Christian news - breaking headlines from around the United States and the world. Trending hot topics in Christianity.

Is It Easier for Christians in America to Love Their Enemies?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Is It Easier for Christians in America to Love Their Enemies?

    We've put so much faith and trust in our freedom of religion that when it starts to be squeezed a little bit, we freak out.



    More...

  • #2
    Squeezed a little bit? Christianity in America is practically illegal. Christianity is banned from the schools and workplace (separation of church and state, hostile work environment, respectively). Christianity isn't tolerated on TV or the movies (where it's only mocked). If you're married, especially parents, you'll pay large tax penalties. If you use your own resources to promote moral behavior around you, even on your own property used for commercial purposes, that's a crime called discrimination. The government confiscates our money to promote everything contrary to Christianity, even down to teaching your children to be against our faith.

    If you don't feel your faith is illegal, it's only because you've bought into the lie that you're suppose to be under a boot. Like, those who defend a government bus service banning advertisement for a service that helps pregnant women, because that service doesn't provide abortion referrals, and stupidly buying the claim that the government is being "fair" in oppressing our speech. In California, there's now a law that requires all organizations that serve pregnant woman to provide abortion referrals, still fair?

    Of course, other so-called Christians don't feel like their faith isn't illegal because their faith isn't really Christian.




    Comment>

    • #3
      Originally posted by Cornelius View Post
      Christianity isn't tolerated on TV or the movies (where it's only mocked).
      That isn't always true. Have you heard about the new movie called Risen? Here is a review:

      Risen Movie Upholds Scripture | Answers in Genesis

      I believe freedom for Christians in America is growing less but we don't suffer nearly as much as people in some other countries. This site is a good place to find out what Christians in some other countries have to endure:

      Serving Persecuted Christians Worldwide Open Doors USA
      Clyde Herrin's Blog
      Comment>

      • #4
        Originally posted by theophilus View Post
        That isn't always true. Have you heard about the new movie called Risen? Here is a review:

        Risen Movie Upholds Scripture | Answers in Genesis

        An exception that proves the rule? But is it really?

        There's a trickle of garbage Christian movies designed to collect some dollars from Christians. It is as the AIG review rightly says, "Conservative Christians have grown wary of Hollywood portrayals of biblical people and events, and rightly so. Although, he says he loved Risen, I don’t think I can be so approving.

        I haven’t seen then movie, but I’m unimpressed by the details I’ve heard. It’s very clear that the intent of this movie is to perpetuate an unbiblical imitation of Christianity which many Americans think is Christianity.

        From the AIG review:

        "Since Jesus (called “Yeshua” in the film)… The Bible never calls Jesus Yeshua. That's a favorite smear of Jesus' by those who...

        "Clavius (Joseph Fiennes) and Lucius (Tom Felton) execute orders from Pontius Pilate…" I can tell that this movie promotes one of today’s very popular blatant lies, that Pilate wanted Jesus dead. This is a ploy to whitewash Jews, in the pursuit of promoting Dispensationalist theology.

        "The depiction of Mary Magdalene was a little disappointing, since the filmmakers followed the traditional idea that she was a former prostitute…. I thought the film played up this aspect a little too much." This sounds like another popular misrepresentation of Christianity, the Jesus who judges according to the Liberal's standards of Political Correctness (the sexually immoral get a pass, an American who wants border control gets judged).

        There’s not one thing in the whole review that suggests that the movie took a conservative or biblical position on anything controversial. Other than not ending with the discovery of Jesus’ dead body.
        Comment>

        • #5
          Originally posted by theophilus View Post
          That isn't always true. Have you heard about the new movie called Risen? Here is a review:

          Risen Movie Upholds Scripture | Answers in Genesis

          I believe freedom for Christians in America is growing less but we don't suffer nearly as much as people in some other countries. This site is a good place to find out what Christians in some other countries have to endure:

          Serving Persecuted Christians Worldwide Open Doors USA
          Seen the movie Risen and loved it. It was a unique idea that I haven't seen before in the Christian genre. My initial theory was right, they personified the critics arguments, they were fleshed and acted in and around Clauvis - a fictional character walking through Scripture as relevant passages unfolded. They put the critic right there in the pages, and kept trying to make you feel what others at that time must of experienced. Clauvis was a true skeptic, but no more than someone like Thomas, James, and Saul. They covered two arguments, the swoon theory and the stolen body theory, not to mention they attacked the credibility of certain other biblical characters, nothing more that happens in the mind of a skeptic or from an investigator today. I wouldn't mind seeing more movies like this where a parable is acted out or a character is walked through relevant passages as arguments are acted out and answered. I generally do not care for Christian movies, because of the repetitive nature of said movies, but this one was an exception. The beginning was awesome, it began with the assassination of Barabbas, something I often wondered, why would the Romans allow a terrorist to walk away free?

          Originally posted by Cornelius View Post
          "The depiction of Mary Magdalene was a little disappointing, since the filmmakers followed the traditional idea that she was a former prostitute…. I thought the film played up this aspect a little too much." This sounds like another popular misrepresentation of Christianity, the Jesus who judges according to the Liberal's standards of Political Correctness (the sexually immoral get a pass, an American who wants border control gets judged).
          I do not believe they portrayed Mary Magdalene as a presently active prostitute, but one with a bad reputation. I imagine that would be the case and important because she was among the first to see the Risen Jesus. Her reputation isn't just going to disappear in an area where every man and Roman soldier knew of her. Her credibility was brought front and center. It's difficult to talk about movies that others haven't seen in order to not spoil it. I will say if you want word for word dialogue and traditional stories, you probably should avoid this movie. If you were a critic and wouldn't mind seeing your thoughts fleshed out and answered then this is worthwhile seeing.

          God bless,
          William
          Comment>

          • #6
            Originally posted by William View Post

            Seen the movie Risen and loved it.
            Christian reviewers also say they loved it. I haven't seen it, and own't see it for a while. From the trailer, it looks good from a secular perspective (e.g. witty, not zero-budget, a novel story). Maybe it works well as an apologetic, too. But, theologically, I see that it is corrupt.

            Christ Jesus was not called Messiah Yeshua. Perverting what Jesus was called is tribute to the whom Dispies say are the Chosen People (referred to as the Synagogue of Satan, by Jesus). We've been talking about Jesus and the woman at the well, John 4:25 The woman saith unto him, I know that Messias cometh, which is called Christ: when he is come, he will tell us all things. Called "Christ" not Messias (let alone Messiah). The NT was written in Greek. Jesus spoke Greek, almost exclusively. The NT is not a tribute to Judaism. Christianity isn't Judaic bone thrown over the fence for gentiles.

            And, tell me, does Risen not blame the Romans for the crucifixion. It might be entertaining watching a Roman search for Jesus. But, Pilate didn't want to kill Jesus and I doubt the Romans would have gone to any effort to find Jesus. Pilate only sealed and guarded the tomb at the request of the Jews. He wouldn't have done it otherwise. It would have been more realistic to have a Jewish agent leading the search for Jesus to prove Jesus was dead. What was Clauvis motivation to search for someone he wouldn't have cared one way or another about?

            The Bible doesn't say Magdalene was a prostitute. It's one thing to make assumptions about a person's background, but it's another thing to devote a lot of attention to something that is only an assumption. What do you mean they didn't portray her has a presently active prostitute? Do you mean they didn't show her to be repentful of an immoral pursuit? Or, is the message that she was a prostitute with a bad reputation because the Romans were so judgy?
            Comment>

            • #7
              Originally posted by Cornelius View Post
              And, tell me, does Risen not blame the Romans for the crucifixion. It might be entertaining watching a Roman search for Jesus. But, Pilate didn't want to kill Jesus and I doubt the Romans would have gone to any effort to find Jesus. Pilate only sealed and guarded the tomb at the request of the Jews. He wouldn't have done it otherwise. It would have been more realistic to have a Jewish agent leading the search for Jesus to prove Jesus was dead. What was Clauvis motivation to search for someone he wouldn't have cared one way or another about?

              The Bible doesn't say Magdalene was a prostitute. It's one thing to make assumptions about a person's background, but it's another thing to devote a lot of attention to something that is only an assumption. What do you mean they didn't portray her has a presently active prostitute? Do you mean they didn't show her to be repentful of an immoral pursuit? Or, is the message that she was a prostitute with a bad reputation because the Romans were so judgy?
              You really should reserve your judgments before knowing first hand, Cornelius. The questions you ask will spoil the movie for anyone, so be it. The movie never took a Dispensationalism bend, it has absolutely nothing to do with this topic. Sometimes you come across as being totally anti-Semitic Cornelius. I realize you really really hate dispensationalism, but sometimes you're coming across as someone that just hates Jews.

              I hope to see a sequel to this movie that shifts more into Acts. That would be awesome. However, you probably wouldn't be pleased, because the type of movie this is, it probably would address a dispensationalism perspective because everything has to be weighed in the balance of Scripture during an investigation. That is, every possibility must be explored. As to your questions... .

              Warning Spoiler:

              Spoiler Alert!
              The movie Risen takes place after the crucifixion. It actually begins with a manhunt for Barabbas. By time the Roman soldiers under the command of Clauvis return Jesus is already found dead and they are ordered to take Him down from the cross. The Sanhedrin approached the Romans to ensure the body of Jesus would not be stolen to lay truth to the claim that Jesus would rise. After the fact they approached Rome again to find the body to lay waste to the claim. The manhunt and investigation was under way and at full speed against the clock, because of decomposition and a visit by the Roman Emperor. The resurrection story was spreading like wildfire, and would destabilize the area which wouldn't be to Rome or the Sanhedrin's benefit. Each with their own motive as plotted out in the movie.

              Regarding Mary, she was brought into question, described by an informant as a woman of the night or some other description, which led Clauvis to ask whether any soldier knew her. Many Roman soldiers raised their hand when asked who could identify the woman Mary Magdalene. They then sent out to bring her in for questioning. The movie then shifts after they find Mary, interrogate her, and let her go, they then follow her into the upper room, and they find the other disciples, just as Thomas walks in. Jesus Christ is there, yet Clauvis cannot speak, he cannot say anything while in shock, but sinks down against the wall and just watches and listens. At this point it really is unclear whether Clauvis is an actual character alive in the movie or a ghost being projected by a reader outside the Bible. This movie really followed an investigation type process into the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Clauvis was tasked with putting together the mystery after the fact, yet the disciples minus one were at this time alive for questioning which brings another point front in center. The movie took great liberty with some other theories, whether the Roman soldiers were drunk, whether they abandoned their post, whether they fabricated a story in order to avoid persecution, whether they were groomed by the Sanhedrin to say what was said in the movie as a cover up.... Mary Magdalene's testimony was important to this point, not only for the resurrection, but for the lives of the soldiers guarding the tomb that abandoned their post who were to be charged with failing to guard it.

              I think a better twist into this movie would of been possible if they revealed at the end that Clauvis never existed. They should have had him as a regular man closing the covers of the Bible after imagining himself there in the pages. That to me would of been an awesome ending, bridging then and now. That would of explained Clauvis motivation better. Clauvis' motivation throughout the movie was to obtain power and money which would lead to peace, and a day of no death - ironically, the twist was, he needed neither power and money to obtain peace and no death, because he could retire from service to Rome and buy property and live out the rest of his days - he only needed to believe - peace and no death came by way of eternal life.

              God bless,
              William
              Comment>

              • #8
                To answer the question posed in the title: I think the more a Christian is persecuted, the more a Christian will love - and pray for - their enemies.


                PermaFrost

                Comment>

                • #9
                  Originally posted by William View Post
                  You really should reserve your judgments before knowing first hand, Cornelius. The questions you ask will spoil the movie for anyone, so be it. The movie never took a Dispensationalism bend, it has absolutely nothing to do with this topic.
                  I don't approve of anyone changing the words and vocabulary used in the Bible for any reason other than readability in English. We should call Jesus "Christ" because that's what the Bible calls him. That's what all the Jewish converts to Christianity in the first century, even in the land of Judea. So, why does this movie use the word "Messiah"? The authors of the NT made a very deliberate effort to use the term Christ.

                  What's really anti-semetic? Thinking we're wiser than the "Jews" (they were converts from Judaism) who were Apostles and the authors of the NT? And, thinking we know what Jews believe better than they know what they themselves believe (e.g. Christians who claim there can be Jewish Christians)?

                  I refrain from further comments on the movie until I see it.
                  Comment>

                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Cornelius View Post

                    I don't approve of anyone changing the words and vocabulary used in the Bible for any reason other than readability in English. We should call Jesus "Christ" because that's what the Bible calls him. That's what all the Jewish converts to Christianity in the first century, even in the land of Judea. So, why does this movie use the word "Messiah"? The authors of the NT made a very deliberate effort to use the term Christ.

                    What's really anti-semetic? Thinking we're wiser than the "Jews" (they were converts from Judaism) who were Apostles and the authors of the NT? And, thinking we know what Jews believe better than they know what they themselves believe (e.g. Christians who claim there can be Jewish Christians)?

                    I refrain from further comments on the movie until I see it.
                    I can't comment on the use of Yeshua, because I can't remember who was using the term, whether it was a Jew, Roman, Disciple, or Gnostic.

                    God bless,
                    William
                    Comment>
                    Working...
                    X
                    Articles - News - SiteMap