty much same thing.

My point is simple. Sin is sin. Gay sin; straight sin.

Warren Throckmorton ~ Mar 14, 2006 at 9:42 pm

Penny, Thank you for your insight and admonition. Something did get in the way and your points are well taken. I will endeavor to be more gracious and not so negative. If it means anything… I think my last statement on that post summed up my frame of mind: “I’m not red-faced and I’m not yelling, but I am calling it as I see it and not trying to incite you to anger.”

Warren, No, I am not saying it is “worse to have one gay encounter than ten straight illicit ones”. I agree with you, as far as the morality is concerned, sin is sin. My point was addressing the fact that the medical community evidently doesn’t agree with Mel’s assertion that the homosexual lifestyle is healthy. When I give blood, it is the only lifestyle excluded from donating.

Mel, to clarify… my comment regarding being “terribly sheltered or simply not being honest in this exchange” goes back to your last post when you said:

“Recruiting” is not teaching kids that homosexuality is okay, either. When you use that word, I imagine you talking about gays and lesbians trying to “turn” a person (kid) “gay.” That, as far as I’m concerned, is not appropriate if it does happen. And in my extensive networking in the gay community, I don’t know anyone who approves of that kind of thing.”

More specifically, I am referring to the “if it does happen” comment which seems to me a denial because we know it happens. We know that men rape little girls, sometimes kill them and dispose of them like trash. That’s sinful and just as wrong as men who support NAMBLA and extol the so called “virtue” of man/boy sex. When I read your posts I get the idea that homosexual love is benign, perfectly healthy and should, therefore, be accepted by society. Research tells us otherwise. Video footage of gay pride parades that will never make it on the nightly news shows a very dark aspect of the “gay community” that most of America has yet to see.

Pastor Sam ~ Mar 15, 2006 at 1:08 pm

Wow,

I was doing some research on Christians and movies and stumbled on to this thread. I’ve spent the last few hours reading through most of the posts, and here’s my 2 cents:

To Mel, Roger, Dennis, and any other homosexuals who have posted:

I respect your knowledge and honesty. I really can’t imagine all the hate and struggles you have gone through. I know you must have struggled tremendously with your faith and your sexual orientation.

Having said that, please understand that what I bring up is not to rehash old arguments, but to get you to examine the basis for your arguments on why homosexuality is not a sin, which I believe are flawed.

I think it is moot to argue about statistics or psychology, since neither side will agree with the other’s “evidence,” so I will argue only from scripture. In the end, something is true and right only because God said so, not because of any discernible physical benefits or ill effects.

First and foremost, I believe that God, as 1 Cor. 14:33 says, is not a God of confusion, but a God of peace. This applies to His creation, His revealed Word, and His gospel. This means 2 things to me: that

1) The bible, and especially the gospel, are understandable and explainable to everyone, without the need for extra biblical sources to “shed new light.” What I mean is, understanding of history, background, original Greek and Hebrew should definitely deepen our understanding and faith, but not alter it dramatically. There will always be points of contention, but not when it comes to fundamental issues like salvation and sin.

2) That in everything God does, He has a planned order and way to do things, and He expects us to follow His set patterns and examples.

Now, when I look at the arguments that have been raised for homosexuality, I see several problems:

Your arguments rely heavily on reinterpreting specific words in order so that those oft mentioned passages only target specific aspects of homosexuality, instead of homosexuality as a whole. Kind of like dodging the bullet, so to speak. Specifically, Mel, for Romans 1, you insist that it must be referring to a specific group of Roman fertility priests and priestesses and yet there is no explicit reason to believe that was the case. In fact, if you look at the context of Romans 1, Paul is clearly addressing God’s wrath on “all the godlessness and wickedness of men” He’s clearly talking about the sinful condition of all of mankind, not a select religious group, and one of the sexual sins he clearly describes is homosexuality: exchanging “natural relations” to those with the same sex. This is not male prostitution, temple orgies, or pedophilia, but consenting homosexual relations.

On Leviticus, I think it is very irresponsible and a great disservice to God and His Word to discount all the Levitical laws as absurd notions because a few of the laws are outdated. While many of the ceremonial, health, and food laws are not relevant today, the majority of the Levitical laws are still absolutely correct in their condemnation of sin. The only difference is that we no longer face the immediate penaly (usually death) from these same sins because of the grace of Christ. If you look at the passage in question: Leviticus 20:13, homosexuality is not listed among outdated dietary laws, but among sexual sins as relevant today as they were back then: incest, adultery, and bestiality to name a few. What basis do you have to single homosexuality out as outdated when every other sin in that chapter is still relevant? Please understand that I ask not to taunt you, but to truly inquire about the basis for your arguments.

Now, you’ve also argued that the sin is not homosexuality in and of itself, but merely sexual promiscuity, whether heterosexual or homosexual, and that monogamous homosexual relations would be ok, and that brings me to my next point:

The only sexual relations permissible in the bible is between a husband and wife in the bonds of marraige. And this is, I believe, the crux of it all. God’s design, as I believe He has clearly demonstrated, is for marriage, and therefore sex, to be between a man and a woman. Since all sex outside of marriage is sin, then this would render all other arguments moot.

I know you’ve heard all about the order of creation and the like, and Dennis was very quick to dismiss Ephesians 6:31 as just instruction for heterosexual families, and therefore not applicable to homosexuals, but I ask you to consider the very nature of marriage. It is not just for the fulfillment for the husband or wife, not just for procreation, but marriage is a portrait of our very relationship with Christ. In that same Ephesians passage, Paul uses that illustration of marriage to explain Christ’s relationship with the church. This is no mere analogy either. Our very understanding of Christ and His church is dependent on our understanding of marriage, the “profound mystery”. The church is the bride of Christ, and He the head, as a woman is the bride of her husband, and he the head of the family. The very nature of God is depicted in this structure for marriage. This mirrors God the Father’s relationship with Israel in the Old Testament, whom He also called His bride. Both God the Father and God the Son dictate for us the structure and pattern we are supposed to have for marriage and family,. God leaves no room for alternatives or “what ifs” There can be no homosexual marriages in any biblical sense because by its nature, it cannot fulfill the pattern that God has set.

I do not question a homosexual person’s ability to love or lead a healthy life. Nor do I think that homosexuality is a sin worse than pride or heterosexual lust. I know that you must’ve had these same verses thrown at you all the time without much thought, and again, I cannot imagine the hardships you have faced in your faith. But God’s Word is not cryptic when looked at as a whole, and I simply do not see a basis for biblically acceptable homosexuality.

Tim ~ Mar 16, 2006 at 3:54 am

(I’ve been really sick for the last few days and unable to do much on the computer other than post news on my site; I always read Byron’s blogs when I’ve got the time.)

Okay, let’s set something stright: NAMBLA is not, nor was it ever, a valid homosexual organization. There is a massive difference between healthy, consenting adults and adults who have a compulsion to believe that children are capable of understanding complex, emotional relationships at a sexual level. Please, please do not equate healthy homosexuality with the type of depraved sickness that is NAMBLA. Again, age of consent laws exist for a very good reason. Any homosexual I know will agree with that statement.

We seem to be forgetting here that the same depravity you are describing, Pastor Sam, exists with just as much ferocity in straight circles. Have you ever been to Mardi Gras? I used to live in Lousisiana. Trust me, depravity is everywhere. Every time I see ads for porn crap like “sorority girls gone wild” or “spring break at Daytona Beach” I want to puke. Don’t kid yourself; nobody is worse than anyone else. I’m doing a concert at the Phoenix gay pride festival this year, and not once in the last couple of years have I seen nudity being flaunted in my hometown’s gay pride celebrations. In fact, the Phoenix PD is always there in force and the one time someone tried to get nude he was instantaneously arrested (I’ve never seen so many cops converge on one spot so quickly without drawing guns).

I’m not being dishonest. I, personally, still think you have more interest in proving your point than in questioning what you believe. I don’t know you, so I have no right to pass judgement. I can, however, respond to your printed views, and I think you and I will have to agree to disagree.

As for the assertion by Tim that Levitical laws regarding same-sex acts were only placed among other sexual laws, that is incorrect. Laws regarding tattooing (I am brightly tattooed), cutting of bodies (I also have a few piercings), and certain foods are in the same set of laws. I believe that those laws, according to Paul in Galatians 3, were made null and void by Christ’s sacrifice. There is something different about being “set apart” now. That doesn’t mean you should hole up and stay away from everyone else in the world, wagging an accusatory finger at anyone who doesn’t live like you do. I believe it means you have to live in such a way that people see what you have and want it for themselves. Gay, straight, bi, none of it matters as far as I’m concerned. What saved my faith was meeting Rev. Mel White and seeing the peace he had. I then met several others who believed the way he did and it made me realize that God didn’t hate me or condemn me, that I hadn’t lost my salvation. That was what changed everything for me.

I don’t agree with trying to “recruit” kids. I do, however, believe that kids should be taught to be tolerant. I don’t have any problems at all with teaching kids that it’s not always prudent to speak your mind about certain things. I haven’t heard of Project 10, so I can’t speak for or against it. I do know, however, that there is a tragically high rate of suicide among teenagers and young adults who identify as gay or bisexual, and it has a lot to do with relatives and friends who they are afraid will reject them or who already have rejected them. Gay teens are horribly bullied in schools. I was, and I didn’t even know what being gay was when I was a kid. You need to try to see things from this perspective before you pass judgemet.

Mel ~ Mar 18, 2006 at 9:05 pm

Mel,

Thanks for your response. I agree with you completely that there is a difference between organizations like NAMBLA and “healthy” homosexuals. And you are dead on in your assertion that sexual lust and perversion is equally rampant whether you’re gay or straight.

What I do not agree with you on, however, is your view of the OT Law. Like I mentioned earlier, if you look at the chapter in Leviticus, (Lev. 20), homosexuality is listed smack dab in the middle of sexual practices still sinful today: incest, bestiality, adultery. There are no dietary, cultural, or ceremonial laws in that chapter at all. The non-sexual sins in that chapter are child sacrifices and consulting mediums. I would hope that you would agree that everything I’ve stated above is still a sin.

So once again, the question is: how is the decision reached that out of everything listed in Leviticus 20 which are still very much sins today, homosexuality is singled out as the one that is “void and null”?

I think the key issue is the understanding of the relationship between the law and grace. Galatians 3:23-24 states this beautifully:

“But before faith came, we were kept in custody under the law, being shut up to the faith which was later to be revealed. Therefore the Law has become our tutor to lead us to Christ, so that we may be justified by faith. But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor.”

The law is there to lead us to Christ. It convicts us of our sins so we know we need a savior. Christ does not contradict the law, but fulfills it. He does not completely throw out everything the “tutor” taught, but demonstrates it perfectly. The grace of Christ does not free us from the CONTENTS of the law (i.e. we are still not “free” to do whatever we want), but the PENALTY of breaking the law: no more stonings, burnings, and most importantly, hell.

Therefore, laws pertaining to the OT religious practices, the “process” of getting to God: sacrifices, foods, clothing, grooming, etc, are made null, since the law is no longer the path to salvation. We have direct access to God through Christ, and we don’t need a “dress code,” so to speak, to come to the Father.

But sins like idolatry and sexual sins do not change with the coming of grace. Lust is still lust, adultery is still adultery, and homosexuality is still homosexuality. Christ did not redefine what is right or wrong, but the process of becoming right.

Once again, I truly admire your dedication to truth and to your faith, and I know that a lot of times “Christian” love has failed the homosexual community, but the heart of the issue is not the mistreatment or misrepresentation of homosexuals in society, which does happen, but whether or not homosexuality is a sin. Not the Greatest Sin, but a sin like any other.

Tim ~ Mar 20, 2006 at 2:30 am

Mel, If I understand what you are saying about the law correctly, then incest, adultery, and bestiality are also acceptable behaviors? Is that your understanding?

Also, I am struggling to understand how you arrive at your statement about NAMBLA not being a valid homosexual organization. I should think they would take great issue with that statement. Who determines which homoesexual organizations are valid and which ones are not?

Pastor Sam ~ Mar 20, 2006 at 8:01 am

Tim–again, there are indeed cultural laws contained in the section you are referring to. I particularly point out the verse on tattooing. And, in most of the areas that speak mostly on cultural sins, there are some sexual laws thrown in. Later in scripture, Paul addresses Jews who had converted to Christianity on the issue of eating meat sacrificed to idols. He basically tells people who are judging the salvation of others over the matter that they’re being too uptight, and tells the people who are being antagonistic to knock it off. I think he’d say the same thing if he were here today.

Pastor Sam, I honestly can’t believe you’d ask a gay rights activist how she could comment on whether a group is a valid homosexual organization. I can tell you, without reservation, that NAMBLA is not accepted by the gay community–it is only found acceptable by those who believe it’s reprehensible activities are anything less than criminal. The gay community is, for the most part, a very tight community, and you have no footing on which to call NAMBLA a gay group. Healthy homosexuality is same-sex behavior between consenting adults. NAMBLA may take issue with my belief, but it is a belief that 99.99% of homosexuals also voice. That is why they will never be allowed to have a booth at Gay Pride. And to be honest with you, I haven’t heard anything about those sickos in quite some time until now.

Please, do NOT put words in my mouth. I have said before that I do not agree with bestiality, incest or adultery. How can you say these kind of things and try to have anyone believe that you’re NOT trying to instigate stuff?

Mel ~ Mar 21, 2006 at 11:04 pm

Pastor Sam,

I think the issue here isn’t whether or not “healthy” homosexuality exists or not. I see no reason to believe that it canno. (By “healthy” I mean monogamous, consenting adults.) NAMBLA is as about good a representation of homosexuality as child porn rings are of heterosexuals, and I believe bringing it up is not beneficial to the discussion at hand. You are not going to convince Mel with arguments like that because she does not identify herself with groups like that, and rightly so.

The point is that biblically speaking, homosexuality, whether monogamous and consenting or not, is still a sin, and the attempts to prove that it is biblically acceptable show a lack of discernment and logic in interpreting scripture.

I believe if Christians are to make any progress in reaching homosexuals, we have to get past the stigma that homosexuals are “extra” sinful or perverted. In terms of sexual perversion, heterosexuals can match homosexuals on almost every level. Bringing up different events or groups will just lead to endless fingerpointing while missing the point. The only objective evidence we can bring to the table is the truth of the Bible.

Please understand, I appreciate and agree with many of the statements you’ve made, but I think you’re fighting the wrong battle in this case.

Tim ~ Mar 22, 2006 at 12:12 am

Tim,
Well said! I think the devil trips us up on so many “issues” that we forget what the main point is, and that is, what does God consider sin? If he can get us off onto rabbit trails then we lose the power
of God’s holy word. And it’s his word that does the convicting, not us. We must continue to pray that God will show homosexuals his truth, and that there will be a repentent heart. And in the mean time we must love them just as God has commanded us to do, “Love thy neighbor as yourself”, share God’s word and let him do the rest in his own time.

Sandra ~ Mar 22, 2006 at 9:45 am

This…is…the…post that never ends; yes it goes on and on my friends! One person, started posting it…

Anyhoo…one quick word—and hey, we’re getting close to 300 total posts now, so why not just go for it—an analogy that I think fits: NAMBLA equals Fred Phelps (ain’t that an ironic thing to say?). I do have to agree that NAMBLA is as much a gay organization as Fred Phelps is a Christian pastor, which is to say, not much, except in superficial ways. I am sure that Mel is right: the average homosexual reacts to NAMBLA with the same extreme distaste that I react to that bozo Phelps. The actions of both are beyond despicable, but neither speaks for the vast majority of those with whom they maintain some superficial connection. How’s that for an analogy?

Byron ~ Mar 22, 2006 at 9:59 am

Tim, I agree with you. The issue we’ve been discussing at length is about the sinfulness of homosexuality. Many pointed questions about Mel’s conclusions have been skirted and answers to straightforward questions go unanswered – like the one in your recent post. I quote:

“So once again, the question is: how is the decision reached that out of everything listed in Leviticus 20 which are still very much sins today, homosexuality is singled out as the one that is “void and null”?”

The answer you received referred to tattooing which isn’t mentioned in chapter 20, but rather chapter 19. Somehow Mel’s answer (IMHO) wrongly places that prohibition in the midst of the sexual sins listed in chapter 20. My question (which seemed to perturb her so much) was related to that line of questioning since I fail to see how she arrives to the conclusion that incest, adultery, and bestiality are sins, but homosexuality is somehow mysteriously singled out as not being a sexual sin. To me, that is not being honest in putting forth one’s argument because it is a mis-representation. Of course, I’ll get blasted for that because I am being “judgmental” for saying so. I well remember the trouncing I received when I suggested she wasn’t being honest in an earlier post.

So I get accused of putting words in her mouth when I ask a legitimate question. She soundly dismisses the sinfulness of homosexuality. Let’s see, Lev. 20:10 is a prohibition on adultery. Lev. 20:11 & 12 is a prohibition on sexual relations with a step-mother and daughter-in-law. Lev. 20:13 is a prohibition on homosexuality. Lev. 20:14 is a prohibition on taking one’s mother-in-law. Lev. 20:15-16 is a prohibition on besitality. Lev. 20:17 is a prohibition on incest. And on it goes. Listening to her arguments leaves my head spinning because there is no logical explanation why homosexuality is singled out and effectively made acceptable.

I’ve never said homosexuality is “the sin” or “extra” sinful, but I have quoted scripture that calls it an abomination. I’ve never intimated nor do I believe that sinful practices of heterosexuals are any less sinful than homosexuality. Fred Phelps is a flake, but he nevertheless identifies himself as a Christian although He doesn’t represent the majority of us who cringe at his antics. Mel, brought him into this discussion before I mentioned NAMBLA. Go figure, it’s OK for her to introduce Fred, but I am the big bad wolf for mentioning them. Hmmmmm.

The bottom line is this… Mel (like all of us) will one day stand before God to give an account of herself. She reminds me of some of the people that have sat under my leadership who give me the impression that they serve a god of their own making. Oh, they call him “Jesus” and for all practical purposes make a pretense of being a Christian. But I think there’s ample Scriptural evidence that they are, in fact, as lost as the pew they occupy. I’ve been told by those who presume upon the grace of God that their habitual sinful lifestyle is “forgiven” and that “Jesus understands”. They evidence no manifestation of the indwelling Spirit to bring conviction and easily dismiss me as a legalist. My experience with the Spirit of God is a keen awareness of conviction when I sin and even conviction about inappropriate thoughts.

Most generally, when a spirit such as I’ve described manifests in someone who talks Christian talk, but fails to walk the walk, they leave in a tiff and verbally crucify the shepherd who tried to help them. That’s neither here nor there, but IMHO Mel sounds strangely familiar in some of the things she has said on this post. She says, “I think homosexuality is a major theological problem, nothing more.” She also says, “And quoting Godless, lawless, and conviction scriptures might hold sway if I believed that they applied to homosexuality. Since I don’t, try another tack, please. Give me something new. I’m not being sarcastic, I’m asking just one person to say something I haven’t heard before. I was never really convicted by it.” She was never “convicted by it” (the scriptures) is a strong statement. It leads me to believe she sees God through a filter of her own making. I wish she would consider her own words if she won’t consider mine.

If homosexuality is a sin (and it clearly is) then living in the lifestyle is clearly sinful and presumes upon the grace of God. The Apostle Paul had something to say about that. “What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we that are dead to sin, live any longer therein? Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.” (Romans 6:1-2,& 6). Mel White and others like him are wolves in sheep’s clothing. They are false teachers and as such will be rewarded accordingly, Sadly, many are swayed by their false theology.

Almost three hundred posts is remarkable and as Byron has pointed out this thread has gone in two distinct directions. Actually, this discussion grew out of the original thread. Since, a good deal of the dialogue can be attributed to this discussion, I think it’s awesome that so many people have sounded off with their two cents. Many agree with me theologically, but that isn’t the issue. A good number have reached out to Mel and shared the truth with her. I think she’s an amazing person for staying engaged. Mel, setting our differences aside for a moment – I sincerely commend you for staying engaged for so long. I pray that you will consider the many admonitions from well meaning people who have reached out to you in this forum. You have admonished me to “question everything” about my beliefs, perhaps it’s time you asked yourself if you follow Mel White’s teaching because it’s what you want to hear rather than what you need to hear.

Pastor Sam ~ Mar 22, 2006 at 2:13 pm

Sandra, thanks! That’s my point exactly. Well said yourself.

Thank you as well, Byron. That’s a great analogy. I’d only heard about this Fred Phelps guy in passing, but after doing some searching, all I can say is wow, talk about twisted…

Tim ~ Mar 22, 2006 at 3:13 pm

Respectfully, Pastor Sam, and you know I agree with you on the basic points about the sinfulness of homosexuality, I think that Mel’s use of Fred Phelps wasn’t really a parallel to the way you used NAMBLA; she didn’t make any suggestion (at least not that I remember) that Freddie was one of us. I don’t think you’re a bad guy for bringing NAMBLA up; I do think that we aren’t really using our best arguments when we take the fringe element as representative of a group. My points are that Fred Phelps isn’t me, any more than NAMBLA is Mel; that most homosexuals, I feel certain, feel as Mel does about the NAMBLA lunatics, and Mel, I think, would grant that most of us feel the same way about Fred the Nutcase; and that there are plenty of more substantive arguments—ones you are using, I think!—that better deal with the issue.

Byron ~ Mar 22, 2006 at 4:33 pm

Pastor Sam,

I don’t mean to come off as singling you out for criticism, and by no means do I want to imply that you said certain things. That comment about a homosexual “stigma” was more a general comment, and your point about Fred Phelps being mentioned before NAMBLA is well taken (I’d forgotten about that… a few hundred posts is a lot to keep track of…)

My point was merely to keep the arguments biblical, which you have just done in your post, and to which I say “amen!”

I know that as a pastor, you bear the burden of protecting your flock, and you must deal with things that I as a layman don’t have to, so I absolutely appreciate your candor.

Mel, I just want to echo Sam’s commendation. You’re the reason I read and ultimately posted on this forum. You’ve put a very human face on what is usually merely an intellectual or political issue for most Christians. And what really touched me is your dedication to truth and faith.

Reading your responses forced me to search the scriptures out on my own to “question my beliefs,” the results of which I’ve posted to you. I hope now you can do the same and really let God’s word speak for itself, guided by the Spirit and free from any reinterpretations.

Like I posted earlier, everything starts and ends with God’s word. Personal experiences, cultural trends, science, history, and religion itself can only enhance, not redefine, our understanding of it.

Tim ~ Mar 22, 2006 at 4:51 pm

Byron, With all due respect, when Mel said,

“Pastor Sam, what you said, whether you meant to express such or not, reminded me forcibly of a very hate-filled sermon I heard once from a well-known I heard on a street corner right here in Phoenix from none other than Fred Phelps. The only thing missing was the “fags are today’s lepers” comments.”

I think she definitely did place Fred in our category (or me in his category). No, she didn’t use the words that he was “one of us”, but I felt that was her intent. However, I wholeheartedly agree that NAMBLA isn’t our strongest argument. I think a review of my posts will indicate that I have offered more Biblical arguments than otherwise.

Tim, Thank you for your comments. They are insightful and appreciated. For me, this dialogue is not a contest, but rather an opportunity to engage with Mel (in hopes of helping her) and stand up for truth. This is an awesome responsibility and holy calling. I can only say that I am the kind of person that respects people who are straight forward because that’s the way I am. I guess the saying what-you-see-is-what-you-get is a fair assessment.

Pastor Sam ~ Mar 22, 2006 at 5:48 pm

Maybe you’re right; let’s ask her! Hey, Mel, tell me you don’t think that evangelical Christians are in the same zip code as our dear friend Freddie Phelps!

Byron ~ Mar 22, 2006 at 9:51 pm

I honestly cannot believe that anyone with half a brain could be the least bit concerned about the sexual orientaion of any other human being.

Even more disturbing, I cannot understand how, in this day and age, you people still actually believe that someone turned water into wine, fish into loaves, raised the dead, healed the sick and then died for their sins.

It’s called mythology, people, and you should be embarrassed for buying into it, ashamed for disseminating it to your (and our) children, and punished for using it as a weapon to bash–or condescend to–others.

D Chase ~ Mar 23, 2006 at 5:52 pm

May the Lord bless you and keep you, DChase; may His face smile upon you; may He lift up His countenance upon you and give you peace.

Byron ~ Mar 23, 2006 at 6:11 pm

D,

I’ll happily tolerate dissenting points of view; I was called a tool of Satan awhile back. I won’t tolerate certain language, though; you’re certainly welcome to repost if you care to and would like to clean up your language.

Byron ~ Mar 23, 2006 at 9:54 pm

Byron, you sparked a wildfire here! And no, I don’t believe Fred the Freak is playing in the same ballpark as you. I brought him up because some people, whether they know it or not (my mother amongst them), flirt dangerously with sounding just like him in some ways.

There have been several instances where people identifying themselves as evangelical Christians have murdered gays and lesbians “in the name of God.” In nearly every case, their pastors denounced their actions as sinful. But the same pastors made clear, even though they denounced the crimes, that they stood by their teachings and in some cases came very close to rescinding said denouncement. Ronald Gay walked into a gay bar in Lymchburg and shot seven people, screaming that he was “a soldier of our Lord” and “Jesus doesn’t want you in His heaven.” Matthew and Tyler Williams murdered their gay neighbors, then told their mother from jail, “I had to follow God’s law rather than man’s law.” And a minister, a man I’d heard and at one time respected, once told a talk-show audience he faced alongside Mel White that he believed the death penalty should be reinstated according to Levitical law.

I did make a mistake; the tattooing law is in chapter 19. But I don’t see each chapter as its own respective entity. It is a single, living entity. I can promise you that the books of law were not broken down into chaper-verse bits when they were first put in writing by Moses. And I ask this: if we were to follow Levitical law the way you say, then there’s a lot of things we’re all going to hell for. Do you believe the death penalty should be reinstated for homosexuals? I don’t think you do. There are other sexual laws–and no, they’re not incest, adultery or bestiality–that are also outdated because of what medical studies have taught us. I will not mention them here because even though I’m an EMT and have no shame when it comes to description of anatomy, I’m quite sure the rest of you don’t want to hear it.

There are plenty of people in this life that I don’t like. There are plenty of people whose theology blows me away with it’s seemingly obvious lunacy. But I think everyone is going to get Home and meet someone there–maybe several someones–that they didn’t expect to see. Personally, the only regret I’ll have when I answer to God is that my selfishness made me more visible than Him. It took me six months to come to grips with my sexual orientation and six more to get over it. I spent a great deal of time questioning everything. That’s the only reason I tell other people to do that.

Mel ~ Mar 24, 2006 at 12:53 am

I rather doubt you “happily” tolerate my dissenting point of view, but, be that as it may, don’t you think that deleting comments containing language that you happen to find objectionable–but that I believe perfectly express my point(s)–is somehow contrary to tolerance?

In Nazi Germany, many books (including, it’s said, certain editions of the bible) were burned and/or banned as indecent and offensive. And there’s a perfectly good old-fashioned name for that practice: censorship (or, if you prefer, fascism).

BTW, do you also object to the word “piss”, as in: “piss” off, your logic is sorely lacking?

Incidentally, the word “piss” (and