jesus camp
After awhile of waiting I finally got a chance to see Jesus Camp. It is a documentary about Pentecostal Christians and how they raise their kids. With no narration (other than sound bytes from current events, radio preachers, etc) it is quite an interesting look at the lives of three kids and their Children's Pastor.
While most of what makes Jesus Camp scary to many is the charismatic expressions of faith (tongues, prophecy, & spiritual warfare), the underlying question is how militant and indoctrinated are these kids and their leaders/parents?
The directors certainly care for their characters, and seem to lead the viewer to believe that they are to be pitied because of their upbringing.
I'm not sure what I think about these people. They clearly are devoted to their beliefs, and reflect the urgency of people who believe the truth will clear others from a very intense hell.
I see the dangers of indoctrination.
I know the compelling message of the Scriptures.
I acknowledge that the spiritual realm is real, and foreign to most Americans.
I believe their use of the "miraculous" spiritual gifts reflects a lack of order that would turn away unbelievers (which Paul is against in 1 Corinthians).
I was haunted by the scenes with Ted Haggard since the film was released prior to his scandal.
I found myself strangely relating to these kids and their leaders. Though I do not share their rhetoric, or commitment to a Christian State . . . we fundamentally (ha ha) agree on the truth and the importance of partnering with God to reveal it to others.
A movie I will continue to wrestle with and reflect upon as it relates to raising my kids and understanding my religious upbringing.
5 comments:
I've been thinking about how Christians relate to culture recently. I haven't seen Jesus Camp, but it's pretty easy to dismiss those types of evangelism practices (or perhaps just the wording of it) as ineffective. On the other hand, the idea that Christians should try to bless their communities seems popular now, and I find myself attracted to that.
But there are lots of parts in the Bible where Christians suffer for teaching. The message of the latter group sounds almost like, "If we just are nice and godly enough, everyone will want to be like us." If we're the nicest people on earth and people have no reason to hate us, will God take care of it and make sure we're suffering? Or is suffering a natural consequence of preaching the gospel? Is one type of evangelism better in this culture where we have freedom of religion and speech?
Just some thoughts from someone who has pitifully little evangelism and suffering in his life.
...I often find that in AMERICAN society when you have groups of Christians whining about being "persecuted" it has more to do with the reaction they get for being asinine and obnoxious than it does with a malicious culture that hates the concept of God.
Okay, I buy that there are Christians who "whine" about persecution that is because of their "presentation" versus the content of the gospel. However, I don't think that you can say the gospel is popular in American Society or Culture. In fact, at least in the Bay Area, there aren't many people I run into that are open or understanding of following Jesus (though this stance has more political connections than it does necessarily to knowledge or understanding of the gospel).
Define "persecution".
Is there a difference between being persecuted and others being in disagreement or not being "open" to your faith?
According to the World Fact Book by the CIA, (https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/us.html#People)
52% of Americans claim to be Protestant, and 24% claim to be Roman Catholic...that makes over 3/4 of Americans "open" to the gospel on one level or another...
The Bay Area is a highly educated arena of people. More books are sold here than anywhere else in the United States. It makes sense to me that people here, noting all the political mumbo jumbo affiliated with the evangelical movement, would be more than slightly turned off (as you said).
I know that the good book says that we'll be persecuted for teaching etc., but it really seems like we're only suffering for being stupid...
If all the "persecution" connected with politics were to be thrown out of the picture, what kind of suffering would be left?
sorry for my longness :)
Absolutely, there is a difference between disagreement and persecution!
Dictionary.com defines persecuted as: 1. to pursue with harassing or oppressive treatment, esp. because of religion, race, or beliefs; harass persistently. 2. to annoy or trouble persistently.
I was not intending to say that we are persecuted (though I think in some ways we are, and since formal persecution is almost always political it is hard to separate them). I was merely trying to redefine how I understood what you were saying about "whining" about persecution. This is where I might agree with you that Christians tend to suffer in the USA more because of our presentation (we are known for what we are against) than our content (what we are for).
However, I would draw a distinct difference between whether our position is "stupid" versus our presentation being "insensitive" or "unclear."
It is interesting that the "open" people of the Bay Area would be so "closed" to the message of the gospel when they should be able to differeniate (assuming they read and are critical thinkers) between the gospel of the Bible and the agenda of "Evangelical" politics. Would these open minded people walk right into the gospel if there was no politics involved? (which is actually a bad question in some ways, because politics IS involved)
I would also wonder, because I know my own heart that struggles, whether or not the 76% of Americans who answer to "Christian" really understand and embrace the difference between the gospel and "Evangelical" politics?
Post a Comment