Jesus Camp and BlogRodent on MSNBC

Jesus Camp and BlogRodent on MSNBC

MSNBC's The Most with Alison Stewart
At 2:40 PM (CST) on Tuesday, September 26, I “appeared” on MSNBC’s ‘Net review: The Most, with Alison Stewart. Alison’s producer spoke with Mark Moring, editor for the Christianity Today Movies channel, wondering if he’d be willing to answer a few questions about Jesus Camp on-air.

Since I’d seen the documentary and recently written an article for CT Movies, he deferred to me. I nervously accepted the opportunity.

I appeared not as a representative of Christianity Today (my employer), but as “a Pentecostal blogger” writing for Christianity Today Movies.

For three minutes, I fielded three questions:

  • “What did you walk away from this documentary thinking about Evangelical camps for kids?”
  • “Becky Fischer … was not pleased with the film. … How important do you think it is to talk about context when you’re documenting religion?”
  • “Is this in any way … ‘brainwashing?'”

Alison’s second question, by the way, is the critical question to ask of this film, and I’m delighted she asked it. (Most blogging punderati never get around to this.)

I’m hardly as articulate on-air as I sound in my own cavernous head. More pity me. I flubbed a couple word choices, have since been corrected on the inflammatory “liberal democrats” phraseology (I used Grady and Ewing’s own self-description, but should’ve said “secular liberals”), and the moment I laid the phone down a dozen brilliant answers to Ms. Stewart’s questions popped into my medicine-fogged cranium. (When in doubt, always blame the meds!) I’ve since forgotten my witty riposts, so don’t ask me to repeat them here.

Watch the clip (below) and observe how I answered Alison. If you can stand the pain, that is.

Alison Stewart, with MSNBC's The MostBy the way, this was the first I’d even heard of The Most — much less seen it — I’m impressed. I don’t know how Stewart and staff can pull together a live one-hour broadcast so professionally executed every single day. It must be almost as stressful as crossing a highway while jugging blindfolded. No wonder her producer was sounding frazzled!. They have my congratulations and an empathetic hat-tip.

Please feel free to post your comments and scathing reviews below! Oh, and if you want to send feedback to Alison & crew and carefully explain why it’s generally a bad idea to invite Pentecostals on-air, send an email to: themost@msnbc.com.

Watch the interview clip online: Jesus Camp on The Most — Windows Media or QuickTime

Download it here: WMV (11 megabytes) or MOV (10 megabytes)



[tags]Alison-Stewart, Becky-Fischer, BlogRodent, Brainwashed-in-the-Blood, brainwashing, Christianity-Today, Christianity-Today-Movies, commentary, CT-Movies, democrats, documentary, Evangelical, Ewing, film, Grady, Jesus-Camp, liberal, Mark-Moring, MinistryToday, MOV, movie, MSNBC, Net-review, Pentecostal-blogger, Pentecostals-on-air, QuickTime, The-Most, trailer-reaction, Windows-Media, WMV, WORD-FM[/tags]

12 thoughts on “Jesus Camp and BlogRodent on MSNBC

  1. Pingback: Jesus Camp review coming soon, my reaction to the trailer » BlogRodent

  2. Marc V

    Well done — you kept a good pace to your answers, sounded enthusiastic (not monotone) and kept on the subject answering the specific question. Pentecostalism is so multi-faceted and you did well representing it.

    I would have liked her to ask the question about “laying down your lives for Jesus”, as that would have been a great topic to expound on what that means to Christians, the difference between Islam and what they expect in giving your life.

    This could be even bigger than the Duvall movie “The Apostle”. We should be ready to give an answer for those who misunderstand what’s going on in “Jesus Camp”.

  3. Rich Post author

    Marc, you wrote:

    We should be ready to give an answer for those who misunderstand what’s going on in “Jesus Camp”.

    Thank you!!! That is exactly why I’ve spent far too many hours decrying this inflammatory film.

    Look, I’m well aware that Jesus is a stumbling block and that Christians will be reviled for his name’s sake. Others have criticized me for even attempting to address this issue, as though to be more spiritually-minded means ignoring slander. But Paul the Apostle made blamelessness and irreproachably major qualifications for leadership in the church (1 Timothy 3:2, Titus 1:6). The way this film spins its subject matter, unfounded reproach is being laid at the feet of the Body of Christ.

    And here I go, ranting again. Sorry.


    Uncle Gene! Thanks for stopping by. Didn’t mean to make you feel your age.

    Everybody, meet my uncle. He taught me how to play chess, helped me carve some excellent Pinewood Derby racers, introduced me to the Sinclair personal computer, funded several summer spending sprees whenever he wanted to rest from a little lawn-care or needed a hand roofing, and is a fine pilot who’s given me many an eagle-eye view of Rocky Mountain vistas when most of my turkey-friends were completely bound to the earth. If you are into flying at all, . Gene’s also an engineer for the Trinity Broadcasting Network. I’m sure he’d have some juicy stories to tell us if telling them didn’t also mean gossiping.

    Thanks again for stopping by. Check out the kids section sometime!

    Rich.

  4. Pingback: On the Verge: More on Jesus Camp

  5. Pingback: Jesus Camp on Word-FM » BlogRodent

  6. Pingback: Jesus Camp Documentary « S.W.A.B.S.

  7. Chet Swearingen

    Rich,

    It’s great to have somebody like yourself representing the cause of Christ. Not all of us are adept to articulating like we would like. Thanks for allow God to use your gift.

    Chet

  8. elk

    My suggestion is that we, as evangelicals, resist the urge to defend ourselves against the generalizations made in the film and honestly engage the core issues raised by the film-makers.

    Their over-arching point seems to be that at least some evangelicals actively seek to leverage faith for political muscle. In this regard, the sample group they depict actually is representative of a larger group. And this, I believe, is worthy of our thoughtful reflection.

    We are called by God to humbly serve our society for good, not to seek a political power-grab. The Church is a community of Spirit-driven compassion, not a voting block. It seem to me that for the Church to seek to accomplish, or even bolster, its redemptive mission through the political system is to acknowledge its own failure and to abandon our hope that the Church could offer repair directly. If we have given up on the Church then we should look to politics for hope. If we still believe in the Church, then we should be the Church and be about the task of redeeming culture directly… sans-politics.

    We have lost our focus when we suddenly realize that we expect everyone among us to vote the same way. That is to imagine that our redemptive mission needs a certain political track to run on if it is to run successfully… which is of course to subordinate the mission of Christ to politics. Never, in the history of Christianity — or of God’s interaction with humanity — has His cause required a certain political climate in order to succeed. I suspect that is also the case today.

  9. Rich Post author

    Elk,

    You wrote:

    My suggestion is that we, as evangelicals, resist the urge to defend ourselves against the generalizations made in the film and honestly engage the core issues raised by the film-makers.

    That’s a fine suggestion. The problem is, the film-makers deny raising any core issues. And that’s why I have to step back and say, wait a minute. There’s a bias here, and the bias must be addressed before even beginning to address whatever implied or inferred issues may be present.

    Their over-arching point seems to be that at least some evangelicals actively seek to leverage faith for political muscle. In this regard, the sample group they depict actually is representative of a larger group. And this, I believe, is worthy of our thoughtful reflection.

    I don’t disagree that Evangelicals are attempting to leverage their community consensus (if there is one) to influence policy. But, really, every interest group out there does this, from the Gay & Lesbian groups to the Green Peace groups, to the Animal Rights groups to every little faith group you could find. This is not news, and it’s not something to be frightened about. It’s the way our country is set up.

    Which leads, by the way, to a point that must be made: the American style of democracy naturally protects the minority groups against the rights or wishes of the majority. While we like to think that “majority wins,” really, it does not always do so. Witness the myriad, countless laws, rules, and regulations designed to protect the interests of very vocal minority groups.

    With a “herd-like” democracy, the herd is always restricted by the slowest, smallest, weakest and most vulnerable of the is not called to politics, it is called to make disciples. However, once a disciple has been made, is it not possible that at least some of them might be called to public service and political office? Does this necessarily entail a “power grab?”

    And if some policies, laws, and politicians are actually “evil,” would we not serve society by attempting to overturn immoral policies, laws, or politicians through sanctioned, legal means? Why must this be seen as a “power grab”?

    Somehow Joseph doesn’t strike me as a failure for having risen to a position of power and influence in the political system of his day. Why should we assume that if some parts of the Church are called to political service that this is tacit failure?

    Look, I agree with you that politics should not be the primary focus of the Church or any individual believer. Just as making money should not be the primary focus, nor driving cars, or making war, or sweeping streets. By the same token, neither is social justice our primary concern, or ecology, or minority rights. Our primary concern is to love God, to serve him, and to make him know. We are to make disciples.

    But that doesn’t mean, to me, that this bars us from having any interaction or influence in the secular spheres of life. We need disciples who are mechanics, doctors, farmers, teachers, lawyers and … dare I say it? Yes. We even need disciples who are politicians.

    Whatever points Grady and Ewing have to make about the insidiousness of Evangelicals influencing politics, I believe it’s lost in the larger point that Evangelicals are, essentially, a threat to democracy, freedom, and the American way of life.

    Regards,

    Rich,
    Rich

Leave a Reply

This site is protected by Comment SPAM Wiper.
%d bloggers like this: