The reactions that I have received from my article were almost inline with what I had expected. The one unexpected response came from, ironically, a filmmaker. I was pleased to see that, even though he disagreed, he chose to accept a challenge and not to scoff. The overall reaction has been not to stop and think but to defensively reject.
To stop and think would mean we might have to consider giving up something we truly adore. We have so much time and money invested into theater, movies and television that we view calling into question the industry as a personal attack and the responses have displayed this reaction. This is sad, but I cannot be too discomforted because though I would like to think better, I know that I am susceptible to this type of misplaced response in other ways.
So I cast no stones; I just ask people to question and think for themselves. But that's like asking a sheep to not be a sheep.
For those interested in seeking truth wherever it may be found:
This is Tozer's essay that I quoted in the article : "The Menace of the Religious Movie"
I also came across a blog by Ryan Martin that researched some opinions on acting and theater from the early Church. I would like to add that I attach this blog merely for the research he did and I am not advocating his opinion and I haven't read his entire blog to ensure no theological differences.
I especially found this excerpt interesting in Augustine's Confessions. Read Chapter II.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Shannon,
I must say, your words are very aggressive and argumentative. Just because one disagrees with you does not mean they haven't thought through the issue and just choose to scoff. Also, we who disagree with your viewpoint are all mindless sheep? This is extremely harsh.
I choose to argue the issue of acting with you in person. My problem with your post(s) has very little to do whether or not acting is a sinful activity. My problem is with your logic.
This is nothing but Pharisaic madness. Acting is not in Scripture so we should avoid it (Tozer)? There are plenty of other things not spoken of in Scripture.... ice cream, automobiles, computers, mystery novels, pizza, photographs, toilet paper, rock music, deodarant, pianos, masking tape, tennis shoes, iPods, lawnmowers, fishing with a rod and reel, jumping rope, playing Legos, drinking beer, roller blading, etc, etc, etc. Are we really going to begin banning all things not in Scripture?
This line of reasoining is so preposterous. It ignores the very heart of the Gospel. It ignores grace and redemption and creativity. The path you are taking leads to strife and legalism and bondage. Jesus did not come to make us live out the letter of the law. He came to free us.
Surprised and disappointed,
Chris
Chris,
My comments were not directed at anyone just the response of emotion and defensiveness and lack of reason I have received in the comments on the website.
I think it not being in Scripture simply means we need to honestly evaluate and this was my limited attempt to do that. All things are lawful but not all are profitable.
As far as the sheep comment, I stick to that, but I do not exclude myself.
I think you may have misread my comment as I stated that I was pleased by the response of the filmmaker who indeed did disagree with me.
Shannon I have to say I am with Chris on this one. Your line of thinking leads down a slippery slope. I think one will lead a pretty difficult life trying constantly figure out was is lawful but not profitable. I think this was meant more as a "Beware of Dog" sign rather than a puzzle we are supposed to carry around with us and live by. Who can do that. The Holy Spirit makes it pretty clear when I get involved with things that I shouldn't be. They are not always sinful things, but more things just for me. Perhaps this may be something for you, but I do not think there is any president for you views to be placed on us all, while Tozer, Augustine, and the early Church fathers were all terrific writers they were just men with some great views on life and theology and some whacked out views too. So just because so and so said it many years ago doesn't mean much for me. If the whole of Christian faith were saying these things that would be another matter.
If you truly believe that "to stop and think would mean we might have to consider giving up something we truly adore", does that mean you are willing to quit your job? I couldn't help but think that your job is based on the very things you are speaking against.
On the other hand, I am glad you work there, I just watched "Lady in the Water" straight from my mailbox today and it was perhaps the most uplifting and spiritual event for me in a long while (church included), film has a way of speaking to the soul that no other medium can (for me anyway). I am a very visual person, so when I see actors feel things, I feel them too.
I was also curious, what do you believe about fiction in general. An author basically makes up a lie to to entertain to speak a message out, in my opinion it is not much different from acting. Just curious. I thought it might matter, because if you are going to go all the way with this line of reasoning you are going to have a tough time explaining parts of the Bible itself (i.e. the parables, possibly Job, and any other fictional narratives used that my Bible college taught me but didn't quite stick.) I am interested in knowing what you think about that.
I swear when I typed that i typed "precedent" not "president", please forgive my poor grammar and spelling.
Matt,
I've been surprised how little anyone has asked me about the company I work for in all of this. When I wrote this article I felt that my job gave me a little more license to write about the subject matter since I am critiquing something I am clearly profiting from, instead of just questioning something from afar.
I can't agree with your 'whole of Christian faith' argument. I don't know exactly how to define the 'whole', but from what I see is the popular whole is a lazy, apathetic church that's more interested in the world than Christ. Too often I am content to be a part of that, so I struggle against it when I become aware.
I don't think because Tozer, Augustine and Pascal (not aforementioned) agree on this makes it fact that is equivalent to the Bible. But these men clearly (from their writings and musings) have a better understanding of the things of God than I do, so I do not discount their cautions without weighing it carefully. So it does mean something for me.
As far as feeling things in a movie, I think it's false emotion because it's felt towards something unreal. All my life, I've been an emotional movie-goer and often cry during touching movie scenes between lovers and friends, while most of that life I was verbally abusive to my girlfriends and never shed a tear over true deaths occurring in the reality around me. In my opinion, there is something seriously wrong with that, because of this I don't give much credence to false emotions in a movie setting.
I think that fiction is different from acting. In one of the comments on the article I discussed what constitues deception. I don't think a story does, but I think acting does fit that description, albeit temporarily. (This could be why we see Jesus consistently referring to the Pharisees as stage actors) The complete discussion is too long for my blog comment that is already too long.
Maybe I'll have to compile my comments between the article and my blog into their own distinct blog since I have so many...
To marry someone is to become one with. Buttons would snapoff at his strong groping, and Id be required for immediate service.
stories erotic taboo
interacial bdsm stories
bestiality stories with pictures
free teen porn stories
free adult stories and pics
To marry someone is to become one with. Buttons would snapoff at his strong groping, and Id be required for immediate service.
Post a Comment