Adam, Thanks for the post and welcome to the group. I watched the video and will comment. Before I do, I want you to understand that what I say is not an attack on you personally. It might seem that way because I am sure you hold your relationship as a personal one. This group is about my beliefs being challenged and therefore I will challenge yours. My hope is that people challenge mine.... The video is nice. It does not make much sense if you remove the rose colored lens glasses though. I completely understand what it is trying to say, and for the audience that this is made for... does the trick. The Breakdown: You have this amazing relationship with the actual son of the only god. The most powerful being who ever is, was, and will be... This being possess your soul and your heart (because you asked him). Now, all of the sudden, you are pulled away while the most powerful being ever waves helplessly at you from a distance. Hoping to get your attention for behind the earthly temptations he continues to wave you down. Despite having access to the very power that made the universes, you are still pulled away and eventually decide to slit your writs after other temptations abound. You then point a pistol to your head and come close to actually being with god, before Jesus decides it is time to jump in and save the day. You then dance off the stage as the crowd erupts to the crescendo of the music playing in the background. Suggestion to new viewers: Watch this video without the music. Classic marketing approach (even though they did not realize they were doing it). As a person in marketing, I did a music test to a slide show I created. I played several songs as background music and watched the reaction. When I got to the song that is modeled technically after this one. Tears welled up in the eyes of the viewers. By the way, the slides were of a company pic-nic. Other songs caused laughter, happiness and so on. Here is the video with a different song... watch till the end... Point: I did not sync this video with the music, just 2 versions of a random song dropped in over the video. Completely different.... The original: L

EDITED by user on 2008-05-15 07:41:10

Hey Lance, Mark Tucker, old Doss friend, though I guess relatively new compared to your friendship with him. Anyway, I love this dialogue. Makes life interesting. Honesty is good. Disagreement is sharpening. I intend to be warm in my remarks, but also hope to be efficient for the sake of time. So I apologize if at any point I come across as...curt (kirt? Kurt? Cirt?). In one sense I think the video is a bit melodramatic, possibly cheesy. I was emotionally moved anyway, because of the combination of music and choreography and the symbolism. They all three combined in a way that drew out emotion. You are correct in that sense HOWEVER, to say that any emotional reaction of a human being is not the work of a Spirit or Deity of some sort is short-sighted. I mean come on. You were raised as in a religious environment. I assume you read the same Bible I did. I would assume you can understand that a Deity can and does use HUMAN devises to achieve his ends. Who is to say that a person being moved emotionally by a certain (slick even) combination of medium is somehow NOT a legitimate God thing? If God wants to move a person emotionally by any means, he can...and does. Say a person is looking at a beautiful painting and is emotionally moved and is challenged to contemplate the existence of God. You could easily say "well it's because of all the RED that is used. If I took out the RED, you wouldn't have the same reaction." Well, that is possible, but guess what RED WAS USED! Does that mean the reaction is not from God. Of course not! It means...he uses RED (at least he did for that person). Does that mean that EVERY time someone weeps at this video or at a painting it is the Spirit? No, God is not a computer. He doesn't fit into our formulaic desires or whims. But we can't also go the other direction and say...well it is human design therefore cannot possibly be God's intention. That is short sighted. Right? Do you see, Lance? Our ability to understand and decide what God will or won't use for his own purposes (which are for our good, I believe) is VERY small indeed. Like an ant walking across a movie screen looking at all the bright colored dots, but having very little idea of what the show is. What do you think. Love to talk about it. Mark

AHHH Wrote a nice long reply and it was lost when I logged in.... I need to talk to management. I will do it again tomorrow.... L

"Mark Tucker, old Doss friend, though I guess relatively new compared to your friendship with him. Anyway, I love this dialogue. Makes life interesting. Honesty is good. Disagreement is sharpening. I intend to be warm in my remarks, but also hope to be efficient for the sake of time. So I apologize if at any point I come across as...curt (kirt? Kurt? Cirt?)." Doss is alright I guess. I always feel sympathy for monoplegics. We first met when I was at the pool as a young child, he was swimming in circles. I waved...he stopped. I digress "In one sense I think the video is a bit melodramatic, possibly cheesy. I was emotionally moved anyway, because of the combination of music and choreography and the symbolism. They all three combined in a way that drew out emotion. You are correct in that sense." BFFs "HOWEVER, to say that any emotional reaction of a human being is not the work of a Spirit or Deity of some sort is short-sighted. I mean come on. You were raised as in a religious environment. I assume you read the same Bible I did. I would assume you can understand that a Deity can and does use HUMAN devises to achieve his ends". Well there are a bunch of dead Islamic extremist that feel that they are used as HUMAN devises to achieve their gods end. Yet they are serving the wrong god so I will try and focus on the god of Abraham. I know that is not what you were trying to say so lets ask ourselves this, how do you know when god is communicating through something? Here is what happens when you tell humans that god can speak to them outside of some parameter... A very slippery slope indeed. "Who is to say that a person being moved emotionally by a certain (slick even) combination of medium is somehow NOT a legitimate God thing?" I hope someone does. "If God wants to move a person emotionally by any means, he can...and does." Well I am quite sure your pastor would disagree. As a matter of fact the Presbyterian denomination you are a part of and many of the ones that are in close proximity theologically believe that god stopped doing all sorts of things 2008 years ago. (Conveniently) "Say a person is looking at a beautiful painting and is emotionally moved and is challenged to contemplate the existence of God. You could easily say "well it's because of all the RED that is used. If I took out the RED, you wouldn't have the same reaction." Well, that is possible, but guess what RED WAS USED! Does that mean the reaction is not from God. Of course not! It means...he uses RED (at least he did for that person)." Again, a slippery slope that can lead to all sorts of misunderstandings. You could say that the second the penny-whistle crescendo at the end of Titanic kicked in, and we all got chills (admit it), god had some part in it if one person decided that an icy death would not compliment the fires of hell very well. Yet I ask, where do you draw the line? Who is the judge? "Does that mean that EVERY time someone weeps at this video or at a painting it is the Spirit? No, God is not a computer." That I agree. If he was a computer, billions of users would have to endure eternal damnation if you don't use the preferred operating system. "He doesn't fit into our formulaic desires or whims." Systematic theology is pretty formulaic. Pastors and Theologians have been attempting to "fit" a god into all sorts of desires and whims. Just look at the number of biblical "translations" you can get at the local Christian book store. "But we can't also go the other direction and say...well it is human design therefore cannot possibly be God's intention. That is short sighted. Right? Do you see, Lance? " I don't : ( "Our ability to understand and decide what God will or won't use for his own purposes (which are for our good, I believe) is VERY small indeed." As I said above, your Pastor would disagree. He would say that God is not raising people from the dead, healing blindness, using glossolalia, or prophetic visions, interpretation, walking on water, burning bushes, wonders, signs, giant floods, parting seas, mass human destruction, mother mary, the saints, talking serpents, talking donkeys, towers that transport people around the globe, dreams, etc. any longer. In other words, god has decided to limit himself for some reason. And that reason is why we can't skip home because god spoke to us through the color red, or told us to kick a lady in the nose in order for her to be healed. There are rules that Christianity has made up to keep it from falling apart at the edges (which are not working--another post). "Like an ant walking across a movie screen looking at all the bright colored dots, but having very little idea of what the show is." It is Titanic... : ) L

EDITED by user on 2008-06-08 10:16:16

Lance, Thanks for your response. I dearly wish I could be in California for pizza. If you ever make it to StL. Let me know. Okay I think (hope) I see your point, but let me attempt to summarize it: Christians tend to attribute emotional responses, words of authority ('prophecy') and even events SPURIOUSLY (however it behoves them) upon God's lap, ie His will. The danger being that we can misread or misinterpret these things in any direction we want AND some people would event interpret them completely oppositely (ie a muslim and a Christian on,,,say...9/11). This justifiable recognition leads you to the conclusion (or at least helps you in the general direction) of saying that it is ALL therefore false. Better to give it no deistic attribution at all. To put it short, since we have no scientific proof of who is correct, our only conclusion should be None of the Above. I know this is a simplistic interpretation, but I just want to be sure I understand you correctly. My point simplified is two fold: A. Just because humans screw it up, doesn't mean that the message is wrong. Though I concede your point that humans are incapable of discernging and obtaining True Truth concerning god(s) by themselves (myself included). B. I believe (humor me) that any response to any stimuli can be from God or not from God, and if it is from God it has very little to do with the stimuli itself but more to do with the work of God inside the brain of the person. NOW, as you point out, humans can manipulate and misinterpret it anyway they want. This does not negate the work of God, it only demonstrates our incapabilities. Finally, my pastor (a conservative Presbyterian pastor) actually does believe that miracles can and do happen and that God does speak through people (though not in the "thus sayeth the Lord" way. And you could make a point about "what is the difference then," but that will have to be a longer post later). Our denomination does not at all believe that God stopped doing these things. There may be individuals, and even some pastors that believe this, but it is the minority opinion and deeply non-biblical. Mark PS I was thinking "Ant Life"

EDITED by user on 2008-06-08 14:30:55

Hey everybody. This is my first post in this group. OK, the original version of the video takes me back to my childhood. I was raised in a methodist household and in the summer would go to christian youth camps. Super mainstream religous camps(retreats). We would always have skits and performances as part of our worship services in the mornings and evenings. These were big facilites with thousands of kids from all over the country attending; packed in watching, praying, and singing. Every part of what went on in front of us was similar in ways to this video. They're being performed in front of kids, in large numbers, to create an emotional effect. Here's the real issue with this performance and the emotions that follow. When the crowd is all lathered up ,immediatly after jesus and the girl get off stage, someone else comes on stage. Kids are overwhlemed with "titanic feeling". He says, "Now its time to be "Saved"" and they go through a whole thing where you pray and people cry and its a real scene. So, I'm sure many would say, "Well, they felt the power of christ and were called to be saved". I fully disagree. Evangelicalism wants to bring all the people that can be brought into the fold as can be brought. This means using powerful tactics on kids of all ages(watch the video on the Creation Museum thread). As teens and preteens we were seeing "inspirational" performances like this video shows to make us part of the flock. Human emotions can be easily manipulated. Especially if you're young and think that you're doing the right thing. Through out history religous and secular groups have used music, plays, film and writings to pull on the "heart strings" of masses. If enough individuals believe, a sense of "mass righteousness" develops; people think "The rhetoric must be real because all of these other individuals feel the same as me". In reality, that isn't enough to make all the talk and emotion "real" or based in reality. Germany in the 1930's being the prime example but there are lots more. OK, so you can't trust emotional feeling, even if its coming from religous inspiration, to be the work of a higher power. But, thats no reason to stop believing, huh? Maybe not, but it is enough of a reason to get away from you're preachers and popes, bibles and korans, religous govt. and TV stations. Your emotions can and will be perversed and manipulated for profit and power. For me, having walked both sides of the fence(christian/atheist) for years, I can say I've found solace by shedding the threats of heaven and hell.

Okay, with ALL due respect...I am, to be honest, getting a bit frustrated at the level of FEAR of emotions I keep hearing. I know I KNOW, that we have to be cautious about our emotions and that they are susceptible to being mislead etc etc. I agree. However, our minds (logic, etc) are just as susceptible to faultiness. There were just as many briliiant scientists that were lured into the atrocities of Nazi Germany as their were emotional folks (We are talking GERMANS you know). I mean do you really think that JUST BECAUSE IT IS EMOTIONAL it must be wrong or manipulation. Granted it can be, that is why we must have wisdom and knowledge to BALANCE it out. But label emotion as bad or misleading come on. Besides, it is quite possible that some of those frenzied teenagers actually had a real experience that changed their lives. Who's to say? Of course there are going to be manipulations, but we can't throw the baby out with the bath water. IF YOU ARE MARRIED, then you will know that sometimes it is a good thing to create an emotional experience. To cook a meal together, get some good wine, light some incense, smoke a cigar together...whatever works. Is it wrong to create an event that causes a person to reflect on something that actually happened (the cross) in all of its power and drama (is God the ultimate emotions manipulator?) and let them FEEL something? Don't be so afraid. Don't be so condescending to the human emotion, and please don't underestimate events like these. So, quick question: Can God or Does God use these kinds of emotional skits? Mark PS Even in saying this, I am not the biggest fan of these kinds of events. They can be overrated. But I just cannot simply discount them or their effect.

I really don’t think I expressed a fear of emotion. Instead, I have a fear of seemingly good intentioned people being mislead by the millions. You’re saying, “I know, I know” emotions can used to manipulate but so can “our minds”. What does that mean? Scientists, scholars, artists, bakers, carpenters; many found the nazi message appealing and joined the cause. Many, also, fled the country in fear of their fellow citizens. The point is, people, through emotionally stirring propaganda as well as other means, can be turned into a blind flock. Therefore, you prove my point. Also, I don’t know if there were “just as many brilliant scientist” as “emotional folks” anywhere at anytime. What exactly does the “we are talking GERMANS you know” mean? Its hard to tell with your erratic use of CAPS. Germans are no different than you or I. No, I never said emotion is bad, only that emotion can be a powerful weapon or tool(bad or good) and a leaders intentions and credibility should be questioned by all. You ask the insinuating question, “I mean do you really think that JUST BECAUSE IT IS EMOTIONAL it must be wrong or manipulation.” and then write, “granted it can be”. I don’t get it. I do agree with the wisdom and knowledge and balance part. Again, I didn’t say emotion is “bad or misleading” but emotions can be used for “bad” by using them to “mislead”. I’m sure some of the kids at the retreat did have life changing experiences. That’s not what’s on the table. We’re talking about whether god caused the effect or humans, appealing to kids emotions, caused the effect, right? I don’t understand the “if you’re married” thing. How does that apply? I didn’t think god killed jesus on the cross so you could reflect on it. . I thought it was to free mankind from the old testament covenant and forgive sin. I think communion is when the reflecting is supposed to be done. What do you mean “feel” something? People before jesus didn’t have emotion? I didn’t know I was being condescending about emotion. I think emotion is the strongest motivating power man has within, but I don’t think they are caused by god blowing in my ear or playing in my dreams. “So, quick question: Can God or Does God use these kinds of emotional skits?” I don’t believe in god, so why would I think that? Now I have a question or two. Do you think that all ordained christian leaders with a following and claim to “talk” or “hear the word of god” are telling the truth? We’re talking about the leader of the mormon church, who proclaims to have one-on-one conversations with god and says only mormons go to heaven, or Rev. Fred Phelps, the head of godhatesfags.com and carries signs saying “Thank God for IED’s”. These leaders certainly cause emotion. Is god causing that emotion? How do you know? Saying, “because I know/feel it” and/or “god works in mysterious ways” are unacceptable responses.

Thanks for your response. It seemed to me that, in your original post, you blamed people's emotions as the tool for their being mislead. This is why my first and main point was that this is too simplistic. It can be emotions, but it can also be intellect (or lack there of). You are correct when you say that many are lead blindly. I agree. But it is much more that just emotions that is to blame. And even given that, I believe that God is bigger than our mislead emotions or intellect. In other words he can work work through our misguided selves. But I recognize and genuinely respect the fact that this is moot point for you. You go on to say (seeming to contradict your first post) that emotions aren't bad unless they are used to mislead. I agree with this. What is at stake then, and this is the crux of the point, is our differing presuppositions. In other words; Who gets to decide whether the person is being mislead? I assume you would say that if emotions, or intellect for that matter is used to convince someone that God exists then it is misleading. Because the place they are being lead is untrue. I assume this to be your position, forgive me if I am wrong. But, because I am working from the presupposition that God is true then I would say it is not misleading or manipulative. For you to say that Christians shouldn't use emotional skits or whatever to convince people of God is just as offensive as me saying that African Americans shouldn't use emotional movies (like Mississipi Burning) to convince people that racism is wrong. See what I mean? Is it wrong for an atheist to write a scholarly book about there not being a God? Is it wrong for an atheist to produce a movie that stirs the heart away from theism? Even I would say NO, they have the right to do it. But I would say that yes it is misleading, but NOT because of its use of emotions or intellect or whatever, but because of where it is leading people. If I am true to what I believe than I have to say it is misleading. And because you must be true to what you believe then you would have to say that those skits are misleading. But, again, that is because of WHERE it is leading them, not HOW (ie emotions). As far as the "marriage thing." I was merely making the point that I just made. It is not wrong to create an environment that stirs the heart. A married person will do this with his spouse (ie anniversaries, etc). It is not misleading or manipulative, unless there is no truth in the love they have. That's it. It was an analogy. As far as your question: I do not think that all religious leaders speak for God. I do believe that some do. I believe that we should be very cautious about who we listen to and trust as leaders in religion, because of your very legitimate point - People are easily mislead. How do we know who to listen to? We have to have a measuring stick of truth by which to measure the words of leaders up against. Just like anything in life if someone claims to be an expert, there needs to be a standard by which they are measured. If someone claims to be a brilliant doctor then what they say and do needs to be measured up against the history of medicine. Likewise with Christianity. That standard, I believe, is scripture. I know that people can take scripture to mean whatever they want. But this is why it is important for individuals to take it upon themselves to look into the Bible and find out. Read it by removing as many preconceptions as possible. Then when someone speaks with authority, individuals should take their words and compare them with what the Bible actually says. This is what I believe about your question. Thank you for this dialogue. It is enlightening. respectfully, Mark

Mark, I think you've said some very honest things. I also think you've done more to make my point than you realize. I agree we are approaching this matter from different starting points. Our differing perspectives and beliefs yield different ideas to where people may be lead or mislead. I don't think I've contradicted myself at any point during this exchange. I hold to the idea that peoples emotions can be used to lead or mislead. Your points about intellect are acknowledged but I think a lack of intellect may be a more accurate interpretation. The poorly educated are, and have always been, the most susceptible to cons and frauds. You agree that many are mislead but say more than emotions are to blame. Of course thats correct but its far from the discussion at hand. The discussion topic is "Does god cause the emotion felt while watching the religous you tube skit?". I can name several ways people are manipulated and mislead. Emotionally moving stimulus is just one. Lets stay on topic. Does some supernatural force cause "the feeling" felt by people watching the you tube skit? I never said christians shouldn't use skits to propagandize. My question is "Does god cause the feeling or not?". Clearly you agree, he does not. You make several statements that show you feel christians(people) are responsible for the stimulus and response. You also compare christian propaganda to other human made movies. Even your response about marriage furthers my argument that you, not god, are responsible for the emotion you feel and create. Furthermore, your acceptance that people are being and are going to be mislead is appalling to me. Thanks for helping to make my point. Thanks for responding to my questions. You respond as many others do to these questions. You would like some sort of standard to use for religous leaders. We both know this is impoosible and would only cause problems, probably war. Who's interpretation of scripture would you use? Your own, right? Also, most PHDs wouldn't claim to be a "brilliant doctor". Instead, they are proclaimed to be brilliant by their peers based on achievements and innovations(ie life saving, discovery, etc). Faith healings have proven to be hoaxes on every stage. Religous leaders effect are only provable to the dead. There is no way to create a standard. Religion will always be used to misguide and control people. Come on, people. Break the shackles of the dark ages. Rejoice in discovery and helping one another.