Gay activist plays a lead role in "End Of The Spear"

Hey Krispy,Somebody already beat you to this. It's being discussed in this thread:End of the Spear

Might get a greater audience here then on the other forum...ginnyrose

I guess I could put this post here instead- it makes more sense :)-------------------------I am planning on seeing the movie tonight with our small group. Yes, I was disappointed to learn about the actor being gay, but we still plan on seeing it.Here is an email sent out to everyone at our church from our Pastor about the fact that one of the actors is a homosexual. Chad Null apparently did not 'come out' until after the shooting of the movie was done.Jimmy, your point is well taken by me. Homosexual, adulterer, liar, gossiper, idolater. Is one worse than another? Who watches sports while many of the players are known idolaters, adulterers, liars, prideful, etc... Who visits restaurants who might be owned by a gay person (maybe the whole chain of restaurants is owned by a gay person). Would you stop going to McDonalds if you knew that a gay person owned the the franchise?Another important point to remember is that yes, the actor who played Eric Liddel in Chariots of Fire was also gay.---------------Dear Grace Family,Now that the movie End of the Spear is about to open tomorrow I have received several emails from people asking what I think we should do about the fact that the role of Nate Saint (one of the 5 martyred missionaries) is being played in the movie by Chad Allen, an outspoken homosexual.So let me speak to our whole church family as I answer this question - I still think going to the movie is the best thing to do. Chad Allen is an actor – that’s his job. If he was trying to portray Nate Saint as a homosexual then I would be against the movie… but that’s not the case. A homosexual director did not write the script. This is not another example of Hollywood hijacking a great story and twisting it to promote a political agenda like homosexuality. So often Hollywood takes a great story (like the life of Christ!) and twists it and perverts the actual details to the point that it no longer even follows the truth of what the Bible tells us about Christ (such was the case in The Last Temptation of Christ by Martin Scorcese). Those are the kinds of movies that we want to speak out against – and refuse to spend our $8 ticket price helping them fund such garbage. But that’s not what is being done in the movie The End of the Spear. Chad Allen plays the part of Nate Saint well and happens to be a homosexual in his personal life. Are we going to boycott every place of business where a homosexual works? Think how many places we probably frequent as Christians where homosexuals are working or even perhaps are the owners. My shopping there doesn’t mean I support homosexuality. And remember - homosexuals should be allowed to work jobs and make an income. My goal is life is not to punish every homosexual. How Christians do you know that stop frequenting a place of business because someone working there or owning it is an adulterer, huh?What I think is really sad is how most Christians today go out and see lots of movies with far raunchier and racier themes than this – and yet now they want to make a stink over finding out that one of the actors in this movie is a homosexual. How hypocritical! I want to ask those Christians if they carefully check to see if there’s any homosexuals in any other movies before they go to see them. I doubt it. Also – in my mind, as long as Chad Allen is willing to play the part and follow the script he was given by a Christian director, imagine the impact it could have on his own life by studying and learning more about Nate Saint. Most actors work hard to understand their character before they step into the role. I imagine Chad Allen has been reading about Nate Saint… perhaps even read “Through Gates of Splendor” or some of the other accounts of their deaths in preparation for this role. God could use his involvement in this movie to show him for the first time what real Christians look like! – people who are willing to give their lives for people who reject what they believe and have to offer. That’s probably not what Chad Allen has seen from Christians here in America. This could be a means of grace where seeds of truth get powerfully planted in his life. But if we’re not careful, this whole “Oh my goodness Chad Allen is a homosexual so I’m not going to see this Christian movie” will be the main thing he remembers from this whole project. Wouldn’t that be sad! I assure you he has probably already heard from Christian groups blasting him for being a homosexual – and he’s probably heard from radical homosexual groups blasting him for having anything to do with this Christian movie, since it doesn’t make fun of Christianity but presents it in a positive light.Let’s not fall into either one of those camps. Let’s be radically different… and I think it would be closer to what God calls us to do. Here’s my suggestion! Instead of boycotting the movie because a homosexual named Chad Allen plays one of the lead roles, why not commit to praying for Chad Allen every week for this entire year – asking God to haunt him with the love and grace he saw in this story of sacrificial love? Let’s put Chad Allen in our prayer journals and beg God to never let him get over what he saw and learned about the life of Nate Saint and the others. And then – let’s pray that God will actually put real, live Christians in his path today that remind him of the Nate Saint that he played in the movie. Wouldn’t that be a better approach? And don’t you think that’s more like what Jesus would do? Jesus hung out with the prostitutes… the tax collectors… and the drunkards – and was criticized for it. If I’m going to be criticized over this then let it be said that I was too soft on Chad Allen. I’m going to err to the side of grace – and pray that God’s love and grace will break through into the life of Chad Allen.A couple people have sent me articles written by Christians that are calling us all to refuse to see the movie because Chad Allen is in it. While I can’t see their hearts – and I assume they love God and mean well – I think it’s absolutely wrong and very unfortunate that some Christians are more focused on punishing Chad Allen for being a homosexual than they are in supporting a movie that finally communicates a great message about 5 men who gave their lives for the cause of Christ. I think it’s another example of Christians who have lost sight of the cross – and are no longer keeping the main thing, the main thing. Evaluate it this way: Is the Gospel being shown in this movie? Yes! Is sacrifice for the cause of Christ being shown in this movie? Yes! Is the radical example of forgiving your enemies because of how much Christ has forgiven us being shown in this movie? Yes! Does the movie twist the facts of this great story and try to make us think any of these 5 missionaries were homosexual? No!Then let’s go see it, to the glory of God… and encourage your neighbors and co-workers to do the same. Let’s show Hollywood that, yes, people will spend money to see a movie that portrays real heroes that are worth emulating.Here’s our chance to show the world the message of sacrificial love that flows from the cross… not one more Christian boycott and protest.I invite you to join me in keeping the main thing the main thing.Because of Him,Brad

Thank you for posting the comments by Grace Family's pastor. I was about to write a response along the same lines, but he beat me to it--and stated it far better than I ever could have. I should add that if an outspoken gay actor is going to appear in a mainstream film, that alone may attract gay viewers wanting to support "one of their own." (I use that term very loosely.) If that happens, they will receive a presentation of the Gospel that they may not receive anyplace else. There are countless actors who appear in family and Gospel-oriented films who are not Christians and who live their lives in numerous types of sin, whether that be drunkenness, neglecting the Gospel, adultery, or homosexuality. That's why they're called ACTORS.I should also mention that while I am generally not a big advocate of going out to the movies, I think it's very notable that Christians, or at least people interested in things related to Christianity, have such a prominent place in our culture today, be it through entertainment, music or politics. Think about it: Could you have imagined this even 10 years ago? I couldn't.Blessings.marc

This was being discussed on another message board I am active on. Here's what I posted:The man (the producer of the film) in an article I read says,"After someone told me that Chad appeared on the cover of the gay and lesbian magazine The Advocate, we just felt, 'Hey, he's still the best actor." Jesus says, "Ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God." (Luke 16:15) 'nough said -Chris

9I have written you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— 10not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world. 11But now I am writing you that you must not associate with anyone who calls himself a brother but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or a slanderer, a drunkard or a swindler. With such a man do not even eat. The problem is that we must learn our entire bibles. Yes that verse is true, but we are not to use that verse in judgement of those outside of the Church. In first Corinthians, God gives us a clear command through the dictation of Paul, that we are not to judge those outside of the church, but only those inside. God will judge those outside. To do otherwise would be to try to claim an authority that we have no right to. It is sin and thus it can not be tolerated among the faithful. It does point out that we are to take a firm stand against wanton sin in the Church however. So for all those who misquote "judge not" it points that we are to expose sin and deal with it.

All of these comments are well spoken and with great concern. Unlike the apostle Paul, the fact is we want what we want and we do what we want to do. The Christian community heaped praise upon the makers of the Narnia movie. OK, well made movie, great story and author. The millions that Disney makes from all of us will be pumped into its machine that spews out its homosexual agenda. They are one of the biggest producers of homosexual material in the business. And it is fueled by the dollars of those who willingly give because we want what we want. If all those millions were given to promote Christ-like morals and prayer funaces and pro-Christian politicians. perhaps we would have less to say on this topic.

I dont personally have a problem with this. I dont see it as being any different than a large company hiring the best person for the job. If I were a businessman, unless I had a specific reason for hiring Christians above others, I would fill the positions with the best people for the job. I dont personally think that it is in the Spirit of love to exclude or discriminate against one applying for a job because they are a sinner. It is NOT in the Spirit of love to not warn that person of where their lifestyle will lead. We MUST do this. But i do not believe that it is our responsibility as Christians to exclude, degrade or trod down a class of society because of their lifestyle. This is what the Pharisee's did. Jesus openly embraced these people, while condemning their sin. Would we have had a problem with this if they had allowed an 'openly' divorced man to play the part? Or a man who is known to be unethical in business? Or a person who is 'openly' prone to anger? I welcome thoughts and opinions on this. In His Love,Joe

JFEdgar wrote:I dont personally have a problem with this. I dont see it as being any different than a large company hiring the best person for the job.Maybe that's one of the problems with modern Christianity - It's too much like a business. There is a difference between worldly and godly wisdom. Proverbs tells us that diffence:"The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom." -Proverbs 9:10If I were a businessman, unless I had a specific reason for hiring Christians above others, I would fill the positions with the best people for the job. We've all seen those movies from the 70's that obviously picked its actors because they were Christians and not necessarily the best at the craft. They are difficult to watch and usually make me laugh more than inspire me. While I would have liked to have seen a Christian instead of an openly-gay person in the role, one has to be careful not to paint themselves in a corner. Films require a lot of people to complete - everything from gaffers, sound people, costume designers, producers, directors, and many more - not just actors. It would be hard to make being a Christian a requirement for any position working on the film. I remember Kirk Cameron talking about witnessing to most of the cast and crew of both Left Behind II and III. The guy who plays the anti-Christ in those films isn't a Christian, and I believe Kirk even said the main character (the pilot) isn't either. The sad fact is that many Christians will not see this film because of this one guy being in it, but they probably won't mind going out to eat after church and contribute to paying an entire restaurant staff to work on Sunday.Even with that said, I still think it's a poor decision by the filmmakers.I dont personally think that it is in the Spirit of love to exclude or discriminate against one applying for a job because they are a sinner.I think that's an overexaggeration of the point. We sometimes forget that if we call something Christian, it associates the name of Christ with it, and we should be careful. It is NOT in the Spirit of love to not warn that person of where their lifestyle will lead. We MUST do this. But i do not believe that it is our responsibility as Christians to exclude, degrade or trod down a class of society because of their lifestyle. This is what the Pharisee's did. Jesus openly embraced these people, while condemning their sin. Jesus didn't embrace sinners - not your run-of-the-mill sinner who is dead in his sin and loving it. Jesus did the perfect will of His Father because His nature was exactly identical as His Father's. God's attitude to embracing the sinner is listed both in Old and New Testaments:"God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace unto the humble." -Proverbs 3:34 & James 4:6If a sinner remains proud of their sin, and lives in open rebellion against God, he will find no mercy from God. That is why Jesus even first preached repentance before grace (Mark 1:15.)There is a theological plague that is alive and well in the church that has somehow convinced the church that it should accept both regenerate and unregenerate alike - that this is showing the love of God - because one would obviously be ungodly if they didn't love sinners as well as believers. Well, we can love sinners, but we are never commanded to accept them. Jesus said the world would know that we are His by the way we believers love one another, not how well we love everyone. There is a way to love sinners and minister to them and share the Gospel with them, but as long as they reject Christ, we have no obligation to treat them as children of light."Adulterers and adulteresses! Do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Whoever therefore wants to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God." -James 4:4 Would we have had a problem with this if they had allowed an 'openly' divorced man to play the part? Or a man who is known to be unethical in business? Or a person who is 'openly' prone to anger? I welcome thoughts and opinions on this. In His Love,JoeTrue - sin is sin, and we all still stumble from time to time into some open or secret sin. While anger does seem to be a "lesser" sin, the sermon on the mount teaches it is just as condemning as murder.The church does have directions for dealing with Christians in open sin (Galatians 6:1, and Matthew 18, for instance), but we have no direction for dealing with non-Christians within a church or ministry (if one considers this film a ministry) because apparently the early church understood that non-Christians shouldn't have any part in the dealing of ministry. You see, we've strayed form that. The church is so full of sin today that the unregenerate don't really seem all that out-of-place. Sad. So very sad.I agree that we need to love the lost, and remind ourselves that we, too, were chief sinners before God sought us out. That keeps us in humility and away from Phariseeism. I have no problem with this.But what would you say about a criminal turned policeman who still parties with the old gang? He might change some of their minds about policemen - that some really do love the people, but he's doing himself and the badge on his breast a great disservice by so closely associating himself with criminals. It's just an analogy, and it has its limits, but do you see what I am saying?-Chris

I think you somewhat missed my point. We could argue about whether or not this was a 'ministry' or a business endeavor. If it was a ministry, then I guess it should have all christian actors and workers on the set. However, my point was only this. There shouldnt really be an outcry against this because it is not 'unlawful' for us to associate with 'gentiles' (or pagans). It is unlawful for us to invite them into our churches and treat them as part of the body. But in business I think it would be unloving and pharisaical for us to discriminate, oppress or chastise a segment of society. Our job as Christians (as far as the work of God goes)is to build up the body (which includes protecting it) and to be a light to the world. Joe