Pensees: Don’t Boycott “The End of the Spear”

Thanks, Bob. It’s been an interesting issue that brings us from anger to amazement. I think (as usual) you’ve landed rightly.

Our heros (the five martyrs) deserve better, and so does the One they represented. However, what has happened has happened. Your “now what” response after all of this is wise and reasonable.

May many things change because of this, may the Bauders of the world be freed to influence, and may ETE make better choices in the future.

— Kevin

Bob,
For the most part, I think when we lead boycotts, oftentimes it comes across as leaders attempting to control others.

I keep having to answer the boycott question and once I tell people that I’m not boycotting it, they say, “Well others are.” I may be uninformed, but I haven’t heard of any organization leading a boycott against this film.

Thanks also for firing up the blogosphere. I needed the encouragement. So did Bauder.

Is there something going on with the water we drink? Why are so many “christians” wasting energy on ridiculing and discriminating gay people? Our energy must be focused on winning the war of poverty, child abuse, corruption in government, international relations, etc. Enough on the attacks, boycotts and narrow-mindedness. A sincere and humble christian does not look for fault, but ways to understand diversity and our commonalities. God is Lord. We are “all” created in His image. Ministers of the Word, using gay people as a “sermon”, must repent of their sins. Truth is knowledge. Lies are evil coming from fear and ignorance. First it was the Indians, next the Negros, the Mormons, the Jews and the Muslems, and the Gays. Shame on those who have not learned from History. Who will be next? Is this loving thy neighbor? I think not. Amen.

It is not the gay PERSON who is being discriminated against in the Christian community. It is the SIN in which he represents. The whole issue is not that Chad Allen happens to be gay, it is that he is proud of his sin as part of this Gay advocacy group. I am not saying that those who are not gay, are perfect. Certainly not. We all have issues in our lives, but the average Christian is not out their telling everyone what that sin happens to be because they are humbled by their own weakness(s).

I agree with Bob (pastor) in that a boycott is not necessary. Whether or not I choose to see the film is up to me and my personal conscience.

Hey Michael! A quick question. Did God discriminate against homosexuals when he burned Sodom and Gomorah? Was that an act of love? Or maybe judgement! Lets call homosexualality what it is, SIN. Gays are not a race of people being discriminated against. They are people engaged in SIN. Should we hate these people? NO! Love the sinner, but please HATE the SIN. Ministers have an obligation to preach the Word of God. The Bible is clear in Romans 1: 26-32, that homosexuality is SIN. I get so sick and tired of homosexuals parading around and having to tell the world they are gay and proud of it. When was the last time we saw a Hetrosexual Pride Day? If people,such as Chad Allen, choose to live a sinful lifesyle, that is between them and God. But, when they go about flaunting it and even saying that God approves of their behavior, Christians must stand for the truth.

Sincerely,

Jason

P.S. Mikey, there is no need to put “Amen” at the end of your own post, because obviously you are going to agree with what you just said.

Well, then, I guess I stand alone. I have admired Nate Saint since my days at Moody in the earlt 60s. I do not wish to have Nate portrayed by a Homosexual ACTIVIST (who is proud of it). I have read some of the books.

I am not one of those who NEVER goes to the theatres. I am not one of those who REGULARLY goes to the theatres. I attend a FEW movies each year upon recommendation of trusted friends. Am I SENSELESS or ILLOGICAL? I SIMPLY choose to “avoid” this one. I am not BOYCOTTING, just ignoring.

Ignoring is a good option that was obviously included in my article. I said “I think that if you watch movies, you should feel free to watch The End of the Spear if you so desire.” It’s clear to me that many Christians don’t want to see it so an organized boycott wouldn’t be necessary anyway.

I agree, Glenn. But you aren’t alone. Clearly, most Evangelicals are choosing to ignore the trivialization of godly people. This is pure speculation, but I wonder how many Evangelical dollars have sustained The Chronicles of Narnia as opposed to the virtual snuffing of The End of the Spear.

One of our church members went to see it and sat alone in a large theatre except for one other elderly woman. Seems like most are ignoring it.

Why are so many “christians” wasting energy on ridiculing and discriminating gay people?

I have seen this comment several times on different blogs. But again I ask, who has recommended or encouraged ridicule or discrimination towards gay people? I haven’t seen anyone from this side argue for that. (I have seen a lot of what seems to be hateful speech coming from the other side.)

Good article Bob. I appreciate it.

I believe the message, not the messenger, is the important thing. The people who wrote and produced “Spear” were Christians. I am sure that much prayer went into the making of this wonderful movie.

Those commenting on Michael’s post seem to be missing a larger point to criticise. He said:

“Our energy must be focused on winning the war of poverty, child abuse, corruption in government, international relations, etc.”

THIS is what Christ commanded us to do??? Is that the mission of Christianity? Does Michael actually understand Christianity at all?

Regards
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3

Don,
Great point! I was so fired up when I read Michael’s post, that I commented at will. That part of his post also bothered me. Those are all good things, but obviously not what Christ commanded us to do. Unfortunately, I do not think Michael understands Christianity, and I will make it a point to pray for him today.

Jason

I think the level of understanding by a lot of American Christians of realpolitik is pretty low. They are being outmanouevered by the secular world.

ETE is typical of a lot of ostensibly Christian businesses today: their site talks about “truth” instead of Jesus or Christianity. Moroever, their CEO is the owner and operator of a “growing chain of 21 Christian & Educational Supply stores.” This is all about money-changers in the temple.

ETE is obviously profit-driven instead of truth-driven. They convinced their secular colleagues in Hollywood that they could deliver the “Passion of the Christ” audience and cash-in. Part of their marketing plan is to create controversy through the casting of Chad Allen, bad actor and homosexual activist. Based on the theory that there’s no such thing as bad press, ETE deliberately cast Allen in an attempt to break out of the Christian youth group film-going market. They cynically created this controversy in order get exposure in the secular media.

Ultimately, I will not reward ETE for their unethical business methods by viewing this film for two reasons:

(1) They lied about the casting of Chad Allen; they claimed he was the best actor for the roles. This is patent nonsense. According to all the interviews I have viewed of Allen, he states they ‘head-hunted’ him and that he did not go to a casting call for the roles. Moreover, the alumnus of Dr Quinn is not exactly the leading actor of his generation.

(2) A Christian movie has a responsibility to (at least in leading roles) present people whose personal lives are in harmony with the Gospel. Otherwise the world will see us as hypocrites. The fact that Jim Caviezel had some sort of authentic spiritual reaction to his own role was part of the power of the Passion. If ETE had cast homosexual activist Chad Allen as Christ would we still be ok with this?

Bottom line: ETE has given media exposure to Chad Allen who is using his interviews to promote a homosexual agenda. He has been pushing his new line about “reconciliation” between the homosexual community and Christians. He has also tried to position himself as a homosexual who is at peace with God, etc. ETE has helped the homosexual agenda win another battle in the culture war.

ETE has sold their souls just for some media exposure. Is this their 30 pieces of silver?

If ETE truly wished to promote the values of Christianity, why wasn’t the message that these missionaries died for more prominent in the movie?
I am a Christian who does go to movies. We can protest and “holler” all we like, but in Hollywood, dollars speak louder than words.

I think that their decision to report Kevin Bauder to the FBI was not only childish, but smacks of tawdry promotionalism. (Nothing like a NYT story to draw attention to your movie.)

I haven’t seen anything yet that says the men you name in your post decided to report Kevin Bauder. Their Communications guy reported Bauder - and it’s not clear whether the other ETE people knew about that before he did it. I think he should not have talked to the NYT on it - but I also wonder exactly what was reported to the FBI and how it was worded.

I just see more speculation here.

The comment above by Jared is another example. Good grief - Part of their marketing plan is to create controversy through the casting of Chad Allen, bad actor and homosexual activist. Based on the theory that there’s no such thing as bad press, ETE deliberately cast Allen in an attempt to break out of the Christian youth group film-going market. They cynically created this controversy in order get exposure in the secular media.

Look that’s just unrighteous - to say those things when they have clearly been shown not to be true. Is that Ok? I mean is it ok to slander now?

As for the post - well I think a lot of people can make up their own minds on whether or not to see the movie. Personally I don’t need permission from a blog. But with the sort of slander in the comment above it’s obvious that some people may be deterred on the basis of false accusation.

This is just me - but I think a pastor with integrity would address that issue. Just shows how false accusations aren’t “peripheral”.

Having re-read that I can see that it comes across as pointed - sorry. Many pastors are blogging on this and it’s disappointing to see speculation. I think anyone with integrity would adddress the slander issue - which is not peripheral but central to how some people percieve this and respond (obviously).

I think the comment making false accusations was unrighteous - I can’t comment on the person. (I think I should make that clarification given the climate on some blogs on this issue).

Good afternoon Bob. Continual thanks for the insight. The entire conversation regarding “The End of the Spear” has kept my interest primarily because I have increasngly noticed the need for voices of discernment in the arts. Postmodernism, re- and deconstructionist thought, and the leveling of ideas have grown rather naturally in the arts. Whether the outcome is a result of life imitating art or art imitating life it is not entirely clear. But THESE, the portrayal of the gospel, the necessity of the word, the ineffability of art, are discussions which desperately need to be had. I appreciate Bob that you are able to discern truth from error and not lose your head. That these men can fall into such error and “…still [be] sincere about casting Christianity in a positive light” is true. Yes, they need to be corrected. Yes they are wrong. But they are working in the midst of unchallenged philosophy and a rationale which has long festered in the arts. This does not excuse them. Just as ignorance is not an excuse for us. Such knowledge should cause us some degree of patience, the assumption that they are not willfully doing wrong, and the grace to avoid foolish words [as some of your readers have been want to express]. I have continued to have conversations with artists and postmodern evangelicals alike, especially in my travels to Europe. Granted there are a few who are persistent in their minds and refuse to consider the clear revelation of God, but many have just never been challenged to think differently. The vast majority have listened, considered and after some time reconsidered their thinking. Are they wrong? Yes. But challenging motivations is dangerous grounds. Additionally, saying that “…in Hollywood dollars speak louder than words” undermines the very essence of the original post. The Word is power. And it is precisely because that Word and words have not been spoken boldly enough or heard or listened to that Hollywood is where it is today. Saying dollars are going to effect change only betrays that we don’t understand what the desired effect is. Is it not for these producers to have a change of mind? Then money or the lack there of will not be convincing. Sound words may. Jared, I hesitate to respond to your words. Merely hesitate. Only as an example you mention that, “ETE is obviously profit-driven instead of truth-driven.” First of all, I hope they are “driven” somewhat by profit. Only a fool would run a business and not be driven by profits. [See practically all Christ’s discussions about money and stewardship] If you are accusing them of being “solely driven” then that is another matter entirely. And I would have to argue that this point is not “obvious.” The truth is, I assume with the facts at hand, that they are sincerely doing what is best here. It is wrong, yes, but nevertheless it’s driven out of a popular art philosophy perpetuated by uncritical, but sincere Christians who ARE trying to uplift Christ. I know that is hard to understand. But the question of how to communicate Christ in the arts has always been a difficult one and one not often helped by many churches some of whom are altogether too quick to condemn motive rather than to inform minds. Again the difficulty of this task excuses no one. There is a need for truth and discernment in the arts and it needs to be objected to and confronted. As one with a small voice trying to effect some of that change I find the task increasingly difficult in the face of uninformed protest. Though the alliteration causes a grin, the charge that they “cynically created this controversy” is more often spouted by conspiracy theorists than Christians.

Also, Jared, for the record I believe the world sees us as hypocrites because to some degree or other we have been and are hypocrites, not because of movies. If you want to know how upset I am about the movie’s detracting from the gospel, then ask for a letter I sent out this morning. It DOES upset me. But this situation has to be more than just protesting. And I think it has been. I think good men have spoken to the people involved and used sound words to persuade. Such actions will also confirm the need for more Jim Eliots who take personal responsibility and don’t just decry foul in some culture war. That will do more than picket lines and dollars anyday of the week.