Posted on 05/26/2006 5:55:34 AM PDT by Simi Valley Tom
If you knew that someone was about to drive off a cliff, wouldn't you warn that person about the danger? Wouldn't that be the loving thing to do?
When Jesus calls His disciples to be salt and light, he was calling for Christians to do two things:
1. Warn people about their sins.
2. Show people that the answer to their sin problem is to establish a personal relationship with Jesus Christ through faith and discipleship.
The warning about sin is not to condemn people for their sins; that is something only God can do. The warning about sin is to warn people about eternal separation from God, who is the Source of all Knowledge, Wisdom, Love, Joy, and Beauty. The call to establish a personal relationship with Jesus Christ is an attempt to share with people the Knowledge, Wisdom, Love, Joy, and Beauty that a personal relationship with Jesus Christ will bring.
To be salt and light, therefore, is an Act of Love to protect people from the destruction that comes from sin and to make people aware of the Light and Truth that comes from Jesus Christ.
Thus, when we at MOVIEGUIDE® warn people about the dangers of THE DA VINCI CODE, violent horror movies, or sex comedies like AMERICAN PIE, it is an Act of Love designed to point people away from darkness and toward the Light of the True, the Good and the Beautiful.
Although these works are fiction, recent polls from the Barna Research Group in the United States and the IPSOS Institute in Europe show that millions of people will change their beliefs after reading or seeing these fictional works. Barna reports that 11 million of the 60 million people or so who have read THE DA VINCI CODE have changed their spiritual beliefs about Jesus Christ after reading the book. IPSOS reports that up to half of the people who have read the book, 30 million people, have changed their beliefs about Jesus Christ. These numbers include people of weak Christian faith and non-Christians.
According to worldwide box office figures, at least 35 million people have seen the DA VINCI CODE movie so far. This means that the movie may affect the beliefs of an additional 17 million or more people.
The book version of THE DA VINCI CODE is a slanderous, vicious attack on Jesus Christ, His church and the Bible. Unlike the book, the hero in the movie, played by Tom Hanks, makes some positive statements regarding the traditional view of Jesus Christ and His divinity. He then says, however, that it doesn't matter what the real truth is, it only matters what people believe. Such irrational, anti-historical statements may be even more insidious than Dan Brown's book, because they lull people into a deadly sense of apathy about the historical, moral and spiritual identity and mission of Jesus Christ.
What makes this even worse is the fact that children, teenagers and young adults, who don't have the knowledge and wisdom that comes with age and experience, are the most vulnerable to the wicked effects of popular works like THE DA VINCI CODE.
No mater how you cut it, therefore, THE DA VINCI CODE, though a work of fiction, will greatly weaken Jesus Christ's loving mission to bring salt and light to the human race. Anyone who reads or sees THE DA VINCI CODE, especially those who advocate reading it or seeing it and those who say it doesn't matter if people read or see THE DA VINCI CODE, are taking a stand against Jesus Christ and His Gospel. It is they who are being unloving, not those who warn people about the dangers of such works like THE DA VINCI CODE. It is also they who will be encouraging the entertainment industry to make and market more books, movies and videos viciously attacking Jesus Christ, His mission and the Bible.
This is a Culture War that Christians dare not lose. We must win this Culture War and defeat the forces of darkness if we are to follow Jesus Christ's loving command to bring salt and light to the human race. Only by winning this Culture War will we be able to continue baptizing people in the Name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit and teaching them everything that Jesus Christ commands us to do.
The fate of the world hangs in the balance, but God is the ultimate power on whom everything depends. If we remain faithful to God through Jesus Christ, then God will remain faithful to us. For, it is ultimately He who will bring the fruit to our efforts to preach the truth of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. It is His blessings on our work that will help make this world a better place for future generations, our children and grandchildren.
Let us prayerfully ask God, therefore, to deliver people from the historical, moral and spiritual confusion that comes from such things as THE DA VINCI CODE. Use us, Oh Lord, to bring salt, light and love to our fellow men and women. Fill us with the power of the Holy Spirit to seek first Your kingdom and Your righteousness. In the Name of Jesus Christ, our Savior. Amen.
Note: For more about THE DA VINCI CODE and other current movies and issues regarding the mass media, go to www.movieguide.org.
The word "divine", as in "divine right of Kings", has gotten folks into all kinds of trouble. Just think of Jesus as God's only begotten Son, and you will have the essence of divine without all the baggage of its use in human history.
Also note that the Gospel is personal. It doesn't matter what others believe, or don't believe. It matters what you, individually, believe.
dartuser wrote:
Hogwash to the extreme. You are attempting to take the most unique individual in the universe (only one who is fully God AND fully man) and reduce him to just a man. Give him a wife and kids, let his interests be divided between his ministry and a family, doesn't matter if he was sinless or not, doesn't matter whether he was resurrected or resuscitated. Just believe in Him and your safe.
Your position here is theologically, morally, and intellectually bankrupt.
Saying He is God's only begotten Son is hardly reducing Him to just a man. You say "let his interests be divided between his ministry and a family" as if One who is fully God and fully man couldn't handle his own family, and the Family of Man in the same way. You are thinking of this as a man reasons. Try believing like a child believes. I understand it is a highly recommended approach.
Binghamton_native wrote:
You are using the "argument from silence". Not a good idea in apologetics.
Sorry, but I am just an old Baptist Preacher's son, and haven't the slightest idea what you are talking about.
Yup. Indifference to truth is indifference to God.
The real fear is the same one it has always been: if people engage in any sort of exercise in thinking for themselves, they might stop being paying customers of Catholic Church, Inc. ;)
> THE DA VINCI CODE, though a work of fiction, will greatly weaken Jesus Christ's loving mission to bring salt and light to the human race.
Just *wow.* And here I thought Jesus Christ was some sort of all-powerful deity or something. But it seems a cheesy pulp novel can crush him.
What you said.
God wills evil? If so, God would be evil, and imperfect.
God allows evil, bringing greater good out of it. Christ's death and resurection perfectly exemplifies this principle.
A complete account may be gathered from the teaching of St. Thomas Aquinas, by whom the principles of St. Augustine are systematized, and to some extent supplemented. Evil, according to St. Thomas, is a privation, or the absence of some good which belongs properly to the nature of the creature. (I,Q. xiv, a. 10; Q. xlix, a. 3; Contra Gentiles, III, ix, x). There is therefore no "summum malum", or positive source of evil, corresponding to the "summum bonum", which is God (I, Q. xlix, a. 3; C. G., III, 15; De Malo, I, 1); evil being not "ens reale" but only "ens rationis"--i.e. it exists not as an objective fact, but as a subjective conception; things are evil not in themselves, but by reason of their relation to other things, or persons. All realities (entia) are in themselves good; they produce bad results only incidentally; and consequently the ultimate cause of evil if fundamentally good, as well as the objects in which evil is found (I, Q. xlix; cf. I, Q. v, 3; De Malo, I, 3). Thus the Manichaean dualism has no foundation in reason.Evil is threefold, viz., "malum naturæ" (metaphysical evil), "culpæ" (moral), and "paenæ" (physical, the retributive consequence of "malum culpæ") (I, Q. xlviii, a. 5, 6; Q. lxiii, a. 9; De Malo, I, 4). Its existence subserves the perfection of the whole; the universe would be less perfect if it contained no evil. Thus fire could not exist without the corruption of what it consumes; the lion must slay the ass in order to live, and if there were no wrong doing, there would be no sphere for patience and justice (I, Q. xlviii, a. 2). God id said (as in Isaiah 45) to be the author of evil in the sense that the corruption of material objects in nature is ordained by Him, as a means for carrying out the design of the universe; and on the other hand, the evil which exists as a consequence of the breach of Divine laws is in the same sense due to Divine appointment; the universe would be less perfect if its laws could be broken with impunity. Thus evil, in one aspect, i.e. as counter-balancing the deordination of sin, has the nature of good (II, Q. ii, a. 19). But the evil of sin (culpæ), though permitted by God, is in no sense due to him (I, Q. xlix, a. 2).; its cause is the abuse of free will by angels and men (I-II, Q. lxxiii, a. 6; II-II, Q. x, a. 2; I-II, Q. ix, a. 3). It should be observed that the universal perfection to which evil in some form is necessary, is the perfection of this universe, not of any universe: metaphysical evil, that is to say, and indirectly, moral evil as well, is included in the design of the universe which is partially known to us; but we cannot say without denying the Divine omnipotence, that another equally perfect universe could not be created in which evil would have no place.
St. Thomas also provides explanations of what are now generally considered to be the two main difficulties of the subject, viz., the Divine permission of foreseen moral evil, and the question finally arriving thence, why God choose to create anything at all. First, it is asked why God, foreseeing that his creatures would use the gift of free will for their own injury, did not either abstain from creating them, or in some way safeguard their free will from misuse, or else deny them the gift altogether? St. Thomas replies (C. G., II, xxviii) that God cannot change His mind, since the Divine will is free from the defect of weakness or mutability. Such mutability would, it should be remarked, be a defect in the Divine nature (and therefore impossible), because if God's purpose were made dependent on the foreseen free act of any creature, God would thereby sacrifice His own freedom, and would submit Himself to His creatures, thus abdicating His essential supremacy--a thing which is, of course, utterly inconceivable. Secondly, to the question why God should have chosen to create, when creation was in no way needful for His own perfection, St. Thomas answers that God's object in creating is Himself; He creates in order to manifest his own goodness, power, and wisdom, and is pleased with that reflection or similitude of Himself in which the goodness of creation consists. God's pleasure is the one supremely perfect motive for action, alike in God Himself and in His creatures; not because of any need, or inherent necessity, in the Divine nature (C. G., I, xxviii; II, xxiii), but because God is the source, centre, and object, of all existence. (I, Q. 65:a. 2; cf. Proverbs 26 and Conc. Vat., can. 1:v; Const. Dogm., 1.) This is accordingly the sufficient reason for the existence of the universe, and even for the suffering which moral evil has introduced into it. God has not made the world primarily for man's good, but for His own pleasure; good for man lies in conforming himself to the supreme purpose of creation, and evil in departing from it (C.G., III, xvii, cxliv). It may further be understood from St. Thomas, that in the diversity of metaphysical evil, in which the perfection of the universe as a whole is embodied, God may see a certain similitude of His own threefold unity (cf. I, Q. xii); and again, that by permitting moral evil to exist He has provided a sphere for the manifestation of one aspect of His essential justice (cf. I, Q. lxv, a. 2; and I, Q. xxi, a. 1, 3).
It is obviously impossible to suggest a reason why this universe in particular should have been created rather than another; since we are necessarily incapable of forming an idea of any other universe than this. Similarly, we are unable to imagine why God chose to manifest Himself by the way of creation, instead of, or in addition to, the other ways, whatever they may be, by which He has, or may have, attained the same end. We reach here the utmost limit of speculation; and our inability to conceive the ultimate reason for creation (as distinct from its direct motive) is paralleled, at a much earlier stage of the enquire, by the inability of the non-creationist schools of thought to assign any ultimate cause for the existence of the order of nature. It will be observed that St. Thomas's account of evil is a true Theodicy, taking into consideration as it does every factor of the problem, and leaving unsolved only the mystery of creation, before which all schools of thought are equally helpless. It is as impossible to know, in the fullest sense, why this world was made as to know how it was made; but St. Thomas has at least shown that the acts of the Creator admit of complete logical justification, notwithstanding the mystery in which, for human intelligence, they can never wholly cease to be involved. On Catholic principles, the amelioration of moral evil and its consequent suffering can only take place by means of individual reformation, and not so much through increase of knowledge as through stimulation or re-direction of the will. But since all methods of social improvement that have any value must necessarily represent a nearer approach to conformity with Divine laws, they are welcomed and furthered by the Church, as tending, at least indirectly, to accomplish the purpose for which she exists.
If God could be tempted to intervene based upon the behaviors of men (who would be manipulated by the evil one), God would be reactive, not the Sovereign of the Universe. Also, should this reactive posture rule the reality in which you dwell, you would not have a free will in any sense.
The divinity of Jesus is an essential quality in bringing Salavation to we humas because God has told us that no one goes to where God is lest He come to make a way to Himself.
Lukewarm Christians say, "get over it, it's only a movie".
I believe the concept of good and evil, are human concepts. I do not believe good or evil applies to God.
I do not believe in the evil one, and I do not believe that we humans require salvation. I believe we are as God created us, for whatever reason that may be.
A cogent explanation of what you mean by this would help matters along.
I can't. Nobody can. Neither can you. Everyone is either putting their trust in God says is Truth, or in what man says he thinks/believes is true. Man can be individual - your own personal "beliefs", or corporate. God's Truth is never changing and has always been. Man's "truths" are extremetly varied and are as changing as the shifting sand. We all lean on one or the other (God or man) as the support for our beliefs. It is impossible to "show what is true" to someone who is leaning and trusting on what you are not. It just can't be done. Apples and oranges. There is only one way that one can truly change their support. And that is by the grace of our God - Christ Jesus. Any other way is just not a way at all.
This what I responded to, from your post at #11: "Didn't God know that this movie was going to be produced? Why didn't He stop it, if it is so horrible?" If you insist on moving the target then there is no answer for you. Incidentally, the answer to the second question you asked is the essence of why I'm responding to you ... consider: perhaps God allows this movie and such blasphemous things throughout History because it gives those of us who have the hope within us to share our faith and our Savior with folks through venues such as this forum. God desires that ALL be saved, but alas, many are called but few are chosen.
I agree. Some men are Christians, some Jews, some Muslims, Hindus, etc. We all share the same God, and His truth. Our differences, do not really matter after we die.
I am curious though...since you say we cannot show what is true, why do you say your way is the only way?
"Barna reports that 11 million of the 60 million people or so who have read THE DA VINCI CODE have changed their spiritual beliefs about Jesus Christ after reading the book. IPSOS reports that up to half of the people who have read the book, 30 million people, have changed their beliefs about Jesus Christ."
So which is it? 11 million or 30 million? Big difference there.
I do not know what you mean by 'moving the target'?
Perhaps so, perhaps not...that is something that we all agree cannot be proven, but I happen to believe, that we all are chosen.
You're right that some might not need to be given any background whatsoever to see that the Da Vinci Code is crap. But those people don't have to read the review-- nobody is forcing them.
Brilliant people can fall for all sorts of fakery. In fact, a wise man once said there's nothing so stupid that some intellectual won't believe it-- or something like that. So it's no insult to anyone's intelligence to provide a background to it. The novel and the movie are polemical--- they're designed to make a point. If you've read the nocel, you know it sucks royally. The reason people like is the same reason they liked the Celestine Prophecy, another crappy new age book--- the message intrigues and fascinates them and,without refutation, stands as is. No immaturity or stupidity need be implied or inferred any more than I need infer those traits in someone who listens to a Clinton speech and comes away thinking "that guy's got all the answers! Damn, leftism works!"
That is a major fallacy. Our different Gods demand different things from us. We have different books*, different precepts, different ethics, different truths, etc.
*sacred texts
And since Dan Brown did say so, he deserves to be praised or criticized based on those statements as well as the reasoning and evidence he provides for them, just as D.W. Griffith's Birth of A Nation deserved to be so criticized.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.