So this first first semester of college just flew by. I mean, it really got out of hand fast. It literally feels like I just moved into the dorm a few weeks ago.
I started telling myself right before school started that whenever I finished my first semester I would post a huge blog about college and how it has affected me. But, to be honest, I really don't feel that different at all. Sure, class was a little bit harder than High School and finals were definately a pretty stressful period, but, other than that, everything was pretty standard.
I think it's great that I am still hanging out with my cell group guys and that I have met a bunch of new solid Christian friends. There are so many pitfalls that you hear about people falling into once they get into college and experience "life on their own," but with these guys and girls, its been just like the old days. I am truly thankful for these people and our friendships--God is, indeed, good. At the same time, while I have met quite a few new people, I feel a little bit like I could do a better job of branching out. Its easy to stay in your own little comfort zone when you have so many people that you're so close to around you all the time. Hopefully I'll figure out how to balance these things.
So, no, I don't have any Earth-shatteringly insightful observations after my first semester. It sure was fun, though--I'll tell you that. And I'm definately looking forward to the next couple of years. Maybe I'll get a huge revelation later... if I do, I'll keep you posted.
Moving on, Christmas time is here. Before I say anything else about it, I feel like I need to plug some music. Sufjan Stevens, one of my favorite singer/songwriters has a, as far as I can tell, completely legal and completely free collection of 3 Christmas EPs called "Hark! Songs for Christmas." Download them here. He plays a great mix of traditional Christmas songs and new ones written by Sufjan himself. My two favorite are probably "O Come O Come Emmanuel" and "That Was the Worst Christmas Ever!" Do yourself a favor and check it out.
My Birthday is about a week before Christmas, and my parents got me my birthday present early, and it is an awesome, awesome gift. They got me a Latin Percussion Conga and Bongo set with stands and everything. I've been banging around on them for a couple of days now, and while I have absolutely no skill on them right now, I can't wait to put some serious practice time into them.
One thing I'm kind of bummed about, however, is the fact that we don't have a Christmas tree at the Lake House (where we're staying until our new house gets built). Its not a big deal at all, but I just like the tree as a big visual reminder of the Holiday.
I really don't have much else to say (and I know I haven't said much up until now, either). I guess I just felt like blogging, even though I really had nothing new to add. Oh well. If there is anyone that reads this that I don't see on a regular basis, do me a favor and have a Merry Christmas for me. I would really appreciate it.
Thursday, December 15, 2005
Thursday, December 01, 2005
A Question of Conviction?
I've been thinking on and off for a while now about the kinds of movies, tv shows, and music I expose myself to--or for that matter, the kinds of movies, tv shows, and music that all believers in Christ expose themselves to.
I know some believers that say they listen to only Christian music because they only want to hear things that are spiritually edifying. They feel that if a song doesn't discuss or directly point to God, it is a waste of their time.
Others I know pretty much refuse to listen to any Christian music because they feel that the music itself, in 99% of the cases, is derivative and uninspired. They sometimes even feel that some (although certainly not all) aspects of spirituality, nature, the human condition, etc. are better expressed by some of today's secular bands than by most Christian artists.
In my opinion, both sides are valid. I fall somewhere in between, typically.
Movies are a little more of an intense subject. I know many believers that if an 'R' rating is mentioned at all, consider the movie to be unboubtedly a tool of Satan. If a movie has a bad word, a hint of sexuality, or extreme violence anyone who watches it is simply exposing themselves to filth and is separating themself further form God.
On the flip side, many believers have (or so they claim) no convictions at all about what they watch. They can watch 100 children be decapitated, 3 explicit sex scenes with gratuitous nudity (although, when is nudity not gratuitous?), and a hailstorm of F-bombs and S-words and have no convictions about it. And if convictions are there, they simply ignore them.
Again, I fall somewhere in between.
But I know why I fall where I fall.
My opinion is generally something like this: We are given pretty clear instructions in the bible on how we are supposed to act in most situations. But, seeing as how there were not movies back in biblical times, Jesus did not say anything specifically about what kinds of movies we, as faithful believers, can watch (although some would insist Jesus recommends a PG cutoff :-)). But here is what we do know:
I know that this verse is literally talking about food and how many Jews were upset with other believers eating foods declared by the law to be unclean. But, I think, for the most part, the underlying principle applies to what we're currently talking about.
If I watch a movie that does not cause me to sin in any way (although, they definately can and have--but I'll talk about that later), I see really no reason in scripture that I should not be able to watch it. That is, unless me watching that particular movie causes a brother in Christ to stumble and struggle. In that case, I believe it is my responsibility to not watch that movie around him, discuss it around him, etc. I do not take that series of verses to mean that if any believer anywhere has a problem with a movie then the whole body of believers must refrain from watching it. I don't think that Paul was suggesting that every believer stop eating certain meats because it made certain Jews uncomfortable. No, I take it to mean that the loving thing to do was to refrain from eating those foods in the presence of those who were offended, to refrain from talking about them, etc. So, it follows that even if a number of believers disagree with a certain film, and as long as it does not cause you to personally sin, it is scripturally ok to watch it.
So the next issue is this: what kind of content can I honestly say does not cause me to sin? Well, obviously it is going to be different for every person, as well all have different sin struggles that affect us more than others. This is a personal conviction call. I can say this, personally--excessive/extended/graphic sex scenes are a no-no for me. Outside of that... I don't know. Violence typically does not make me feel the urge to commit a violent act, watching drug abuse does not make me in any way want to try drugs, and hearing crude language typically does not make me want to start using those words. Maybe it is becasue most of the movies I watch do not glorify these things, but show the evils of them.
But how can I watch a movie with repeated drug use, unbelievable acts of violence, and crude language and still walk away saying that I "enjoyed" or even "loved" said movie with a clear conscience? Well I can tell you that if the movie glamourized or promoted drug abuse, I would have a very hard time enjoying it. But nearly every film I have seen dealing indepthly with drug abuse has portrayed it as the evil it most certainly is. And to the filmmakers of those types of films I say "Bravo."
I think there is a difference between a movie with "bad" content and a "bad movie." That many movies would contain detestable behavior is nearly a given--it happens all around us. If a movie is trying to show us a truth about the real world, its probably going to have to deal with the real world as it is--bad guys and all. Even scripture makes surprising references to things that could earn a boycotting by hardcore Fundamentalist Christian moms. Let us not forget the stories of Rahab the prostitute, Abram, Sarai and Hagar, aspects of Ruth's story, the countless old-testament wars, the Song of Solomon, etc. I am no expert on the Old Testament by any means, but that list right there is a pretty good start. Its some pretty head-turning stuff. The reason they are not viewed as "bad," however, is because they are used to illustrate greater points from the real world. We don't focus on the fact that Rahab was prostitute, we focus on her great faith that she developed even after years in a job like that. And nowhere in scripture are things like adultery, prostitution, and killing glorified. They are shown as elements of the world we live in that we cannot ignore.
Now I'll give you this: many filmmakers, well, most filmmakers push it too far. They show more of these types of activities for one reason or another than is necessary to establish their point. That is where it comes back to conviction. Has the filmmaker crossed the line from thought stimulation to personal sin temptation? Has the filmmaker crossed the line from presenting a bad situation as it is to celebrating said situation? These are the things we need to consider. And for the most part it comes down to the individual. Do YOU feel like the movie crossed the line? Do I feel like the movie crossed the line?
These are really my thoughts on this issue right now. I concede that I am just an 18 year old kid, and I still have a lot that God has to teach me. Any and all input on this subject will be greatly appreciated.
--Cameron
P.S. I love you.
I know some believers that say they listen to only Christian music because they only want to hear things that are spiritually edifying. They feel that if a song doesn't discuss or directly point to God, it is a waste of their time.
Others I know pretty much refuse to listen to any Christian music because they feel that the music itself, in 99% of the cases, is derivative and uninspired. They sometimes even feel that some (although certainly not all) aspects of spirituality, nature, the human condition, etc. are better expressed by some of today's secular bands than by most Christian artists.
In my opinion, both sides are valid. I fall somewhere in between, typically.
Movies are a little more of an intense subject. I know many believers that if an 'R' rating is mentioned at all, consider the movie to be unboubtedly a tool of Satan. If a movie has a bad word, a hint of sexuality, or extreme violence anyone who watches it is simply exposing themselves to filth and is separating themself further form God.
On the flip side, many believers have (or so they claim) no convictions at all about what they watch. They can watch 100 children be decapitated, 3 explicit sex scenes with gratuitous nudity (although, when is nudity not gratuitous?), and a hailstorm of F-bombs and S-words and have no convictions about it. And if convictions are there, they simply ignore them.
Again, I fall somewhere in between.
But I know why I fall where I fall.
My opinion is generally something like this: We are given pretty clear instructions in the bible on how we are supposed to act in most situations. But, seeing as how there were not movies back in biblical times, Jesus did not say anything specifically about what kinds of movies we, as faithful believers, can watch (although some would insist Jesus recommends a PG cutoff :-)). But here is what we do know:
Obviously if there is anything in our life that causes us to sin, we must flee from it. This is cut and dried. But there is also this:
Matthew 5:30 "And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell."
Romans 14:13-16 "Therefore let us stop passing judgement on one another. Instead, make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in your brother's way. As one who is in the Lord Jesus, I am fully convinced that no food is unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for him it is unclean. If your brother is distressed becasuse of what you eat, you are no longer acting in love. Do not by your eating destroy your brother for whom Christ died. Do not allow what ou consider good to be spoken of as evil."
Romans 14:20-21 "Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food. All food is clean, but is is wrong for a man to eat anything that causes someone else to stumble. It is better not to eat meat or drink wine or to do anything else that will cause your brother to fall."
I know that this verse is literally talking about food and how many Jews were upset with other believers eating foods declared by the law to be unclean. But, I think, for the most part, the underlying principle applies to what we're currently talking about.
If I watch a movie that does not cause me to sin in any way (although, they definately can and have--but I'll talk about that later), I see really no reason in scripture that I should not be able to watch it. That is, unless me watching that particular movie causes a brother in Christ to stumble and struggle. In that case, I believe it is my responsibility to not watch that movie around him, discuss it around him, etc. I do not take that series of verses to mean that if any believer anywhere has a problem with a movie then the whole body of believers must refrain from watching it. I don't think that Paul was suggesting that every believer stop eating certain meats because it made certain Jews uncomfortable. No, I take it to mean that the loving thing to do was to refrain from eating those foods in the presence of those who were offended, to refrain from talking about them, etc. So, it follows that even if a number of believers disagree with a certain film, and as long as it does not cause you to personally sin, it is scripturally ok to watch it.
So the next issue is this: what kind of content can I honestly say does not cause me to sin? Well, obviously it is going to be different for every person, as well all have different sin struggles that affect us more than others. This is a personal conviction call. I can say this, personally--excessive/extended/graphic sex scenes are a no-no for me. Outside of that... I don't know. Violence typically does not make me feel the urge to commit a violent act, watching drug abuse does not make me in any way want to try drugs, and hearing crude language typically does not make me want to start using those words. Maybe it is becasue most of the movies I watch do not glorify these things, but show the evils of them.
But how can I watch a movie with repeated drug use, unbelievable acts of violence, and crude language and still walk away saying that I "enjoyed" or even "loved" said movie with a clear conscience? Well I can tell you that if the movie glamourized or promoted drug abuse, I would have a very hard time enjoying it. But nearly every film I have seen dealing indepthly with drug abuse has portrayed it as the evil it most certainly is. And to the filmmakers of those types of films I say "Bravo."
I think there is a difference between a movie with "bad" content and a "bad movie." That many movies would contain detestable behavior is nearly a given--it happens all around us. If a movie is trying to show us a truth about the real world, its probably going to have to deal with the real world as it is--bad guys and all. Even scripture makes surprising references to things that could earn a boycotting by hardcore Fundamentalist Christian moms. Let us not forget the stories of Rahab the prostitute, Abram, Sarai and Hagar, aspects of Ruth's story, the countless old-testament wars, the Song of Solomon, etc. I am no expert on the Old Testament by any means, but that list right there is a pretty good start. Its some pretty head-turning stuff. The reason they are not viewed as "bad," however, is because they are used to illustrate greater points from the real world. We don't focus on the fact that Rahab was prostitute, we focus on her great faith that she developed even after years in a job like that. And nowhere in scripture are things like adultery, prostitution, and killing glorified. They are shown as elements of the world we live in that we cannot ignore.
Now I'll give you this: many filmmakers, well, most filmmakers push it too far. They show more of these types of activities for one reason or another than is necessary to establish their point. That is where it comes back to conviction. Has the filmmaker crossed the line from thought stimulation to personal sin temptation? Has the filmmaker crossed the line from presenting a bad situation as it is to celebrating said situation? These are the things we need to consider. And for the most part it comes down to the individual. Do YOU feel like the movie crossed the line? Do I feel like the movie crossed the line?
These are really my thoughts on this issue right now. I concede that I am just an 18 year old kid, and I still have a lot that God has to teach me. Any and all input on this subject will be greatly appreciated.
--Cameron
P.S. I love you.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
