|
|
| |
 - Endorsed - Indifferent - Contested
|
| |
| The Nashville Statement
|
| |
|
|
| |
Name:Daniel
Home: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
About Me: I used to believe that evolution was reasonable, that homosexuality was genetic, and that people became Christians because they couldn't deal with the 'reality' that this life was all there was. I used to believe, that if there was a heaven - I could get there by being good - and I used to think I was more or less a good person. I was wrong on all counts. One day I finally had my eyes opened and I saw that I was not going to go to heaven, but that I was certainly going to suffer the wrath of God for all my sin. I saw myself as a treasonous rebel at heart - I hated God for creating me just to send me to Hell - and I was wretched beyond my own comprehension. Into this spiritual vacuum Jesus Christ came and he opened my understanding - delivering me from God's wrath into God's grace. I was "saved" as an adult, and now my life is hid in Christ. I am by no means sinless, but by God's grace I am a repenting believer - a born again Christian.
My complete profile...
|
| |
Daniel's posts are almost always pastoral and God centered. I appreciate and am challenged by them frequently. He has a great sense of humor as well.
- Marc Heinrich
His posts are either funny or challenging. He is very friendly and nice.
- Rose Cole
[He has] good posts, both the serious like this one, and the humorous like yesterday. [He is] the reason that I have restrained myself from making Canadian jokes in my posts.
- C-Train
This post contains nothing that is of any use to me. What were you thinking? Anyway, it's probably the best I've read all day.
- David Kjos
Daniel, nicely done and much more original than Frank the Turk.
- Jonathan Moorhead
There are some people who are smart, deep, or funny. There are not very many people that are all 3. Daniel is one of those people. His opinion, insight and humor have kept me coming back to his blog since I first visited earlier this year.
- Carla Rolfe
|
| |
|
email
|
|
| Artistic Integrity? |
 Friends of ours subscribe to a movie rental service that caters particularly to Christians, and other people of moral persuasion. It does so by renting DVDs that have been modified to remove all overtly offensive content from the movie. Nudity, violence, and language are all "scrubbed" from the DVD, and a "non offensive" product is then rented to the subscriber.
I don't have to tell you the disappointment of going to see a movie that looked to be harmless - only to find that someone has thrown in superfluous blasphemy, coarse language, nudity, or what have you. I say superfluous because these elements add absolutely nothing to the story, and you leave the theatre in the middle of the movie because what looked to be harmless entertainment, somewhere along the way became an offense to Christ within you.
The notion of renting a movie that has this sort of superfluous content edited out is quite attractive to the movie buff who doesn't wish to overtly offend the Spirit of Christ within.
The other day, Judge Richard P. Matsch's decided that Cleanflix, a service selling versions of popular movies edited to remove violence, nudity and other elements, was in violation of U.S. copyright law for selling these edited versions.
Now, as you can expect, Hollywood was all on about "artistic integrity" and "censorship." How dare these people take the "art" of Hollywood, and censor it! (Apparently they have no problem doing just that to run the show on television if it means a few more buck$ later on down the road - but hey, let's not go there!).
If you have been living under a rock most of your life, you may not have noticed that "corporate morality" is overwhelmingly being programmed into citizens of first world countries through "entertainment" - music, television, movies/theatre, and even the various internet medias all have this in common - they collectively, progressively attack and bring to an open shame - objective morality. Don't believe it? When I was a child homosexuality was a perversion - now it is a lifestyle. Why? Because for the past 30 years we have been inundated with messages from every media that have villainized the view that homosexuality is a perversion - and simultaneously (and successfully) promoted the idea that homosexuality is natural, common, and even healthy. That is a -radical- moral change (for the worse) that has happened in only one generation.
What would have been considered too risque for lingerie forty years ago - we now find in the "twelve year old girl" rack at Target - in fact, it is becoming increasingly difficult to buy clothes that leave any room for modesty.
Not that I am going to go on a tirade about how far and fast our culture has fallen - we all have eyes to see, and we all see it. If you are in the world and love the things of the world you will find nothing wrong with it - and really, how could you?
One might expect therefore, that I would be opposed to Judge Matsch's decision - but I am not.
On one level I can appreciate those who rise up against this decision - who say, "We have a right to be entertained without being morally raped!" - they are saying that they believe that entertainment shouldn't have to be 'polluted' - and that if someone wants to offer a moral alternative - they should be free to do so.
But I think that is a confused and essentially selfish position.
You see, on the one hand, they don't want to be morally manipulated by offensive content. But on the other hand they are willing to overlook how they are financially supporting the makers of the offensive media for the sake of their being "entertained." That is, they are concerned about being entertained more than they are concerned that they are supporting an industry that is hell bent on moral decay and secularism.
I therefore applaud the judges decision because it makes it difficult for people to put blinders on their eyes as they are actively support moral decay. Frankly, I think God's hand is in it.
I am not insisting that everyone who rents or has seen a "scrubbed" movies is "evil" - or desires to support the industry that made the movie so foul that it had to be "scrubbed" - many who watch such movies probably haven't given it much thought - really - surely doing the good is better than doing the worst - even if it comes at the expense of the best. I do believe however, that some simply stiffen their necks - that is, they know/suspect they are supporting an industry that is destroying the moral fabric of their culture - but they are willing to overlook that in order to see that "cool" movie with all the great effects because it looked like it was going to be entertaining - and hey, apparently my being "entertained" is so important I am justified in a little compromise. |
posted by Daniel @
11:55 AM
 
|
|
| 9 Comments: |
-
Two thumbs up, a five star performance! :)
I agree with you 100% on this assessment Daniel. Christians have no business financing the immorality of Hollywood, or Motown for that matter. I guess Nashville would probably fit in there too.
-
What about so called "Christian Artists" who are on a secular label?
-
Oh, you mean the ones that are there to "witness" with their lives to other artists?
I think the key is, are we compromising an area for advancement, money, fame, or just plain old entertainment. We could go ahead and label wrong choices but the issue must be met at the heart level I feel.
I understand that most of the CCM movement is now under secular ownership. I fear there is much ill gotten gain amongst these harlequins who peddle the word of God for profit.
Ouch, that was very judgemental.
-
There is no way around it all, in a sense, you will be supporting the world system in some way...
That being said, just because a fire is started doesn't mean you should let it spread, and so to make determined decisions about what not to watch, support, etc., is a good practice...
Everyone compromises in some way, whether they realize it or admit it or not, but that doesn't mean we don't endeavor to "get better at it", (re-insert "fire analogy here)...
EVEN SO...
EVEN SO...
EVEN SO...
-
JD - that is true.
There is a lady I know who is like the third-world country child labor watchdog. She doesn't shop here because they sell a product that was made in China where children have work 14 days for pennies a day, and blah blah blah. It seems she is aware of all these places where you shouldn't go and spend your money because doing so is supporting aparthied, child labor, slave labor, - the list goes on and on. I am surprized that she is able to shop anywhere frankly.
Unless we go live on a colony and grow our own food, and make our own clothes, tools, and everything, we are going to have to accept that part of being a consumer in a capitalistic society is acknowledging that no matter where we spend our money we will be offering financial support to something we don't agree with.
We can argue that at least for the necessities of life - that such "support" is unavoidable.
Can we make that same argument for entertainment? I don't think so. You are correct JD - there is room for improvment in all of us - and we mustn't imagine that what one man takes twenty years to learn, he can insist another pick up in the twenty minutes it takes him to describe it. There has to be some room for maturity as well.
With regards to the entertainment industry however, I find I cannot raise my voice and cry foul when a worldly industry that is bent on destroying the last remnant of our national morality protects its agenda and in so doing forces those who have been ignoring that agenda to deal with it.
I hear you though - even so.
-
Daniel,
Great post.
I believe the sad fact is that agenda based manipulation is so successful because of an appalling lack of discernment on the part of people that are really too concerned with their own lives to notice or care. The late Francis Schaeffer had some remarkable thoughts and predictions on the causes and where this would all lead.
Jazzycat
-
I thought this would get more traffic.
Humph?
-
-
Wow! I hadn't thought of it quite that way. I haven't ever even seen a "scrubbed" movie, but I had thought they might be a good idea. But you've given me something more to consider.
We don't even watch tv, and have only been to the theater maybe 5 times in 10 years, so entertainment isn't a huge issue with us. Still, lots to think about...
Thanks for the post.
|
| |
| << Home |
| |
|
|
|
|
Two thumbs up, a five star performance! :)
I agree with you 100% on this assessment Daniel. Christians have no business financing the immorality of Hollywood, or Motown for that matter. I guess Nashville would probably fit in there too.