www.praythemovie.com

It is a topic many Christians will say they either love or hate it. Others may reject the genre outright because they see it as coming from the devil or, worst (as exemplified by the scores of non thinking, “walking living dead” around us, no punt intended) will have NO opinion on the subject whatsoever. The latter, although unbeknown to them, is by far the most toxic and dangerous attitude to have of all…….more on this when we chat next.

Everything we can feel, see, hear and experience was created by our transcendent God who lives outside the boundaries of time and space that limit us. This includes us, imperfect creatures but created in God’s image, as well as our ability to think and experience life. When God created the World, he loudly and clearly proclaimed it was good after everything He created. I do not think one can unilaterally exclude “scary movies” or the ‘horror genre” from this Godly qualification because it might be distasteful or otherwise unpalatable to some. It is the gift of free will that creates the possibility of sin and evil not the object (or subject) itself, e.g. it is not the gun, or even the bullet, that murders a person but the finger on the trigger instructed by the mind.

So, like with everything else in life, we Christians must carefully consider how we interact with horror, sex and gore wherever we find it, not simply avoid it. As Pastor James Harleman concludes in his article …….”the genre is not off-limits; like all areas of life, it should be engaged with godly discernment”.

Godspeed!

Another interesting article which I enjoyed reading. I will give you a comment or two in a minute but first a point of business. if you would like to make it easier for your readers of TJH Weekly Newsletter to provide you with feedback, you may wish to consider putting a link to your Blog http://thejoshuahouse.blogsome.com somewhere in the body of the newsletter, e.g. with your signature at the bottom of the message…..just a thought.

And now to the subject at hand. I must admit that I have no idea whether you would have become a Christian at Camp Qwanoes or not should the cultural context have been less appealing to you than it was. However, if I had to bet, which fortunately I don’t, I would probably answer with a no. Exactly why I think this way I am not sure, as it is only a gut feeling. This is a point that you and I have enthusiastically discussed before and one which will be very familiar to other Christians interested in the important soteriological question of whether to side with a Calvinist (predestination) or an Armenian (free will) doctrine of election and salvation.

While I fully realize that God is sovereign and may choose to do whatever he wants, I also think that He is not fond of illogical or whimsical actions. His perfection is surely beyond these worldly tendencies. Even though it could be presumptuous of me to try to interpret God’s mind, I believe that that He created me in His own image and that this, in some way, allows me to conjecture about the possibilities of His mind and the doctrines of election and salvation……..and by inference to what could have happened to you at Camp Qwanoes under a different set of circumstances. Whether my conjectures are reasonable or not I leave it up to your judgment. Basically, as Philip F. Congdon of the Adelaide College of Ministries first observed, I see four basic possibilities about God’s election:

1)God elected those individuals who would be saved based on His foreknowledge that they would believe;
2)God unconditionally elected individuals He would be save based on His sovereign choice alone;
3)God elected those individuals who would be saved, yet also gave them the free will to choose whether or not to believe (a seeming paradox);
4)God elected those who would be saved through the “Elect One,” Jesus Christ; all who by faith are “in Christ” are elect in that corporate Body.
It is clear that none of these possibilities are without difficult exegetical problems in Scripture. However, I find the theology of No 2 above, (the classic Calvinist thesis) both difficult to swallow and a bit inconsistent with my understanding of Scripture. The Calvinists seem to emphasize that God’s individual unconditional election is necessary to account for God’s divine attributes of sovereignty, omnipotence, omniscience, omnipresence, and immutability. But, I ask, is this correct and does free will necessarily disregard God’s attributes? I, for one, don’t think so.

I must admit that it has an irresistible allure for me to think that God’s love for us is an essential ingredient and key to understanding the complexities of election and salvation. God’s divine love never ceases and correctly frames His nature (1 John 4:8). This nature begs the question of whether a God who ordained the existence of immortal beings He so greatly loves would create them without making provisions for them to escape eternal torment. What kind of God would call on mankind to “believe and be saved” when He knows they cannot? I’ll let the readers answer this question for themselves but I strongly lean to believing that God’s love would discourage Him, if not outright prevent Him, from behaving in such a callous way. If one thinks theologically, i.e. one looks at a system of doctrine not in isolation but in conjunction with other biblical truth, one ultimately sees how things fit in. I suggest that God’s love fits well with a free will ingredient somewhere in the recipe.

In conclusion, I would like to say that, putting aside for a moment the simple possibility that view No 4 is the right one if we only interpret the word “elect” in the proper Jesus context, i.e. that all believers “in Christ” are elect in that corporate Body, the correct answer probably lies in a hybrid between views N0 1 and 3. Something along the lines that:

“God elected those individuals who would be saved based on His foreknowledge that they would believe making use of their God given free will to love Him or not.”

God transcends His creation; He exists outside the boundaries of time and space while reserving the right to intrude in them when and how He pleases. Thus it is quite possible, I would dare say, even likely, for both predestination (in the sense that God foreknows what will result under the conditions exquisitely laid out by Him) and free will (the ability of created individuals to choose whether to believe in Jesus or not) to exist simultaneously.

Thus, in my view, the outcome of your decision at Camp Qwanoes was set from the outset by God, who foreknew what your decision was going to be under the circumstances He had so wisely and sovereignly predestined for you. Somewhat paradoxically but correctly, you in turn exercised you free will and chose to believe in Him. Perhaps God makes it easier for some to believe in order that others, whom he also loves, are helped later to believe in Him as well. If the cultural setting had been less inviting you could have easily said no to Jesus and perhaps might have been given another chance later. Then perhaps you might have not. The point is that God has created an equitable set of conditions in the world for everyone to have ample opportunity to believe in Him. We in turn must choose whether to believe or not……a wonderful blessing but a tremendous responsibility as well. Ultimately, God wants to have by His side only those who freely love Him. He will impose himself on no one.

Having said this, I fully realize that more than one reader will disagree with my conclusions. If so, please let me know your views as I am always interested in a new perspective.

Godspeed!

Alfonso Casasempere

I fully support Pastor James Harleman’s idea that we ought not to shun Halloween simply because we are told it is evil, or because we have at some time participated in the festivity and never bothered to weigh its appropriateness. We ought instead to encourage ourselves and our fellow believers to employ godly wisdom, discernment, and a sense of our shared mission as Christians to decide what to do about this so American and Canadian festivity…….”Our abstinence or participation in regard to Halloween should not be derived from fear, misinformation, or pressure but rather from a sincere love of Jesus; every response to our culture and its festivals is a way to point to the God we love and serve”.

Furthermore, and along the same line, I wholeheartedly champion the belief so well expressed by Mars Hill Church in Seattle that…….”when it comes to doctrine, culture, preferences, traditions, lifestyles, politics, behavior, etc., we ought to take a “closed-hand/open-hand” approach.

The closed hand hangs onto the non-negotiable tenets of Christian orthodoxy: sin is the problem, Jesus is the answer, the Bible is true, and Hell is hot. The open hand, however, allows room for differences when it comes to secondary matters; we liberally allow freedom for conscience and wisdom to guide where the Bible is silent”.

Thus we see how the open hand fosters unity among the diversity of expressions found in our church communities: liberals and conservatives, ice hockey fans, and soccer moms, tree huggers and consumerists, carnivores and vegetarians, trendy bohemians and Microsoft nerds. Hence, my favorite Mars Hill Church policy, to be….”in favor of good beer (in moderation), great sex (in marriage), and even tattoos (Jesus has one). But our goal must always be love and concern for our friends so that we don’t enjoy our freedom at the expense of their faith.

Thanks again for an inspirational read.