KeralaBrethren.net
New User? Register Today!
Registered Users, LOGIN
What we believe (Eng) What we believe (Mal) About Us Contact Us
Forums Home General Forum Youth Forum Sisters Forum Archives (2005-2007) Archives (2001-2004)
Listing of Brides Listing of Grooms
Assemblies in Kerala Evangelists in India Instituitions in India
Christian Albums Christian Songs
Audio Sermons Bible Wallpapers Brethren Links KB History (Eng) KB History (Mal)

K E R A L A  B R E T H R E N
General Forum (2005 - 2007)

Forums Home ::
This Message Forum is to discuss spiritual topics only. Please avoid personal or assembly matters.
Let us use this facility for our spiritual enrichment and for bringing glory to our Lord almighty.
Webmasters reserve the right to delete any topic or posting partly or completely from this forum.
View Topics ::

Go to bottom of the page

# 01125 :  "Daivam Urangatha Veedu"
Dear Brethren,

Recently, I came across a movie titled "Daivam Urangatha Veedu", produced and directed by our brethren.

I personally believe that these kind of gimmicks should not be encouraged among our brethren. Instead of spending valuable time preaching the gospel and doing door-to-door ministry, it is sad that one of our "famous" Evangelist is directing actors/actresses to "act" like being saved and baptised, and that too by utilising the resources given to him by our brethren from various places.

I would like to invite brethren to comment of this issue. Is it scripturally/morally acceptable for our brethren, especially an Evangelist to make/direct movies and distribute?

Would it be fine if we watch a movie (worldly movie), and recommend to others because it has got a good moral?

Post by : jeevan  View Profile    since : 6 Mar 2007


Reply by : nelnob1   View Profile   Since : 6 Mar 2007 1:41:03 AM Close
Dear brother in Christ,

I dont think it is right on the part of an Evangelist to direct/make any types of documentary/films, as it is not his work, his work is to deliver the gospel to the unreached souls. If at all some visual factors to be shown there are capable visual medias which can do, but not by an evangelist. And moreover christian life is not acting it is practical, it is our spiritual life which should be a witness , testimony and not by watching any visuals and change and make reforms accordingly.

Yours in Christ
Samuel

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : mathai   View Profile   Since : 6 Mar 2007 1:53:40 AM Close
Dear brethren
Then what about 'vazhikatti' and all those programs which are greatly hyped these days among brethren!!?? In many of that, it is mainly 'role-play' and it is not truth.
"For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe. " 1 cor 1:21

Time immemorial media in one way or other was there. But Paul or Peter never used 'theater' or 'Drama' to PREACH GOSPEL.

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : nelnob1   View Profile   Since : 6 Mar 2007 2:35:37 AM Close
Dear brethren,

With the invention of visual medias as T.V, it has become a part of everyones life, let it be a believer or a non believer, there are several things in a television which is useful like news and current affairs which is the main purpose too , and the remaining which is an entertainment and which is pleasing in a wordly way to eyes and mind may be abstained.

But the querry raised can a EVANGELIST direct a movie for whatever purpose it is , as it is also added with resources utilised given by the brethren for gospel work. It is no, and shouldnt be entertained.


Yours in Christ
Samuel

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : kbb   View Profile   Since : 6 Mar 2007 2:36:04 AM Close

Of course, Peter, Paul and the rest of the Apostles used Radio, TV, Printed Tracts, Public Address Systems and Internet Message Boards for their work.
Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : jeevan   View Profile   Since : 6 Mar 2007 2:44:57 AM Close
Thank you Brethren for your thoughts, though, I couldn't understand what Bro. kbb wanted to say.

Regarding Bro. Mathai's comments, I do agree that programmes like "Vazhikatti" should be encouraged as long as they stick to the basic objective - that is, to proclaim the Gospel - "as it is". As soon as they turn to role playing and drama, we should abstain ourselves from watching/participating/or even assisting them.

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : nelnob1   View Profile   Since : 6 Mar 2007 2:57:50 AM Close
Dear " jeevan"

Kindly read once again and understand if it was the right meaning what you have written about "mathai" posts.


Yours in Christ
Samuel

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : beracha   View Profile   Since : 6 Mar 2007 4:26:17 AM Close

Brothers,

How will we explain the following enacted messages / parables? Is not there an element of theatrical performance in them?

1. Jeremiah 13 – The Linen Belt
2. Jeremiah 19 – Breaking of Clay Jar
3. Ezekiel 12 - Digging through the wall and acting as one going into exile.

Who was the Director?
Whose was the script?
and who acted?

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : drjcp   View Profile   Since : 6 Mar 2007 4:49:07 AM Close
Dear Brethren

if an evangelist has a call to use multi-media in a particular way, who are the others to condemn it. Is not the discussion progressing on the basis of personal likes and dislikes about what one evangelist has done.

If the job of an evangelist is only to preach the gospel then let me ask

1. What about evangelists who run bible schools
2. What about evangelists who run orphanages
3. What about evangelists who run counseling ministries
4. What about evangelists who run hospitals.

Why raise the finger of accusation and gossip against a person just because he is an evangelist and made a film.

Whoever told you brethren about the finances such as

<<But the querry raised can a EVANGELIST direct a movie for whatever purpose it is , as it is also added with resources utilised given by the brethren for gospel work. It is no, and shouldnt be entertained.>>

who told you that the resources he used were given for some other purpose. Is that not a hasty conclusion.

Look at the irony in the following statement
<<Would it be fine if we watch a movie (worldly movie), and recommend to others because it has got a good moral?>>

The author himself accepts that there are at least two kinds of movies. Then why confuse one with the other.

In that case you should also condemn all multi media ministries like

* Jesus film
* Other films which our brethren use for evangelism

If someone is doing a useful work without taking anything from your pocket, and if he is not breaking any rule of the land or principles of ethics by doing so, let him do it.

If an evangelist is supposed only to preach, he cannot organize, conduct marriages, bury the dead, etc. The artificial caging of evangelists is not right.

Johnson C. Philip
www.BrethrenAssembly.Com

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : beracha   View Profile   Since : 6 Mar 2007 4:56:11 AM Close

Coming to New Testament:

The various events recorded in the Book of Revelations are signs or scenes enacted by the Angelic Team.

The Lord had profusely used drama or theater for communicating His prophetic plans for the future through audio-visual media and all elements of theatre were present in them where acting was definitely an important item.

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : nelnob1   View Profile   Since : 6 Mar 2007 5:31:57 AM Close
Dear Dr.Johnson,

I oblige your comments, I know this particular evangelist & I do praise God for the ministry he is doing to achieve souls unto his kingdom and really he is a God gifted evangelist,but I dont agree with this way of Gosepl work where he has engaged an actor & actress to demonstrate what a born again believer or his family has to do, as I am one among the brethren who share the burden of his ministry, by praying and by support.

Yours in Christ
Samuel

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : thomasdelhi   View Profile   Since : 6 Mar 2007 7:06:22 AM Close
We should praise God for those who actually spend money for the sake of Gospel. He has not used the money entrusted to him for his personal purpose.

Movie is a good tool to reach the multitudes. Why not we use it. Now without engaging actors and actress (there is hardly any believers) how can one make a good film. Let us be practical.

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : drjcp   View Profile   Since : 6 Mar 2007 7:07:42 AM Close
My Dear Brother Samuel

Thanks for your kind reply addressed to me.

Brother, it is entirely up to you to like or dislike what another person does. That is something I would not question.

However, when it is not made clear that it is a matter of personal opinion and assessment, people might think that you are discussing a general principle about what an evangelist can and cannot do.

Good to read your post and God bless you

Johnson C. Philip

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : ageorge1   View Profile   Since : 6 Mar 2007 7:18:26 AM Close
In these days we can see there are so many means used to spread the Gospel of Truth which a believer has to differentiate personally and find out from the Word of God what all these things are really meant for and what purpose it should make as far as our Christian walk is concerned. By simply condemn or criticize is not the answer but to have a realistic discernment in the light of the Word of God is to be sought to know the truth.

See, faith comes by hearing the Word of God and by believing it. This is the reality the Bible establishes since from the inception. By showing the picture of Lord Jesus Christ and simultaneously His death on the cross works out nothing good for a new person. The same is the way nowadays people choose pictures and films in order to reach out the gospel. People try to demonstrate reality in a scenic way in order to make known people the things in a more exceptional way. But really speaking nothing good comes out from all these. To a certain extent such thing declines the faith and trust a person really have before be has seen gospel in such a way.

Of course, in all the cases, it should be our earnest desire to discern what is good and profitable to our lives for spiritual augmentation, otherwise it is our responsibility to refrain from such things.


Christian Regards,


A. George


Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : drjcp   View Profile   Since : 6 Mar 2007 8:12:47 AM Close
Precisely. In things about which the Bible is silent, and things which are not contrary to the Bible, we should follow

<<Of course, in all the cases, it should be our earnest desire to discern what is good and profitable to our lives for spiritual augmentation, otherwise it is our responsibility to refrain from such things.>>

<<Whether you eat or drink or whatever you do do it for the glory of God. I Cor. 10:31>>

Johnson C. Philip

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : jeevan   View Profile   Since : 6 Mar 2007 8:24:22 AM Close
Dear Dr. JCP,

Thanks for your kind comments.

(I) "If the job of an evangelist is only to preach the gospel then let me ask

1. What about evangelists who run bible schools
2. What about evangelists who run orphanages
3. What about evangelists who run counseling ministries
4. What about evangelists who run hospitals."

Could you please tell me from the above four responsibilities of an Evangelist, where would find an element of "acting" and "directing"?

(II) About your comment on "worldly movies", my question was whether it would be right for us to watch them if we can learn something good (moral/values) from them.

(III) As a believer, I would definitely be concerned about the way the Lord's resources are being utilised - more so by an Evangelist. So your question of "who told you that the resources he used were given for some other purpose. Is that not a hasty conclusion?" doesn't have any sense at all.

(IV) "If someone is doing a useful work without taking anything from your pocket".........well I think now you are generalising. How can you say that I have not contributed without even knowing knowing me?

It is not a question of whether somebody has "taken from my pocket" or not. It should be a matter of concern for all brethren - as Bro. Samuel has rightly pointed out - as we all share the burden of his ministry, either by praying and/or by support.

(V) Would you recommend our young (or for that matter even old) brethren to join an acting/directing course in a Film Institute, so that we can make more and more movies and telefilms?

Please, brethren, the time has come for us to start thinking about our priorities.

God bless all.

Regards

Jeevan


Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : drjcp   View Profile   Since : 6 Mar 2007 10:20:19 AM Close
Dear Jeevan

Emotion is not to control oneself when discussing an issue. Else you might not have asked some of these questions. For example, you ask

<< "If someone is doing a useful work without taking anything from your pocket".........well I think now you are generalising. How can you say that I have not contributed without even knowing knowing me?>>

Once you contribute, you have become part and parcel of his ministry. A person who contributes funds or time for the ministry of an evangelist does not try to strip that evangelist in public. A person with that much burden for an evangelist would confront that evangelist in PRIVATE. That is the biblical norm.

You have violated a biblical norm. What is more you have behaved like a coward by doing the following two more things:

1. You are hiding your identity behind a pen-name. Thus you are throwing stones upon a person from dark. [Do you know that Scripture condemns and forbids a person to curse a deaf person.]

2. You may say you did not mention the name of the evangelist. Whom are you fooling. You have mentioned the name of the film and then you have attacked him.

3. If you were sincere, you should have talked to him first. And then you should have shown courage by entering in a public discussion by revealing your name and identity.

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : drjcp   View Profile   Since : 6 Mar 2007 10:26:59 AM Close
<<(V) Would you recommend our young (or for that matter even old) brethren to join an acting/directing course in a Film Institute, so that we can make more and more movies and telefilms?>>

Dear Jeeven

this is simply a pejorative question, and it has no connection with the main issue. Any person can raise any number of such questions to attack others -- but this is not a Christian attitude.

You say
<<It is not a question of whether somebody has "taken from my pocket" or not. It should be a matter of concern for all brethren - as Bro. Samuel has rightly pointed out - as we all share the burden of his ministry, either by praying and/or by support.>>

If you were so concerned, you would have gone to the person -- following the biblical pattern. In fact, if you had done anything for this brother, you would surely have contacted him and expressed your disapproval.

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : drjcp   View Profile   Since : 6 Mar 2007 10:41:14 AM Close
Dear Jeevan, you ask

<<Could you please tell me from the above four responsibilities of an Evangelist, where would find an element of "acting" and "directing"?>>

Let me remind a couple of things.

1. Many of us Brethren simply cannot tolerate others doing anything. We simply strip them naked.

2. Many of us Indians approve the same thing when done by non Indians. The movie "Jesus" was shown in tens of thousands of places. Nobody raised objection. Many have produced movies among the Brethren, but they were influential people so nobody had the guts to say anything. But one evangelist does it and you try to tear him. More so because like the terrorists, you are doing it from behind a mask.

When God wanted his messengers to "act" they did act. Some passages have been quoted by another person in this same thread. God Himself directed the drama and it served as an object lesson for His children.

Almost all TV programs conducted by the Brethren are recorded by the same people who record secular movies. The same makeup is applied. (I know, because I have appeared on many Brethren TV programs). The same money is spent. Nobody has the courage to speak because these are done by relatively powerful brethren.

Finally a poor evangelist comes on the scene -- after all the others -- and you simply pick on him using a straw man. Worse, you are doing it from behind a veil.

Does not the scripture teach transparency. Hiding behind a veil you are trying to remove the speck from another brother's eyes.

If you are sincere in your desire for stewardship of money, go and talk to the Evangelist. And then advice him. Do not strip him in public.

Johnson C. Philip

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : drjcp   View Profile   Since : 6 Mar 2007 10:47:23 AM Close
In case you think I am defending this evangelist because we are pals, then you are wrong. We know each other, that is all.

I have met him many times. I have given compliments to him for his teaching ministry. But on his face I have told many things that I perceived as wrong. He graciously received my comment as though from an elder brother.

I did so because that is the thing to be done.

The only thing one can criticize in public is doctrinal heresy. Bible commands it. The rest of it is "go and talk in private"

Johnson C. Philip

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : tomj   View Profile   Since : 6 Mar 2007 1:46:56 PM Close
Dear readers:

I like telling stories. Here is one. About 40 plus years ago, late Bro. M.E. Cherian wrote an Editorial in his magazine ‘Suvisheskan’ (=Evangelist). I remember him criticizing those who would listen to the Radios or owning one at home. There were subsequent articles appeared under several titles and by different contributors.

Years passed. Radio gave way to Television and Computer. In the mid 1980s he and I watched a Billy Graham’s crusade on TV. He greatly appreciated it. MEC, being a close relative , I asked; “Achyaaya (a respectful way to address an older relative in Malayalam), do you remember your article about the Radios in the magazine, back in the Sixties?

He turned to me and said; “you have to remind me of that now, don’t you? Yes, it was one of my biggest mistakes. I didn’t think it through when I wrote it”.

I hope those criticizing this brother for making a film to bring a message, particularly to help people who are contemplating suicide, would take a step back and leave such people alone.

I pray that we would get off from our Pharisaical high-horse and encourage these men who have greater vision. If it is from God, and it is a source of blessings for others, and God wants to continue it, why should I stand by the way side and sling stones at them? If it is not from God let Him deal with it!

Regards,

Tom J

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : George P. Koshy   View Profile   Since : 6 Mar 2007 2:08:54 PM Close
Dear Readers,

I am not against making and showing movies. At the same time Romans 1:21-23 and similar verses tell us that no one or any created things should act as God or to be portrayed as God. This includes pictures of any kind.

This prohibition is also seen in the Old Testament.

Shalom Malekim!!!

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : ageorge1   View Profile   Since : 6 Mar 2007 10:37:04 PM Close

Dear Brethren,

Quote from GPK :

"At the same time Romans 1:21-23 and similar verses tell us that no one or any created things should act as God or to be portrayed as God. This includes pictures of any kind.This prohibition is also seen in the Old Testament".

The film and other visual medias do the same thing as quoted by GPK above. A person acts as Lord Jesus Christ, Lord of all Glory and Majesty, really a matter which we are to be taken seriously into our concern whether we really appreciate such thing or not. We are not appreciate then we should either abstain or not to encourage that is all I would like to submit here.

Christian Regards,

A.George

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : nelnob1   View Profile   Since : 6 Mar 2007 10:45:14 PM Close
Dear brethren in Christ,

Was good to read everyones comments. Let me contribute my part to, as I am somewhere in the forum, I dont know about other denominations , and I dont want to, Brethren Assemblies have individual assemblies at different places by yield(souls) God has given for thier hard in that particualar areas. God himself have choosen various valuable brethren among ourselves to preach among the unreached. The ways of spreading gospel are in different ways, by personal evangelisation, open air ministries,convention speakers, literature ministries, hospital evangelisation, Jail evangelisation,Radio ministries, counciling ministries, bible school ministries, orphanage ministries and the latest T.V. Ministries till date. And we have our brethren saints(evangelist) identified for this particular ministries and God has blessed them with in all this fields by adding souls to his kingdom, And as brethren assemblies doesnt have a head office or any of the evangelist is employed with, but God feeds them like Elijah was fed. And it all depends upon the identity they have among the brethren and zeal they have for thier ministry. As Dr.Johnson mentioned generally, it was wrong on my part too to give such a statement , I unconditionally apologise to all in the forum for make a loose statement. As Dr.Johnson said it should have been said privately as he did in some occassions, so did I , but as a part of the discussion I wrote my opinion, which I withdraw now.


Note: Br.George P.Koshy has also given a valuable thought, no one has seen God, do we need a picture or photo to believe who Christ Jesus is ? It is matter for us to think. Lord Jesus Christ reply to Thomas after resurrection is self expalnatory. (For God so loved the world, so that he gave his only begotten son, for whosoever BELIEVETH in him should not persih but have everlasting life. John 3:16)


Yours in Christ
Samuel

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : thomasdelhi   View Profile   Since : 7 Mar 2007 2:52:50 AM Close
Somebody told God used the help of drama or theatre for communicating his prophetic plan.

I believe, God do not need the help of drama or theatre to show something. Only humans need them.

Because TIME matters for us humans and not for God. For Him everything is ever present. Hence things in the Book of Revelation is a future event for us and not for God. He showed John those future events through a "revelation', not through his natural eyes.

Rev 1:10 I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet.

Our human intelligence alone can not grasp those spiritual things.

Thomas

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : tomj   View Profile   Since : 7 Mar 2007 8:49:20 AM Close

I am also sensitive in regard to someone playing the ‘part’ as Jesus Christ or God in a dramatic performance. I read in Aug 2006 ‘Suvisheshekan’ Magazine (I read it this morning again) that this was performed by believers ONLY and the purpose was to convey the message that there is an alternative for suicide while facing adversities and introducing the gospel to people going through trials. Also, there was nothing in what i read sugegsting that they had anyone 'playing the part as Jesus Christ or God'. So, I assume there isn't any. Please correct me if I am wrong.

How can we so heartless and be critical against such noble endeavors? This particular person (Kunjumon Thottappally) might have seen the need in the rural areas where he is working and burdened to do something about it.

It is easy to sit and criticize people; it is much harder to wear their shoes and walk in it for a day! The least we can do for such people who labor for the Lord is to stop criticizing them (unless there is doctrinal error). These brothers are accountable to God, their local church and or their commending church. Such accountability is helpful, since none of us are perfect. Beyond that, even if you support a person financially, he is not in your control. You do it unto the Lord; let God reward you – let God guide and give wisdom to the recipient.

Regards,

Tom J

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : beracha   View Profile   Since : 7 Mar 2007 8:52:35 AM Close

Dear Thomas,

Take it easy.

Regards,
Thomas Varghese.

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : trds   View Profile   Since : 7 Mar 2007 9:12:09 AM Close
I don't know Malayalam and I don't know what is ther in this movie, but if only movie-preaching is to be condemned, all televised preaching needs to be stopped, because they are all done with movie camera and are projected on small screen.
Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : abygeorge   View Profile   Since : 7 Mar 2007 4:26:09 PM Close
The Issue no one has addressed is - Dowry - this movie encourage the poor old protestant evil called Dowry - a Rich Brother From Gulf, who is on vacation is willing to pay So many Lakhs for a Groom!. there is enough money to Pay off BLADE company plus, enough money to pay dowry for another wedding!.

I am not sure How Gospel is prached here!

For a non believer - The movie basicaly shows - Christian life is a Bed of Roses, - I think the movie failed miserably in many ways.

If the Movie contains few more of the Testimony of True conversions, it would serve the purpose.

Also - The quality of the Production was terrible, hope this brother didnt pay a lot of money to make it.

I encourage this brother to make a movie called "TV illathu Brethren Veedu"

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : drjcp   View Profile   Since : 7 Mar 2007 9:54:22 PM Close
Dear TRDS, you are right.

Dear AbyGeorge, you are simply reacting against something you did not like. Remember, if one looks for perfection one can always find fault with anyone and anything.

Do not blindly oppose those who are trying to do something for the Lord.

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : drjcp   View Profile   Since : 7 Mar 2007 10:01:10 PM Close
Dear Brethren

it has become clear that all this attack directed against an evangelist is simply emotionalism. We need to abandon this attitude. Let me jot down my observations

1. It is people who hide behind the mask of "pen names" who are bold in their guerilla war against others in this thread.

2. Politically or financially powerful people among us have been doing the same things for long but these people who are so bold against an "evangelist" do not have the courage to attack the powerful ones.

3. Thus the cause of the attack in this thread is not the film per se.

4. For the last 60 years foreign missionaries have been showing films in Kerala and other places in India. Malayalees go in droves to watch those films. It becomes a sin only when a malayalee dares to do the same thing. This is our slave mentality. "Sayippine Kanumbol Kawathu Marakkuka"

5. Our slave mentality which endorses anything western or foreign, and which condemns the same thing when Indian, needs to be addressed and abandoned.

Dr. Johnson C. Philip

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : abygeorge   View Profile   Since : 8 Mar 2007 12:13:50 AM Close
Mr. Philip.. There is No attack on any evangelist. The comments were towards the contents of the Film.

I am very surprised at your comparison of Foreign missionaries showing films to this movie. You are comparing apples to oranges.

Without attacking the film producers - Mr Philip, can you comment on the contents of the Movie or write up a critique?

Thank you
Aby

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : thomasdelhi   View Profile   Since : 8 Mar 2007 12:29:46 AM Close
I fully agree what Br Johnson wrote above.

Also a separate thread to review this particular film may be useful.

Nothing in the world is perfect. If this film has more good things compared to its negatives then we have to accept it as a good work and encourage the person who laboured for it, so that he could bring something better in the future.

Thomas

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : bethel   View Profile   Since : 8 Mar 2007 1:37:23 AM Close
Dear Jeevan&All,

I think all this postitive&negative response towards an evangelist making a Christian movie maybe due to the lack of our knowledge about the roles&characterstics of a good evangelist. I guess It would be better to discuss who is an evangelist, what should be his characterstics,what is the scope of his ministry.These need to be discussed in the light of scriptures and not on personal likes and dislikes.

I have not seen this particular movie, but I think if it helps the cause of expanding the lord’s kingdom on earth then what is the harm???Now the objection mainly seems to be an Evangelist making it. I think there are both positives and negatives to it..

Positives Responses

-He is presenting the gospel in an audio visual form, which does attract attention of people specially in rural areas who may be illiterate and cannot read a tract.

-Lord Jesus himself used so many parables and examples to teach people about the kingdom of God, there was no audio visual medium those days.

-We don’t find any specified procedure in the scripture to preach the gospel, it can be preached by any method as long as there is no deviation from the truth.

Contd

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : bethel   View Profile   Since : 8 Mar 2007 1:37:49 AM Close
contd.

Possible Criticisms

-Most of our evangelists/full time workers are also one among the elders of the local church and movie making does need time, and effort. This will divert his attention and time from his primary responsibilities which he may not be able to perform to the best of his abilities.

-He may be using non believing actors in the movie, who are working purely for commercial reasons. Does God want us to take the help of unsaved people to preach the gospel.

-Movie making needs finances, it is important to remember that the finances used for making a movie by an evangelist is obtained specifically for the purpose. It will be wrong to use funds received for other purposes into movie making.

-Lastly for any movie to be watched it needs to promoted and publicized, which again needs funds, time and methods which may not be always becoming of a good Christians.

The above comments are not targeted on this particular movie or the evangelist but my opinion in general on this subject of believers making movies.

In Christ’s Love

Jimmi

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : drjcp   View Profile   Since : 8 Mar 2007 1:59:33 AM Close
Dear Aby

if this attack was against a "film" and not an evangelist, then what is the meaning of the following statements and analysis:

<<Instead of spending valuable time preaching the gospel and doing door-to-door ministry, it is sad that one of our "famous" Evangelist is directing actors/actresses to "act" like being saved and baptised, and that too by utilising the resources given to him by our brethren from various places.>>

<<As a believer, I would definitely be concerned about the way the Lord's resources are being utilised - more so by an Evangelist.>>

Again by the masked person who started this thread.

There are several attacks against the person here. Placing "famous" in quotes in this context is understood to be a pejorative expression. His financial integrity is also questioned here.

<<I dont think it is right on the part of an Evangelist to direct/make any types of documentary/films, >>

<<querry raised can a EVANGELIST direct a movie>>

It is against the evangelist. [Statement has been retracted by the person when he realized he was unfairly attacking a person]

My dear Aby,

either you did not read the thread. Or you did read and felt the others are blind and that they did not see this.

This forum is not meant to tear down Brethren evangelists -- whether you like them or not. The only things that should be attacked here are false doctrines, heresies, and heretics -- in keeping with the Bible.
Johnson C. Philip


Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : drjcp   View Profile   Since : 8 Mar 2007 2:15:51 AM Close
Dear Jimmi

thanks for an objective listing of many criteria. They are very useful. However, one of your comments is either incomplete or biased -- probably incomplete due to the little time one can spend on the net.

<<Lastly for any movie to be watched it needs to promoted and publicized, which again needs funds, time and methods which may not be always becoming of a good Christians.>>

Raising funds for the promotion of a movie is not ethically different from raising funds for any other ministry. So placing it in a category to be suspected is not right. I am sure you did not intend it.

Coming back once again to the thread -- we Indians are in the habit of attacking our brethren while at the same time we endorse the same things when it is done by a non Indian missionary in India. This is a slave mentality. It is this mentality which caused many of the brave Indians like Tipu Sultan, Jhansi Rani, and Velu Thambi to die when the fellow Indians betrayed them to our foreign rulers.

Even today it is this slave mentality which endorses [for more than six decades] what foreigners do in India but condemns the same thing when done by Indians.

Johnson C. Philip

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : bethel   View Profile   Since : 8 Mar 2007 2:58:43 AM Close
Dear Bro.Johnson,

thanks for your kind words...The term promotion&publicity somehow i feel a discomfort with,if you ask me why..i really don't have a clear answer..i do also realise without these it is difficult to create awareness in todays age,probably thats why we use these concepts today whether it is to promote a Christian film,a convention,a spiritual retreat,youth camps,popular evangelists etc...

One reasons i am not very convinced of promotion&publicities for spiritual matters is:
The apostles and other preachers in the early centuries could not have used these methods and i think there were more conversions those days than it is today..Besides it will make us stand along with the so called big healers of today who do alot of publicity of their ministries.Now the question to be asked is how then people know about it????i guess word of mouth is the best way of promotion with no expense but efforts,and this is what we find in the scriptures too when people had been telling and asking themselves when Lord Jesus used to reach any place.

Anyway this was to clarify about the last point i made in my previous post,the clarification may not be convincing enough,i will leave it there..i personally have no problem with anybody making a christian movie,but he must take due consideration of the important things so that unwanted things do not get attached to the movie ending up like any other commercial movies.I think there should be a healthy debate on this subject and if positive conclusions are reached then why only evangelist but other affluent brethrens who can spare finances can also get into making Christian films on so many subjects…

In Christ’s Love

Jimmi

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : thomasdelhi   View Profile   Since : 8 Mar 2007 3:11:48 AM Close
Dear Jimmi,

You made a good point "The apostles and other preachers in the early centuries could not have used these methods and i think there were more conversions those days than it is today"

I think QUALITY matters and not QUANTITY. Otherwise these so called "miracle ministers" of this time could have turned the world upside down for God.

ACTIONS SPEAKS LOUDER THAN WORDS.

Thomas

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : drjcp   View Profile   Since : 8 Mar 2007 3:15:41 AM Close
Dear Brother Jimmi

that was a very helpful reply, and it clarifies the subject further, specially

<<but he must take due consideration of the important things so that unwanted things do not get attached to the movie ending up like any other commercial movies.I think there should be a healthy debate on this subject and if positive conclusions are reached then why only evangelist but other affluent brethrens who can spare finances can also get into making Christian films on so many subjects…>>

Coming to publicity and promotion: while these are modern words, the activity is ancient. In fact done properly, it is a totally biblical activity. One of the greatest publicists was Noah who gave wide publicity to the divine message.

The very phrase "Messenger" of God implies the need to do the right kind of publicity and promotion of the right kind of message.

I am sure the above lines would open a new direction for you to assess the need for the right kind of publicity and promotion

Greetings

Johnson C. Philip

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : drjcp   View Profile   Since : 8 Mar 2007 3:19:12 AM Close
Dear Brother ThomasDelhi

if your comment is about publicity and promotion, then you need to examine the subject again.

All preaching is publicity and promotion -- of the right kind -- so one cannot place a blanket condemnation on these two.

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : thomasdelhi   View Profile   Since : 8 Mar 2007 3:32:05 AM Close
no brother, i was not referring to the publicity and promotion per se.

what I did was a general comparison of 1st century preaching with current day. early century christians accomplished more because people felt a real difference in the lives of christians. If we compare early believers with the charismatic ministers who run million dollar programmes, we can see the difference. Spent much but accomplished less.

sorry for moving away from subject.

thomas

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : drjcp   View Profile   Since : 8 Mar 2007 4:37:09 AM Close
Dear Brother Thomas Delhi

I fully agree with you -- now that I know what you meant.

No problem in moving away now. The main subject has almost come to a close.

Johnson C. Philip

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : abygeorge   View Profile   Since : 8 Mar 2007 7:34:24 AM Close
Mr. Philip.
Answer to your "either you did not read the thread. Or you did read and felt the others are blind and that they did not see this." - I did read all the posts, I was only commenting on what I posted - I am only responsibile for what I said in this forum.

It still astonish the fact, you have refused to answer my question, "What you think about the Movie" - I am not asking anything about the evangelist, producer, director, camera man. With your vast Knowledge about so many things.. let me ask you Mr. philip - What do you think about the movie? Its just simple, if you dont want to comment on the MOVIE. If you dont want to speak about the contents of the Movie, then I feel like you are deviating from the subject.

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : fellowchristian   View Profile   Since : 9 Mar 2007 12:53:03 AM Close
I find the discussion is active and I think this might take some positive turn in the methodology of propogating 'gospel'.
I remember an instance, myself asking the evagelist (who has produced the film under discussion) on the way he conducted music concerts for propagating gospel.
I was also in charge of one of his capaign in our place. After the 1st day's 'music, many of the elders and church leaders aired their dislike and some of them declared that they won't be coming the next day to hear a "ganamela or pattukacheri'.
I asked him to do the music direction so that it may sound more of a spiritual atomosphere rather than a 'ganamela'. He smiled at me and asked 'Do you know, who are the target group". He himself answred, "We target the campaign program to preach gospel to the worldly people who come to enjoy the music". He also added, "There is a good crowd of people from outside the church, and sometimes they may feel more 'at home' in the midst of their fellowmen rather than be surrounded by some pharisees".
Jesus has said, we can know the tree from its fruits.
Some people do things in a different way, but don't get annoyed. It can do wonders if they are properly guided and encouraged at some points.

It might be profitable to read 1 Corinthians Chapter 13 at least once in a while.
FC

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : drjcp   View Profile   Since : 9 Mar 2007 2:56:56 AM Close
Dear Aby here is your comment

<<Mr. Philip.. There is No attack on any evangelist. The comments were towards the contents of the Film.>>

1. This is a false representation of this thread.

2. The thread is about an evangelist, and we did discuss that subject.

3. If you wished to introduce a new subject, you should have followed the protocol and should have started a new thread.

4. When you start a new thread on that new topic, then you will get appropriate replies.

You pointed wrote to me

<<It still astonish the fact, you have refused to answer my question, "What you think about the Movie">>

1. first, that question should be placed in a new thread, not here where it is NOT the subject matter.

2. The question was to everyone and not to me. As to whether I should be the one to answer, I will decide after you launch a new thread.

Please follow the protocol of discussion fora.

Johnson C. Philip

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : samv   View Profile   Since : 21 Jan 2008 6:18:05 PM Close
Jesus Christ commanded his desciples to spread the Gospel all over the world. I think it's a good thing to make use of the communication systems (including Television) which is available in our age to spread the Gospel.

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : paulsmathew   View Profile   Since : 22 Jan 2008 2:23:38 AM Close
dear dr. jcp and jimmi(i.e. bethel)
i agree to the points you have brought out. especially the fact that when we make a drama we need to make it with people who are aware and believe in the truths we are presenting rather than taking anybody from secular world be it a famous actor..
but at the ame time i would commend the use of mass media in the promotion of the gospel and biblical principals in a form that is unadulterated..
the evangelism is not only thru a verbal ministry from the podium or in the street corner preachin the gospel but it can be in diverse fashion as long as we keep it unadulterated and without any ulterior motive..
today if many are hearing the gospel in iran and afghanistan its thru the many redio stations..
how can we undermine these ministries..
let us be not too rigid in just because a particular way is different from what has been going on for many ages..
of course there are people who misuse these to their own profit which will not be the case if we present the word of God unadulterated.. thanks..
Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page



Go to top of the page

All times are GMT -5 Hours
Forums Home ::
© 2017 Sansnet.com



HOME