SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Looking for free sermon messages?
Sermon Podcast | Audio | Video

Discussion Forum : General Topics : "End of the Spear" Steve Saint Speaks

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 Next Page )
PosterThread
TaKa
Member



Joined: 2003/4/17
Posts: 124
Louisiana

 Re: End of the Spear

I have been personally blessed by this movie because I read Through Gates of Splendor and The Journals of Jim Elliot years ago and they have remained two of my favorite books. I'm reading End of the Spear by Steve Saint now.

Gentiles were unclean to Jews but not to Paul and if I read my Bible correctly the two cities that were destroyed by fire were not destroyed because of homosexuality but because of laziness, gluttony and lack of care for the poor.

Jesus told the religious leaders of his day that prostitutes would enter the kingdom of heaven before they would.

If God can use a donkey, can He not use a gay actor? Maybe God is working in his life through this to expose him to the gospel so that he can be saved.




_________________
Troy

 2006/2/1 22:51Profile
IRONMAN
Member



Joined: 2004/6/15
Posts: 1924
IN HEAVENLY PLACES WITH JESUS

 Re:

bro Krispy
not sure if i should put this on the other thread but, according to the O.T. ravens were not to be eaten and were considered unclean so the Jews were to have no contact with them right?

in Lev 11

[b]13 And these are they which ye shall have in abomination among the fowls; they shall not be eaten, they are an abomination: the eagle, and the ossifrage, and the ospray, 14 And the vulture, and the kite after his kind; 15 Every raven after his kind; 16 And the owl, and the night hawk, and the cuckow, and the hawk after his kind, 17 And the little owl, and the cormorant, and the great owl, 18 And the swan, and the pelican, and the gier eagle, 19 And the stork, the heron after her kind, and the lapwing, and the bat. [/b]

but the Lord uses ravens to feed Elijah here in 1 kings 17

[b]3 Get thee hence, and turn thee eastward, and hide thyself by the brook Cherith, that is before Jordan. 4 And it shall be, that thou shalt drink of the brook; and I have commanded the ravens to feed thee there. 5 So he went and did according unto the word of the LORD: for he went and dwelt by the brook Cherith, that is before Jordan. 6 And the ravens brought him bread and flesh in the morning, and bread and flesh in the evening; and he drank of the brook. 7 And it came to pass after F115 a while, that the brook dried up, because there had been no rain in the land. [/b]

and also contact with dead bodies is forbidden by God as it leads to uncleanlinessm, there is however a cleansing process though. check numbers 19



[b]11 He that toucheth the dead body of any man F45 shall be unclean seven days. 12 He shall purify himself with it on the third day, and on the seventh day he shall be clean: but if he purify not himself the third day, then the seventh day he shall not be clean. 13 Whosoever toucheth the dead body of any man that is dead, and purifieth not himself, defileth the tabernacle of the LORD; and that soul shall be cut off from Israel: because the water of separation was not sprinkled upon him, he shall be unclean; his uncleanness is yet upon him. 14 This is the law, when a man dieth in a tent: all that come into the tent, and all that is in the tent, shall be unclean seven days. 15 And every open vessel, which hath no covering bound upon it, is unclean.[/b]

also Jews were not to have contact with gentiles either yet the Lord sent Elijah toa gentile woman for 3 yrs after which when her son died he laid on him 3 times and the child was raised from the dead. what does that mean? the Lord is free even to go against what He says, it's His perogative, He's God and He can do that. check out Art Katz's text sermon on Elijah the prophet of restoration. it's deep bro and he does a better job of explaining that than i can.

God bless


_________________
Farai Bamu

 2006/2/1 22:55Profile









 Re:

Quote:
Steve was not eager to accept the actor. It felt wrong, but it was also unethical to break a contract. The dream exposed the real motive of his reluctance - it was the fear of backlash.



It is far better to go back on one's word, when such a word was given improperly, than to go against God's Word. Proverbs 6:1-5 says that if a person has made a foolish agreement, he should waste no time in extracting himself from that situation.

"My son, if thou be surety for thy friend, ifthou hast stricken thy hand with a stranger, thou art snared with the words of thy mouth, thou art taken with the words of thy mouth. Do this now, my son, and deliver thyself, when thou art come into the hand of thy friend; go, humble thyself, and make sure thy friend. Give not sleep to thine eyes, nor slumber to thine eyelids."

Allen even offered to back out of the agreement.

By the way, it is truly astonishing, almost to the point of disbelief, that experienced movie men would be so ignorant of Allen's very public homosexual image. Bill Ewing, the producer of "End of the Spear," is the former senior vice-president of production at Sony and has overseen 125 films, including Men in Black II and Spider-Man. Even Steve Saint said, "I could not imagine how something like this could slip through a professional screening process." Indeed.

People have stated that they have been blessed by this movie, and no doubt the movie is inspiring... but what do we mean when we say we've "been blessed"? I suspect the movie touched an emotional chord with people, but emotionalism is not "blessing".

Krispy

 2006/2/2 8:21









 Re:

Quote:
It seems clear to me that Steve is not equally yoked with the world in this issue. His heart remains reserved for God, and I sense no compromise in his testimony.



I love ya, Diane... but I just cant wrap my brain around that one.

Quote:
It is also worth considering how those who opposed reacted - hardly Christlike, and hardly in a manner which would bring conviction to sinners (rather it would turn them away)



That doesnt change the truth, or make something right or wrong. There is a saying on this board: You can be totally right, but totally wrong. I certainly do not agree with the people who have sent Steve Saint hate mail... but I do not disagree with what they are upset about. They are right, but they are wrong in how they handled it.

Krispy

 2006/2/2 8:34
roadsign
Member



Joined: 2005/5/2
Posts: 3776


 Re: To Krispy

Quote:
love ya, Diane... but I just cant wrap my brain around that one.


I love you too, Krispy. I praise God for someone like you who keeps me examining what I believe!

This may rattle your brain, but it's where I'm at now:

I grew up in a setting where whatever we did externally was the only thing that counted. The hidden things of our hearts was never considered. We were taught that going to movies was bad, (period!)... being involved in the ministerial was bad, doing anything with other churches was bad, etc.

Now, I see a degree of truth in all of that. However the real concern was to APPEAR clean and polished. It was assumed that any involvement in these things would be an indication that we AGREED with them.

we were never taught about issues of the heart. And so, while many of us where careful to live a pure outer life, our hearts still craved the things of this world. So we would make such comments as this: " Well, maybe a little bit is okay, just not alot." We had so many crazy legalistic discussion about the "grey" area, that it makes my head spin to think about it.
We were really trying to find the place where we could satisfy God, and also with a clear conscience keep our affections in this world.

Well, God got a hold of me and convicted me of trying to have the best of both worlds. Really I was not sold out to God at all. I was trying to run my own life. He worked in me (through pain and tears) to shake out my legalistic self-righteousness. Then he put me on a path that led me to learn to love and trust him instead of all these things in the world, including myself.

It is far to long a story to write here. But the end product is, I can now take part in various things in this world, while my true citizenship is in God's kingdom. I do not ever need to watch TV, or have a nice house, or go to parties. But sometimes God calls me and leads me in those directions because it is in those settings that he wants me to be a light. He also has important truths to teach me (I don't just go to church to learn about God)

God has called me to be yoked with him - to love him, and seek and follow his will. That is a heart predisposition.
If that makes no sense, I can understand. Somehow, I'm sure it wouldn't have made sense to me back then.
Diane


_________________
Diane

 2006/2/2 9:08Profile









 Re:

Diane,

I agree completely with your post. That was what the guilt of the Pharisees was. They looked very religious on the exterior, but obviously their hearts were full of sin... including murder. We must be very careful to avoid that... and it's easy to slip into.

I was listening to a sermon yesterday on purity and holiness, and while I agree with what you're saying, we can not ignore God's Word when it exhorts us to "be ye separate". This does not mean that we never have any contact with the world. If we did that we would never reach the world with the gospel.

Going to the movie theater is not a sin. But seeing "American Pie" is. A Christian has no business spending their time and money watching a movie filled with smut & blasphemey. But is there anything wrong with seeing "National Treasure"? I don't think there is. No sex, no cussing, great plot. I took my kids to see it.

But Steve Saint and Every Tribe were unequally yoked together with a homosexual activist in making a movie that was intended to inspire and represent Godly men who gave their lives to spread the gospel of Jesus Christ. And that was wrong, no matter what the results.

The end never justify the means.

Krispy

 2006/2/2 9:46
roadsign
Member



Joined: 2005/5/2
Posts: 3776


 Re: obey God

Quote:
The end never justify the means.


True, we cannot justify our sins by coming up with a noble end.

However, Try telling God that. His means seem very questionable many times. He works through sinnners many times, don't you think?

So the issue is: Has man disobeyed God or has God called man to obey him?
The articles seem to reveal the answer. Do we have a right to dispute that?

Diane


_________________
Diane

 2006/2/2 10:02Profile
crsschk
Member



Joined: 2003/6/11
Posts: 9192
Santa Clara, CA

 Re:

Diane;

Quote:
The overall message to me: Do not make judgments or assumptions on something you know nothing about.



Which was the whole point of bringing it forth, to get the perspective from his point of standing.
To be in his shoes and to hear it from himself. Had a hunch that this was the case. I agree Diane and was humbled as well.

Quote:
What are we to think of Steve Saint's dream? It is simple. God would never act contrary to His own Scriptures. That would be the penultimate confusion. If God does not act strictly in accordance with His own revelation, it would be impossible to know anything for certain. This is not to "put God in a box." It is rather to honor God by taking Him at His Word.



It is not simple, that is the whole point, it is rather difficult and messy and muddy. Don't misunderstand, just as was rightly pointed out by Randy and even by yourself, the issues of the situation don't go away or are ignored but think you are pushing the wrong sentiment by way of using those scriptures, that is going too far, just as this is;
Quote:
In further justification of his support for the homosexual activist in the role of his father, Steve Saint said, "God works in mysterious ways, his wonders to perform." This is Hollywood's favorite Bible verse and has been quoted in countless movies, but of course it is nowhere in the Bible!

That is not a bible verse by the way. And seems you are here twisting intent with justification and support. It was acknowledged that this could have been handled differently and that all the other items [i]should[/i] have, [i]could[/i] have been caught before hand. What would you say to the issue that was brought forth over the dilemma he faced upon finding these things out and whether to call or not call a press conference? The things he had to wrestle with, whichever way he chose after the fact he could not win. Yours, mine all of our opinions are worthless. We can sit here with the pro's and con's of the matter and still completely miss the point, that he found himself in a great dilemma and is now also finding that he can be beat up by both 'sides', precisely where I am finding this creeping into the lives of saints in a wrong manner and the expressions that come forth out of our own hearts. We like to think we have all the easy answers to these kinds of things when we haven't even experienced them as the ones that are in these kinds of situations, but to assuage the difficulty of the dilemma will give our 'positions' our 'support' in a easy black and white construct.

There is a tension is this walk, to know things, to understand a situation from afar, to know all the issues and still refuse a splitting off into either\or and giving our worthless opinion on matters when we do not have all the facts on. Just as surely this will be misunderstood and maybe that is the point. To suffer even that. The problem is in trying to put oneself into his shoes. It is partially an impossibility and for some even to attempt to see it from that perspective is too much to even ask for, because our opinion of how things ought to have been done even with the rightness of what that entails still doesn't allow for an appreciation of the difficulty. I don't think one can get there fully without having been in the situation in time and space, all the peripheral things going on ... to climb inside his head and suffer the things he had to suffer and deal with. I thought he expressed them well enough, he wasn't blinded to the situation at all, he knew the issues once they were presented and the dilemma he was in and what to do? Pray and then do what he felt the Lord would have him to do.

Trying to extract a bottom line out of all this is just as difficult. To hear all the extremes from giving license to liberty, support and\or justification ... the only reason to even bring this forth in the first place was an attempt to get us to look at our own reactions and our own selves and just how bound up we can be in our opinions.

It seems we can forget that a great deal of this life is in suffering of all sorts and kinds, not 'always' as in up on the surface but underneath it all, for we should just as well have a measure of great joy. Maybe the tension I speak of is just this;

2Co 4:10 Always bearing about in the body the dying of the Lord Jesus, that the life also of Jesus might be made manifest in our body.

Think there is a great lesson out of all this if we could just enter into it.


_________________
Mike Balog

 2006/2/2 10:09Profile









 Re:

Quote:
So the issue is: Has man disobeyed God or has God called man to obey him?



God did not call these folks to be unequally yoked together with an unbeliever in order to advance the kingdom. If He did... then He went against His very Word, and can not be trusted in any of His Word.

Quote:
The articles seem to reveal the answer. Do we have a right to dispute that?



I dont put much stock in dreams when they are in contradiction to the Word of God. People like Benny Hinn have conditioned much of the church to not question anyone who has a so-called "dream" or "vision". The article didnt do anything except raise even more suspicions in my mind.

Krispy

 2006/2/2 10:11
KingJimmy
Member



Joined: 2003/5/8
Posts: 4419
Charlotte, NC

 Re:

Even if the directors and such were guilty of commiting some sort of sin in the production of the movie, does that in and of itself make the end product sinful?

What of books you and I read every day? Do you doubt for one second that some people involved in the production of some books we read, Christian ones at that, are possible unregenerate? Does that make the book sinful?

Consider the country you live and and support with the payment of your taxes was one founded on the grounds of outright rebellion against England.

Do we divorce ourselves from this country being that the means that brought the end result of this country's formation was grounded in absolute sinful activity?

Do is bother you if a church puts on a Christmas play, and perhaps many of the young children involved in the play are perhaps unregenerate as it is? Do we boycot such plays because of this? If not for young children who are sinful, why with a Christian movie?


_________________
Jimmy H

 2006/2/2 11:36Profile





©2002-2019 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Privacy Policy