A Healthy Diet for the Church – Food given by God through nonbelievers
As I said in the introduction to this series, I’ve decided to look at the source of the “food” that the church needs to take in to be healthy. I’ve divided the sources into three types: 1) directly from God, 2) from other believers, and 3) from others. Now, in reality, all “food” for the church comes from God. However, in some cases, God works more directly; but in other cases, God communicates in a more indirect manner.
When Jesus was tempted in the wilderness just after he was baptized by John, at one point he responded, “Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God.” (Matthew 4:4 ESV, quoting Deuteronomy 8:3) In this post, I look at food that God gives to the church through nonbelievers and worldly society and culture.
Because of (what I think is) misunderstandings concerning the church’s relationship to unbelievers and worldly cultures and societies, this may be the source of “food” for the church that is consumed the least. Actually, this kinds of “food” is consumed quite often by some believers, but not in an appropriate manner. The church tends to fall to one extreme or the either: 1) ignoring everything that comes from nonbelievers/culture or 2) accepting everything that comes from nonbelievers/culture.
There are scriptural examples of God speaking through and working through nonbelievers to communicate (i.e., “feed”) his children. The most obvious example in the Old Testament is the pagan prophet Balaam in Numbers 22-24. However, there are many other examples of God using nonbelieving kings, other individuals, and nations as his “servants”.
Similarly, in the New Testament we find examples of God using nonbelievers and cultural elements to speak to his children. For example, Paul quotes non-believing poets when speaking with or writing to others (see Acts 17:28 and Titus 1:12).
In these cases, Paul shows us how to use the words of nonbelievers in a positive way, without accepting everything that the person says as truth from God. Instead, with Paul being aware of what is being said in the wider culture, God is able to direct Paul (through those writings) to associate with his listeners/readers.
Obviously, these accounts do not indicate that everything Balaam or the Greek/Cretan poets said was from God. Thus, once again, discernment is necessary in order for the church what (and if) God is saying to them.
What would add to my discussion of God “feeding” his church through nonbelievers and culture/society?
A Healthy Diet for the Church Series
1. Introduction
2. “Food” given directly by God
3. “Food” given by God through other believers
4. “Food” given by God through nonbelievers/society/culture
5. Conclusion
A Healthy Diet for the Church – Food given by God through other believers
As I said in the introduction to this series, I’ve decided to look at the source of the “food” that the church needs to take in to be healthy. I’ve divided the sources into three types: 1) directly from God, 2) from other believers, and 3) from others. Now, in reality, all “food” for the church comes from God. However, in some cases, God works more directly; but in other cases, God communicates in a more indirect manner.
When Jesus was tempted in the wilderness just after he was baptized by John, at one point he responded, “Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God.” (Matthew 4:4 ESV, quoting Deuteronomy 8:3) In this post, I look at food that God gives to the church through other believers.
In Scripture, we see many, many examples of God speaking to his children through other believers. There are examples of this kind of indirect communication in both the Old Testament and the New Testament. In many ways, Scripture itself is an example of this type of indirect communication as God inspired some to write to others.
The concept of a priesthood contains within it the idea of communicating and serving others on behalf of God. Of course, God intended for the entire kingdom of Israel to act as priests to the other nations around them. Instead, they chose to have others act as intermediaries (in oppositions to God’s will). Similarly, in the New Testament, all believers (all of God’s children) are described as priests.
The “one anothers” of Scripture are probably the most obvious examples of God working through one or more believers in order to communicate with (feed) other believers. We must not limit these “one anothers” to those related to speaking. While God can communicate with his children through teaching, admonishing, encouraging, etc. He can also communicate with us through serving, helping, giving, etc.
This is probably the type of “food” that the church consumes most. But, primarily, the church is not consuming this type of food in a balanced manner. The majority of the church does the “eating” while a minority provides the food. This does not seem to be the example we see in Scripture. Instead, both the consuming and the providing should be mutual.
There’s another problem with the way the church consumes this indirect food today. Primarily, Christians today are learning from strangers. This can be in the form of books, blogs, podcasts, CDs, etc. But, in Scripture, believers are exhorted to learn from both the words and the lifestyle of those that they know and live with daily. Even when Paul was not with a particular group of believers, he would point them back to the way that he lived while he was among them.
Obviously, God can and does communicate with us through strangers. But, this should not be the primary way that we learn about and hear from God.
Finally, as with all of these “sources” of food from God, remember that a balanced diet is important. Just as “direct” communication from God should be discerned and tested, so also this type of indirect communication should be tested… and perhaps even more so. We should especially be careful if all of our indirect communication from God is coming from primarily one source (i.e., the same person teaching week after week).
What would you add to my discussion of this kind of indirection communication from God through other believers?
A Healthy Diet for the Church Series
1. Introduction
2. “Food” given directly by God
3. “Food” given by God through other believers
4. “Food” given by God through nonbelievers/society/culture
5. Conclusion
A Healthy Diet For the Church – Food given directly from God
As I said in the introduction to this series, I’ve decided to look at the source of the “food” that the church needs to take in to be healthy. I’ve divided the sources into three types: 1) directly from God, 2) from other believers, and 3) from others. Now, in reality, all “food” for the church comes from God. However, in some cases, God works more directly; but in other cases, God communicates in a more indirect manner.
When Jesus was tempted in the wilderness just after he was baptized by John, at one point he responded, “Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God.” (Matthew 4:4 ESV, quoting Deuteronomy 8:3) In this post, I look at food that God gives directly to the church.
In Scripture, God primarily communicates with his children directly. In the Old Testament, we find God walking and talking with Adam, directly talking to Cain and Noah, dining with Abram and Sarai, sending angels to Lot, speaking with Moses, and many, many other examples.
But, what about in the New Testament? Yes, we know that Jesus directly communicated with people, but do we find God “feeding” people directly once Jesus ascends into heaven? Yes.
Not only do we find examples God communicating directly with people in Acts, the epistles, and Revelation, we also find exhortations to listen to and heed the voice of God. We also find that God will communicate directly through giving understanding and wisdom.
These are all examples of God giving “food” to the church directly (i.e., not through some intermediary). As with all communication from God, God speaks to his children clearly and objectively. This does not mean that we always understand perfectly. In fact, this is where the problem lies.
While God communicates clearly and objectively, we do not understand clearly and our interpretation is always subjective. While we should to understand God as he is speaking with us, we must also understand our own limitations in interpreting what God is saying.
There are even examples of this in Scripture. When God directly intervened to release Peter from prison, Peter did not understand what was happening:
And he [Peter] went out and followed him [the angel]. He did not know that what was being done by the angel was real, but thought he was seeing a vision. When they had passed the first and the second guard, they came to the iron gate leading into the city. It opened for them of its own accord, and they went out and went along one street, and immediately the angel left him. When Peter came to himself, he said, “Now I am sure that the Lord has sent his angel and rescued me from the hand of Herod and from all that the Jewish people were expecting.” (Acts 12:9-11 ESV)
Also, consider the following description that Luke gives concerning something that happens with Paul and his traveling companions (including Luke):
While we were staying for many days, a prophet named Agabus came down from Judea. And coming to us, he took Paul’s belt and bound his own feet and hands and said, “Thus says the Holy Spirit, ‘This is how the Jews at Jerusalem will bind the man who owns this belt and deliver him into the hands of the Gentiles.'” When we heard this, we and the people there urged him not to go up to Jerusalem. Then Paul answered, “What are you doing, weeping and breaking my heart? For I am ready not only to be imprisoned but even to die in Jerusalem for the name of the Lord Jesus.” (Acts 21:10-13 ESV)
We see in these two examples that Peter and Agabus did not perfectly understand or interpret what God was communicating directly to them. Thus, we are told to discern prophesy and to test the spirits. In the first case, Peter understood better after the angel left (i.e., after God stopped directly intervening). In the second case, Paul disagreed with how that Agabus and those with him (including Luke) understood what God was saying.
But, what about Scripture? Doesn’t the Bible represent objective direct communication from God? Yes and no. I do believe that God inspired the authors of Scripture. Their writings have since passed through many human hands: copyists, editors, translators, etc.
When we read Scripture, even our Hebrew or Greek editions, we are reading what other people think God intended to be written in Scripture. So, we must be careful and understand the work of editing and translating, either of which is also a work of interpretation.
Furthermore, many people who say they are reading Scripture are actually reading what others say about Scripture, either through Bible studies, commentaries, study Bible notes, etc.
The church must consider how God is communicating directly with them. We must be listening and discerning what God is saying. But, this is not the only way that God communicates with his church. So, we should balance this diet by also listening to what God says through other believers and through others (who may not be believers).
What would you add to this discussion?
A Healthy Diet for the Church Series
1. Introduction
2. “Food” given directly by God
3. “Food” given by God through other believers
4. “Food” given by God through nonbelievers/society/culture
5. Conclusion
Thank you for sharing in our sufferings
One year ago, I had just returned from a two week trip to Ethiopia. The trip was amazing, and I met some wonder brothers and sisters in Christ. One of the men that I met was named Nigusse.
A few months ago, the vehicle that Nigusse and a few other Christians were riding in was attacked. The vehicle was damaged and several of the people were injured. If I remember correctly, one of the brothers ended up with a concussion.
Over the next few weeks and months, Nigusse was constantly in danger. People followed him in order to harm him. They would follow him around his city, and they would follow him to other cities.
We new about the harassment, persecution, and violence, and we were praying for Nigusse and others.
Last Friday, Nigusse flew from Ethiopia to Raleigh, North Carolina. He is planning to work on a degree here before returning to his home. My family was among a group of about 30 or so who met him at the airport, then had dinner with him afterwards.
During dinner, Nigusse brought us greetings and encouragement from the church in his city in Ethiopia. While he said many things, one thing stuck out in particular.
He said (and I’m paraphrasing), “Thank you for sharing in our suffering.”
I have heard that we can share in other people’s sufferings, but this is the first time that I’ve heard it from someone who actually suffered for the cause of Christ. This first hand account truly changes the way that I think about praying for and partnering with those who are suffering.
A Healthy Diet for the Church – Introduction
A couple of weeks ago, I wrote a post called “A change in diet and exercise for me… and for the church.” I explained that the doctor had recently advised me to change my diet and exercise, or I might be headed toward an unhealthy life. I’ve learned more about what a healthy diet and exercise means for me. But what about for the church.
This week I’m going to explore the question, “What would be a healthy diet for the church?” Next week, in another series, I’m going to investigate the question, “What exercise helps the church remain (or become) healthy?”
So… what would be a healthy diet for the church?
Now, obviously, there are two different ways to think about the word “diet.” First, “diet” refers to the kind of food that an organism takes in. Second, “diet” refers to restricting the amount of food in order to lose weight.
In this series, I’m thinking more about the first use of the word “diet.” The kinds of food that an organism takes in affects the way that organism lives. In the case of humans, the type of food helps determine whether or not a person is healthy or not.
Now, taking this metaphor into the realm of the church (another organism), what kinds of “food” should the church take in order to be healthy?
As I’ve thought about this question over the last couple of weeks, I’ve realized that there are several approaches that I could take to try to answer this question. Each approach has benefits, and each approach can be misunderstood.
I’ve decided to look at the source of the “food” that the church takes in. I’ve divided the sources into three types: 1) directly from God, 2) from other believers, and 3) from others. Now, in reality, all “food” for the church comes from God. However, in some cases, God works more directly; but in other cases, God communicates in a more indirect manner.
I’m certain that some people will disagree with my categories (sources), and others will disagree with what type of “food” I would put in each category. That’s fine. This is a metaphor, and I’m interested in hearing your input. So, please share it with me.
As with a human diet, I believe the church’s diet should be “balanced.” I’ll explain more about what that means as I examine each “source” listed above. That may seem strange. It may seem (at first) that the church should desire only direct communication from God (the first source I listed above). However, I hope after reading through each article you will understand why I still suggest that a “balanced” diet is better.
So, for now, I simply ask these question: What “food” do you think the church should take in to remain healthy? How would you break the “food” into different types (categories/sources)? And, what do you think of my plan so far?
A Healthy Diet for the Church Series
1. Introduction
2. “Food” given directly by God
3. “Food” given by God through other believers
4. “Food” given by God through nonbelievers/society/culture
5. Conclusion
Replay: Why Work?
Two years ago, I wrote a post called “Why Work?” While the post considers several different passages of Scripture, it primarily focuses on one passage. And, as an interesting twist, this passage was written about elders/pastors. That’s right, Paul wrote this passage to church leaders to exhort them to work with their hands… but why?
————————————-
Why Work?
Sometimes, when I’m sitting at my desk or coding late at night, I wonder why I work? Yes, I know that I need to provide for myself and my family. We like to eat, and we like to have a place to sleep, and we like other things that are not necessities.
So, certainly I should work in order to support myself and my family. But, did you know there is another scriptural reason to work as well?
Scripture has alot to say about work. In fact, Paul warns the Thessalonians not to associate with a brother or sister who refuses to work. (2 Thessalonians 3:6-12) But, Scripture also gives us several reasons for working. Besides supporting ourselves and our families, Scripture also says that we should work in order to have something to give to others in need.
For example, consider Paul’s admonition to the elders from Ephesus:
I coveted no one’s silver or gold or apparel. You yourselves know that these hands ministered to my necessities and to those who were with me. In all things I have shown you that by working hard in this way we must help the weak and remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how he himself said, ‘It is more blessed to give than to receive.’ (Acts 20:33-35 ESV)
Paul provides his own example of working with his hands in order to provide for himself and for those who are with him. He then commands (using the verb for “it is necessary”, translated as “must” in the ESV) the elders to follow his example. He says they are to work with their hands so that they can help the weak (or “in need” according to the Greek lexicon BDAG).
In another passage in Ephesians, Paul instructs those who have been guilty of stealing in the past. He says:
Let the thief no longer steal, but rather let him labor, doing honest work with his own hands, so that he may have something to share with anyone in need. (Ephesians 4:28 ESV)
The thief has not “put on the new man” (Eph 4:24) simply by ceasing to steal and beginning to work for his own support. Instead, Paul expects a complete reversal in his thinking. No long is the thief to take from others; as a new man in Christ he is now to work in order to give to others who are in need.
Apparently, the idea of working for others and supporting those who are in need was active in the earliest days of the church. As Luke records in two passages:
And they were selling their possessions and belongings and distributing the proceeds to all, as any had need. (Acts 2:45 ESV)
There was not a needy person among them, for as many as were owners of lands or houses sold them and brought the proceeds of what was sold and laid it at the apostles’ feet, and it was distributed to each as any had need. (Acts 4:34-35 ESV)
Perhaps this also explains part of the reasoning behind John’s instructions concerning caring for a brother or sister who is in need:
But if anyone has the world’s goods and sees his brother in need, yet closes his heart against him, how does God’s love abide in him? (1 John 3:17 ESV)
Thus, according to John, when we work to “have the world’s goods” in order to help others who are in need, we are demonstrating that God’s love abides in us.
We should work in order to provide for ourselves, and we should work in order to provide for our families. However, according to Scripture, we should also work in order to provide for others who are in need.
During these tough economic times, we should especially be looking around for those who are in need, and we should be working in order to help these people.
Three Views on Christians and Horror – Conclusion
During the last week, we have examined the following question: “Should Christians participate in horror genres?” I’ve asked three people to write essays answering that question from different perspectives:
Lew argued that Christians are free to participate in horror genres. Bobby said that Christians can participate in horror genres as long as their conscience allows (i.e., Christians should limit their participation based on the Spirit’s convictions in their own consciences). Jason argued that Christians should not be involved in horror genres.
In this conclusion, I do not plan to answer the question about Christians and horror. (Although, it would be easy for astute readers to recognize that my views would fall within one of two views, and would not fall within one of the other views, especially given my participate in Zombie Theology.)
Instead, I want to encourage further dialog among Christians on this topic. In fact, I suggest that the authors of the three essays brought up some good points that would provide starting points for further conversation.
For example, how does a person’s conscience play into the decision about participating in horror genres? What if another person’s convictions differ? How do you relate to one another with differing convictions?
What if you lay out your best arguments and another person continue to disagree? How can you maintain fellowship despite your disagreements?
Similarly, what benefit is there to the individual in participating in horror genres? What about benefits to the church? What about benefits to the world?
So, in conclusion, I want to again thank Lew, Bobby, and Jason for taking part in this project. Also, I appreciate everyone who commented and interacted with their articles.
(All posts in this series are also published at “Zombie Theology.”)
Christians and Horror
It’s Sunday, Worship Sunday
My friend Stephanie at “Dead and Domestic” writes beautiful, heartfelt, powerful poems. Often, she writes things that we don’t want to read… or, at least, things that I don’t want to read.
When she shares her own feelings and hurts and depression, it reminds me that there are hurting people all around me. What about the people who are different? Am I caring for them? Am I welcoming them into my life? Or, am I keeping those pains at arm’s length?
Anyway, I hope you will seriously consider her poem below. She sent it to me and gave me permission to publish it here. It’s not a call to reject any certain type of “church”. It’s a call to love people and welcome them into our lives.
——————————————-
It’s Sunday, worship Sunday
Welcome one and welcome all
We have music, food and lectures
And we’re sure you’ll have a ball!
We have some simple rules
You should follow complacently
Please sit down alone, yes by yourself
And do it quietly.
If you’re sad or mad or angry
Leave your problems at the door
We’re too busy having worship
Plus, those things are quiet a bore.
Once we sing a song of praise
A man will come to shake your hand
But sit back down, please hurry
Here comes the worship band.
We have songs of grace and mercy
That we sing with joyful shouts
But if you sing them wrong
Or out of tune
You’re sure to be kicked out.
We’re so glad you chose our church
Because we know we are the best
And we may make you a member
If you pass our many tests.
Oh, and please no jeans or sandals
These clothes will just not do.
Wear a tie or dress and stockings
Anything less would be plain rude.
Once a month we help the homeless
We feed them bread and give them socks
But don’t worry they won’t bother us
We make sure all church doors lock.
Three Views on Christians and Horror: 3 – Christians should NOT participate in horror genres
As I mentioned in the introduction to this series, I have invited three authors to write essays concerning this question: “Should Christians participate in the horror genres?”
I defined “participate” as follows: “We’re defining ‘participating in horror genres’ as reading/writing articles/stories/novels, watching shows/movies, viewing/creating websites, participating in forums, viewing/buying/creating art related to horror genres.”
Finally, instead of simply replying with “I agree” or “I disagree,” I encourage you to engage the authors by answering these three questions: 1) What is this author’s argument? 2) What are the strengths/weaknesses of the argument? 3) Is the argument persuasive/convincing? Why/Why not? Then, feel free to respond as you desire (within the realms of civility that I spelled out in the intro post).
This article was written by Jason. You can contact him at his website, on Facebook, or on Twitter.
——————————————–
Christians should NOT participate in horror genres
WARNING!!!! THIS POST MAY NOT BE SUITABLE FOR THOSE UNDER 16 YEARS OF AGE!!
Let me just begin by suggesting that I’m sure there are some really good books that are out there that do this subject much more justice than my short little journey in the subject. Much of my conviction on the matter comes more from what I believe is a discerning voice within me rather than from a large amount of research on the subject. However, I have done some research and I believe this research reinforces the discerning voice within me.
What are we talking about here? Well, to quote Marlon Brando in Apocalypse Now, “The horror…the horror.” To clarify, the horror film that I am critiquing in this post is not to be confused with a Hitchcock suspense film, but rather a film that fits the mold as defined in the “Horror Films” genre descriptive page on www.filmsite.org, it describes horror films in the following manner,
Horror Films are unsettling films designed to frighten and panic, cause dread and alarm, and to invoke our hidden worst fears, often in a terrifying, shocking finale, while captivating and entertaining us at the same time in a cathartic experience. Horror films effectively center on the dark side of life, the forbidden, and strange and alarming events. They deal with our most primal nature and its fears: our nightmares, our vulnerability, our alienation, our revulsions, our terror of the unknown, our fear of death and dismemberment, loss of identity, or fear of sexuality.
Simply put, horror films present images that are meant to invoke fear in our hearts and minds and do so in as shocking a manner that is culturally necessary. The content of these films follows the pattern of most things in Hollywood; something new must outdo something old. What was considered horror even in the 1980’s pales in comparison to the disturbing images and ideas that are present in current day horror flicks. Why do many humans seek after the progressively shocking? Why do they desire something even more terrifying to observe than they saw last year? Well, probably because it gratifies something that they want to keep gratifying but find it harder and harder to gratify as they indulge in the content.
This brings up our first argument, the biological argument. Like the viewing of sexual activity, viewing things that invoke fear releases chemicals within our brains. Those particular chemicals are meant to be a natural warning signal that we are in danger. I believe that some quotes from David Saliba’s A Psychology of Fear can be helpful in understanding these natural biological processes:
There are two basic kinds of fear stimuli. The first is environmental and poses a direct physical threat to the perceiver. The second is strictly psychological and poses no direct physical threat. For obvious reasons the first is a rational fear and the second is an irrational fear. Rational fears can be overcome by physical retaliation or escape, whereas irrational fears such as those aroused by horror stories, can be successfully overcome only by conscious and rational control…. Consequently, the method for controlling irrational fear is to avoid further instinctual reactions and to concentrate on rationalizing. However, in a panic situation the victim automatically acts instinctually rather than rationally, and instead of remedying his problem and dispelling his fear he acts in a non-rational way that is likely to end catastrophically.
Spiritual arguments aside, it appears that consistent viewing of horror films doesn’t do much for one’s ability to properly function in this dangerous world. Secondly, the effect of desiring something more and more out of the norm of what is imaginable continues the producer and viewer down a path of more and more abhorrent thoughts and imaginations. Psychologically speaking, horror films can be said to be as detrimental to the human psyche as porn films due to the chemical manipulation that consistently takes place in response to the consistent viewing of the material. Here is a link that touches on one person’s observations of the connection between porn movies and horror movies: http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/2771494/10_undeniable_parallels_between_porn.html?cat=40.
Next, we consider the ethical consideration of dehumanizing nature of horror films. The connection to porn has already been stated and with a little research one can find very solid proof of the fact that the majority of popular horror films in the last 30 years all include some female nudity, if not straight up soft and hard core porn. I don’t think I need to go into much detail to help you understand that the scenes and scenarios that these characters are presented in are dehumanizing and in many ways nails into the hearts and minds of young men and women that certain types of women are less than human…less than what God intended. The levels of this phenomenon are diverse. You have the degrading thoughts toward the actress playing the role (whom the young man will surely Google after the movie and continue to lust after) and then you also have the subconscious connection that the viewer makes with sex, nudity, violence, and fear. These conscious and subconscious connections may not sponsor a flew of rapes or sexual abuse, but they can’t help.
Let’s get off the nudity kick for a second and say that the horror film in question has no nudity and simply deals with dismemberment, torture, stalking, and insanely evil characters. There is still a factor of dehumanization going on in these movies. A human is a “whole” being and was meant to be appreciated in his or her “whole” context. Horror films not only glorify the ripping apart of the human physically, but also mentally. Characters’ bodies are ripped apart and their minds are driven mad. It is one thing for a student of criminal justice to necessarily study such things in order to successfully fulfill an unfortunately necessary service to the community; it is another thing to pump minds full of these dehumanizing images for the sake of entertainment. The shock that humanity needs to have toward such dehumanization is not helped by generations of viewers filling their minds full of the images that the very thought of should sicken the soul of man.
The Christian, in relation to the prior arguments, is uniquely held accountable for what he or she puts before his or her eyes. We are bought with a price and we are not our own. We have an obligation to think on things above and not things below. We are to avoid even the mention of the evil things that fallen men dream up in their fallen brains. Yet, in our culture there are many Christians that award the fallen mind of fallen man for dreaming up things that Christ was nailed to the cross to forgive. They go in droves to see the latest horror flick which someone had to sit down and spend his or her time dreaming up. Can you imagine going up to a congregant in your church and saying, “Here brother, some brothers and sisters in the church would like to pay you to think of some torture and dismemberment scenes to make into a movie so that we can gather on Saturday night together and enjoy a moment of fear and anxiety. If you put a little nudity in there as well none of us will be too upset.” SERIOUSLY!!! Is this not what we are doing? Yet, in most cases we are simply rewarding a non-believer for dreaming up such things and we hope he gets better at it.
There is much more to be said about this matter and I have many more points on my heart that I could bring to light. However, our length is limited and this should be a long and important conversation. The Biblical evidence against such matters has not even been tapped and I apologize for that. I could have simply filled this post with scriptures but I was afraid that those scriptures would have been simply scoffed at as “unrelated” or “out of context.” I realize that there are movies out there that some have labeled as horror that may not fit the above descriptions, but I believe that I have fairly represented the genre as a whole. Different discussion could be had concerning the zombie movie genre (which seems to fit more into a sick comedy type) or the vampire movie genre (which has taken on a life of its own, though closely related to horror flicks), let alone overly violent movies in general. Thank you for your time and I look forward to your interaction with this post.
David R. Saliba, A Psychology of Fear: The Nightmare Formula of Edgar Allan Poe. Lantham, MD: University Press of America, 1980. Pages 39-42.
(This post and the other posts in the series will also be published at “Zombie Theology.”)
Christians and Horror
Three Views on Christians and Horror: 2 – Christians can participate in horror genres with limitations
As I mentioned in the introduction to this series, I have invited three authors to write essays concerning this question: “Should Christians participate in the horror genres?”
I defined “participate” as follows: “We’re defining ‘participating in horror genres’ as reading/writing articles/stories/novels, watching shows/movies, viewing/creating websites, participating in forums, viewing/buying/creating art related to horror genres.”
Finally, instead of simply replying with “I agree” or “I disagree,” I encourage you to engage the authors by answering these three questions: 1) What is this author’s argument? 2) What are the strengths/weaknesses of the argument? 3) Is the argument persuasive/convincing? Why/Why not? Then, feel free to respond as you desire (within the realms of civility that I spelled out in the intro post).
This article was written by Bobby. You can contact him at his website, on Facebook, or on Twitter.
——————————————–
Christians can participate in horror genres with limitations
I love Jesus and I enjoy watching horror films. Granted, I didn’t grow up in a very religious household, in fact, my parents never read the Bible to me or took me to church. But I would hop on the first church bus/van that drove by on Sundays and off I rode. A heathen on my way to hear about Jesus with visions of Fred Kruger or Jason Voorhees in my mind.
Things are a bit different now. I’m all grown up (well, sorta), I have a family of my own. I read the Bible and pray with them. I love Jesus much more than the snot nosed kid I used to be. So much has changed in my life because of Christ. I’m not one of those dudes who gave his life to Jesus and then joined the religious gestapo. In fact, I can’t remember ever trying to change any part of who I am without it being a miserable failure. Nonetheless I am different and if there is one thing I know for sure it is that I didn’t do the changing. Christ changed me. I was having as much fun as a heathen could have before Jesus put the brakes on.
So why tell you all this and why should you care? Only so that you can have a dim glimpse of the guy that’s telling you that it IS possible to love Jesus and enjoy horror. It’s important because I know enough about the Bible that I could write a lengthy post about why you should never indulge yourself in anything within horror genres. But if I did, I would be a manipulator and a hypocrite and that means I would hate myself. I try not to do things that make me hate myself. So instead, since I’m not naive about what the Bible says and I’m fairly confident that I have heard all the arguments before that say otherwise, I’m gonna tell you why I think it is cool to enjoy horror and love Jesus at the same time.
Jesus doesn’t want His followers to clean up their act in order to be worthy of Him. We don’t have to jump through hoops and keep a lengthy list of do’s and don’ts in order to faithfully call Him our Lord. He is not looking for followers who think they can do it on their own nor does He desire followers who try their best to do it on their own and give Him credit for it. On the contrary it is the broken and humble folks that He has in His flock. He wants us to trust and depend on Him completely. Jesus takes us as is, with all of our imperfections, and makes us His own. We are not perfect but we are being perfected. The crazy thing is that even though we are not yet complete, in Christ we are still considered saints. Our old self is hidden in Christ and we are a new creation. In Christ is who we are and no movie or book preference can change that.
So, as the Apostle Paul said “I consider it a little thing to be judged by you, in fact I do not even judge myself”. I do not regard myself according to what I think I am doing right or wrong. I regard myself as in Christ and although I haven’t arrived at perfection, I know I am on my way because He is faithful and He has promised to bring me there. We don’t have to do more of this and less of that. We do not have the authority to say what is and is not acceptable according to our preferences and opinions. We are bound by our conscience as it is informed by the word of God. We must let the Spirit of God lead us as He will and we must no longer regard one another according to the flesh but rather as a new creation in Christ.
Who knows, maybe the Lord will use something that one of my Christian brothers writes on this subject to convict me that horror genres are something that the He is desiring to put away from me. Thus far I remain unconvinced that my enjoyment of these things is somehow detrimental to my relationship with Him. My experience is that our relationship is based all in His grace and not my own works. My growth comes directly from the power of His Spirit within me. For that I am thankful because if it was based on me I’d be in a perpetual downward spiral.
For what it’s worth I think a person can love Jesus and still enjoy horror. Either I am a living example of that or my enjoyment of horror proves I have no idea what life in Christ is actually about. There is no in-between. I’ll let the Lord be the judge of that. Till then I will continue to trust in Him wherever He leads, even if that means that some of my brothers in Christ want to hurl insults and judgments at me. No biggie, Christ is my shelter and my shield from both the walking dead who are clothed with Christ and from the zombies on my tv screen.
(This post and the other posts in the series will also be published at “Zombie Theology.”)
Christians and Horror