Monday, October 12, 2009

"Deceived" Trailer is Up!

For the last few years, we've shared the growing film/video ministry of Apostolic Entertainment Ministry (AEM) and Eric Roemheld, a set designer on CSI:NY as they meld their camera habits with Virtual Hell every Halloween for their church to the point dozens get the Holy Ghost every year.

They also did many of the video commercials at Youth Congress in 2007.

Here's their latest trailer, which should inspire anyone attempting to develop their artistic gifting(s) for Christ:


Anonymous said...

This is wrong. I do not care. You can blast me, call me a self-righteous conservative, etc. Wrong is wrong. Where is the Apostolic distinction from the world anymore? People need to get a grip and sort out whether they are of the world or a child of God.
This sickens and disheartens me greatly to see these methods of "outreach". The Lord does not need such methods to "reach the lost" and as far as I am concerned, I have had great success in personal witnessing, resulting in helping over 30 people coming to church. I did not need some movie to encourage that.
I pray that God can somehow show people how destructive it is to allow Hollywood into the church.

God bless
A Canadian Apostolic

Anonymous said...

WAOHHHH!!!! Okay, I have a question and comment here. Err. I didn't know we as UPCI watched movies, LET ALONE made them? Crazy! This means there is no OBVIOUS distinction between us and the world. :( I don't understand this. Can you explain it, and I'm trying to be sincere?? TV, movies, are NOT ACCEPTABLE in our district and I don't understand why on earth you are trying to make a movie. :(

kdc said...

Here's my sincere response: Would you be excited if one of our Apostolic people had a book about to be published by a major publisher? Writing, like film-making & live theatre, is an art form. You can write porn or write literature or tracts. It's what you write that makes the difference.

It's no different w/film &/or video - if they're using an art form for God's glory then how can it be sin? It's an art form.

Our churches warn against TV/film because it is so rarely used for the glory of God. (TV is also a big time waster, etc. etc.)

Does that make sense?

Rachel Peterson said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

No, it does not. Because TV/Movies is VISUAL, it is completely different than an author getting PUBLISHED. My whole pentecostal life (25 years) I have been taught to stay away from VISUAL sins....."set no wicked thing before thing eyes....", which puts TV and movies into an entirely different category.

Agree with first two comments. Eventually churches that embrace this kind of method for an outreach tool will begin to go to movies and/or have a TV in general. It's a very slippery slope. If the UPC as an organization accepts this, it too is on the way down.

Sorry, I don't buy it.

- D -

Anonymous said...

The whole point is, we don't need TV or movies or videos. God doesn't. It's not necessary and is a potential trap for us to fall into.

Anonymous said...

An art form? Well let's celebrate. Jesus cares about the "arts" after all. This is simply pathetic.

kdc said...

Thanks to everyone for staying civil as we discuss this.

Every year, most Apostolic churches put on some type of Easter drama with music and acting. That is live theatre. Live theatre is an art form. It is visual. No one preaches against Easter dramas (to my knowledge). We win others to the Lord through Easter dramas.

Are you telling me if we videoed that Easter drama it would be wrong? That watching that videoed Easter drama on a monitor would be wrong? But it’s okay if it’s live in our church? To me, that’s contradictory.

This ministry is simply combining video with live theatre to win souls to the Lord (every year!).

It seems like some people are confusing how Hollywood is mis-using an art form with the art form itself. We understand there is secular and Christian writing, secular and Christian music, secular and Christian live theatre, but can’t comprehend secular and Christian film/video? It’s the content we must be careful of, not the art form itself.

Can it be a slippery slope? Of course. We must be vigilant against anything that might seduce us from Christ.

quichang said...

Your church should NOT associate this with the UPCI\UPC. You have enough problems in the organization as it is. The enemy has crept in and deceived appropriate that your "flick" is titled as such. Come out from among them and be separate, love not the world...learn a lesson from the "other pentecostals"...the ones that call themselves the Assembly of God...back in the day that organization allowed them to go watch the "Ten Commandments" w\Charlton Heston. Since then, they dropped their standards, many backslid, most do not believe in receiving the Holy Ghost, their elders envy the UPC b\c they see how far they are from God. I've seen other UPC\apostolic churches that were once strong fall b\c they wanted to appease to the masses as you are trying to do. They compromised by losing their holiness, then their faith...God sent them a strong delusion that they have believed a lie, hook line and sinker. I'm not a prophet nor the son of a prophet but as you continue your downward slope of compromise, the hedge of protection in the Holy Ghost is lowered. You have entertained the spirit world and invited the enemy to baptize you in the name of "HOLYwood", YOU ARE will not recognized your church in five years in that it will not represent the Name of Jesus as you once did. Sad to say, your youth leadership will be the first to absorb the compromise if they have not done so already, then your young parents. I can only pray for your church and your pastor. :(

carandavis said...

Whether it's music, theater, film or a book - these are all forms of media - the public broadcasting of a message. Technology might change the method the content is delivered but it's all still just a method by which a message is communicated. A film is simply a vehicle for content. The vehicle doesn't have the capability of being good or evil - the content does.

Anonymous said...

I would like to point out some obvious problems with the "clip" itself. It seems to facilitate a way for unfaithfulness as part of the story line. It was not something Apostolics do, either.
Someone tried to make the point that anything is acceptable as long as it is in the name of the Lord. (Paraphrasing) Well it is not. Hollywood and the venue of movies/tv has been used for the world's agenda to propagate fornication, ungodliness, lust, etc.
Under that same line of reasoning and logic, why is it not acceptable to drink alcohol as part of communion?
As people who are called out from that which is unclean, we must be very careful about what we call acceptable or unacceptable. My church does not put on a live drama, and I personally do not agree fully with them. The anointed word is still the most powerful tool.

chantell said...

I think the main reason why this post has hit a raw nerve is due to the fact that in our organization there are a variety of norms that differ according to district and according to individual churches.

In some places, it is acceptable to watch visual media in the church and in the home. Obviously, in other places, all types of visual media is looked down upon. Just as it would be unfair for someone to label another person as self-righteous because they have a personal conviction against visual media, by the same token is unfair for someone to label another person as deceived and compromising because they don't.

Media is media. Whether it's visual, auditory or print. One is not holier than the other. What distinguishes the good from the bad is the way it is used.

To those who are voicing disapproval to the use of film I have a question: Why is it possible to have literature that glorifies God (print media), music that glorifies God (auditory media), but somehow no visual media that glorifies God?

Print media can be used either way. You wouldn't put The Chronicles of Narnia in the same category as a Harlequin romance. Auditory media can be used either way. You wouldn't put "How Great Is Our God" in the same category as "Hollaback Girl." Visual media can be used either way. How could you put the latest ungodly Hollywood flick in the same category as a film whose purpose is to glorify God and win the lost?

Anonymous said...

KDC & Chantell - you are missing the point. Again, there is something different about being stimulated VISUALLY than reading a book or listening to the news on the radio. Men in particular are more visual, which is why women have to watch how they dress. That's why visualizing a movie makes it that much harder not to be sucked in to more and more things "visually", which will eventually include Hollywood.

I honestly think we have to be careful about dramas as well. In fact, that has always been a concern to me - will doing drama after drama, year after year, eventually lead to the justification that it's okay to do a video or movie? I think this answers that concern. If dramas make churches go down the slippery slope to videos, then I think dramas must be eliminated as well.

If this is all very "old school", then thank God. I don't want to constantly be riding the middle on these issues, slipping occasionally onto the liberal side, and finding myself eventually changing and letting more and more stuff "go" because of it.

We must remain separated from the world.

Anonymous said...

"Variety of Norms".."Set no wicked thing before thine eyes" How is that film wholesome and glorifying God? It is disturbing and wrong. I would not watch a normal movie nor would I watch a so-called "Apostolic movie". Where are the true Apostolics? The ones who have convictions against television and movies? The ones who do not let any part of the world infiltrate and detract from the anointing of God?

chantell said...

To the anonymous who stated that I am missing the point:

I want to say your response was fair and consistent and you make a good point about the power of visual stimulation as opposed to other forms.

However, I don't exactly buy your "gateway" argument. In other words, that performing dramas or utilizing film could be a gateway to being sucked in to much less godly forms of visual media.

To me, that's the same as saying that subscribing to the Pentecostal Herald could lead to subscribing to Cosmo. One cannot ignore the importance of purpose when evaluating something's virtues.

Additionally, one must take into account the fruit something bears. "A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit" (Matthew 7:18). My point is that if utilizing this type of media in the proper setting has led to many receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost (which fulfills the purpose of seeking and saving that which was lost), how can it be labeled as ungodly? The same cannot be said for the usual Hollywood blockbuster.

Anonymous said...

Chantell: I know a lady who got the Holy Ghost in a denominal, trinitarian church because she was hungry. Did she stay there? NO! God led her to a church that preached the fullness of truth and that is when she found out exactly what she had received. Just because one is hungry enough to get the Holy Ghost because of a movie does not mean it was exactly the scenario that God would have wished (just like this lady). God will draw people of all walks in all situations. It does not necessarily justify the "rightness" of the situation, however. For example, what if a young person frequented a bar every Friday night (because they were being CARNAL). He hung around the partiers (although not drinking), even had FUN, BUT he happened to talk to someone he met there and that person eventually got the Holy Ghost? Do you think God was pleased that that person hung around revellers? NO. But, God will use whatever situation He can to draw people. Backsliders is another situation. Is it God's will to backslide? NO. But I've known backsliders to witness to people who have then come in and gotten the Holy Ghost.

I hope that I'm making my point clear. Some more food for thought.....I hope.

chantell said...

To the previously addressed Anonymous:

Though I don't agree with the logic of your examples, you said something that I definitely agree with, and that is that God will draw people of all walks in all situations. God can and will use whatever He can to draw people unto Him.

I don't have a problem with people disliking the use of visual media. People have convictions, some more conservative than others, and people had valid reasons for holding those convictions. What bothers me is when people condemn others (which is not what I think you are doing, by the way) for not holding the same convictions they do and claim they are out of the will of God, deceived, compromising, etc. in the process.

One cannot deny that God can and does work through the use of this media. There may be disagreement about the acceptability of it according to one's own convictions, (i.e. the "rightness" of the situation) but the fact remains that there is good fruit to show for it.

Anonymous said...

Chantell: I wish to make one last point, and then I will leave this discussion alone. It has only been in the last few years that I have seen these drastic changes come into the apostolic movement. You say you feel that I condemned you. I propose that the pressure is really more on those of us who HAVE NOT CHANGED to conform - and sometimes that comes with CONDEMNATION when we don't. Frankly, I am really tired of having to defend WHAT HAS ALWAYS BEEN THE NORMAL STANDARD. YOU should feel defensive. You're the one who has changed. Not me.

God bless you and keep you. Sincerely.

chantell said...

I was going to let the above be my last comment, too, but I just wanted to let you know that I stated above that I did NOT think you were being condemning. You're just being honest with how you feel.

To be honest, I respect where you're coming from. But to be clear, I have not changed either. I just think it surprises some that what has always been the normal standard to them is not as uniform in our movement as they've supposed.

Okay, I'm done for real. God bless, and I'm glad we could have a civil dialogue about this.

Anonymous said...

I guess I need glasses, because I did misread your statement.

This is it, for sure! God bless you, too.

Anonymous said...

My whole point about this movie, is we do not need it. It is absolutely unnecessary. Sure it could help a few more people, but so could talking to just a few more people. And telling them abou your own personal experience with God, not watching some movie that was made by you and doesn't have that personal-God-did-it-just-for-me feeling. If it's causing this much trouble, why bother with it? We don't need it. We have had revival for many many years without it. The missionaries in third war countries can't even use it, and they are doing just fine without it. It is simply trouble waiting to happen. There is no need for anything that causes trouble. It is like having a standard. A standard is there so in case someone messes up, they aren't in serious trouble. A boundry. A boundry, people, christians should try and stay as far away from the edge as possible, so that if there is trouble they won't fall. They have some room to fall, instead of walking that line all the time, just tempting the devil to cause peoblems.
I guess it boils down to how much a christian is willing to do to show someone God. It is wayy easier to watch a movie then it is to talk face to face and answer questions for people.
We don't need this, it's not necessary and it just causes trouble and problems that can be avoided. Plus, it really doesn't distinguish from the world, which is kind of important. :)