I’m still working through my thoughts on this. But my initial reaction is that I don’t like it.
So I’m watching CNN this morning with probably every other person in Florida interested in the final space shuttle launch. Interspersed into the coverage are little interest stories about this and that, including the author and producer of these DVD’s.
They showed excerpts and teasers of the various stories and there is quite a bit of Scriptural twisting. I realize that it is fairly difficult to translate the lifestyles of the women of the Old Testament into a modern story, but still.
Did Abraham had an “adulterous affair?” This implies that Sarah was in the dark and the “baby mama drama” was forced on her unawares.
Was Abigail in a “sexless marriage?” Scripture doesn’t tell us this. It does say that her husband was a fool, but it doesn’t say he was a fool with no libido. It’s a possibility given that they had no children, but I wouldn’t add details that Scripture does not offer.
This is the problem with trying to make Scripture “relevant” to people in the 21st century. If the amazing grace of a loving God giving His only Son as a sacrifice for our sins isn’t enough, then so be it.
Usuallythese things are awfully done. I remember seeing a miniseries on network tv once in which Lot was Noah’s nephew and was floating through the flood in a rowboat. It was horrendous.
FIrst of all, nebbys comment above made me laugh out loud.
Second, you know I almost sent you the link on this but I already email you too much as it so I didnt (or did I? haha I cant remember). Im not surprised to hear they are twisting it up, and my first thought as a tv/movie snob was “oh good gracious, another low-budget, poorly done ‘Christian’ media production attempting to reach the masses that will likely fail.” Hows that for criticism? And I agree with you on trying to make the bible relevant…. I like Mark Driscoll’s reminder that we are not supposed to make the gospel culturally relevant, but to show the culture how the gospel is relevant to everyone at all times.
Hope you’re having a good week.
I sort of cringe when I read modern adaptations of Bible stories. And seriously? Lot was Noah’s nephew????
Terry, you should have been watching NASA TV. All the space shuttle and science, none of the mindless fluff.
From what you’ve written this DVD sounds like a sordid soap opera not any Bible I’ve ever read.
Yikes– well this bit of biographical information about the project’s leader gives a bit of insight:
“She’s the author of Single, Saved and Having Sex, has produced religious DVDs and plays and offers sex and relationship advice through a web-based column called “Ask Ty.” ”
She’s clearly not into orthodox views of Scripture.
@ Nebby: Your comment was funny. You’re right that these things are usually badly done. Lot was Noah’s nephew…please.
@Nicole: The attempt to make the Bible relevant almost always tips over into territory that is unseemly and out of step with traditional Biblical teaching.
@Daisy: Yes, I know that NASA TV would probably have been better, but as you may know there’s a lot of coverage about what will happen to the families on FL’s east coast now that the economic boom that was the space program is coming to the end. Thankfully, that was the only real fluff piece since the dismal job numbers came out during the coverage
@Brenda: I agree.
@Jess: The “Single, Saved, and Having Sex” thing caught my attention too. What kind of madness is this online evangelist promoting? Then I wondered if her book was attempting to frown on that kind of behavior. I certainly hope so,
.
*sigh*
Jess pretty much said what I was thinking. Ms. Adams appears to have a very liberal view of Scripture.
That said, I’ve often thought it would be really wonderful to do a study on various women of the Bible. Sarah in particular interests me as she is mentioned by name in the NT as one to pattern our lives after as women of the Word. I’m reasonably sure the thing with Hagar was not what we were intended to focus on, though.
Rahab is mentioned, too right alongside Abraham. But she is remembered for her faith in God rather than her adulterous past.
Yes, Heather, a study on the women of the Bible would be fascinating. You should tackle it,
.
And at least we’ll know it’s being approached with the proper reverence of Scripture that such a teaching should have.
Yikes! And that’s all I have to say about that.
Oh, I know — I’ve heard the Proverbs 31 woman described as a “real estate agent” to try to make her relevant to our time. Really stretching things. Also, I notice that Hollywood has made a composite of 1) Mary Magdalen; 2) the woman who washed Jesus’ feet with her hair, and 3) the woman caught in adultery, having us believe Mary Magdalen was a prostitute that Jesus regularly consorted with as a good friend (while she was still a prostitute, I guess), when the Bible simply says that demons were cast out of Mary Magdalen, nothing about her being a prostitute, I don’t think (correct me if I’m wrong). Hollywood salivates over stuff like that.
ladies in defense of this Ty lady I looked up her” single, saved, and having sex” book and it is a critical look at women who are Christians and are still having sex outside of marriage. While this production may be less than perfect, and while I would guess from some of the things Ive read about her that we would have some theological differences, lets not go defaming the woman and claiming her faith is unorthodox based on a misreading of her book title. We can google stuff, ladies, before we jump to conclusions.
lets not go defaming the woman and claiming her faith is unorthodox based on a misreading of her book title.
You are right in that we ought not be speculating about the woman’s faith or status of personal relationship with Christ based on the title of her book. I’ll admit this was the direction my mind started to go when reading the linked article.
To be fair, I do agree with her concern about the damaging effects of popular television programming. Most of it is garbage that feeds insecurity and/or discontent in the minds of viewers.
However, it does appear that she has a liberal view of scripture in light of the way her video is presented in the linked article or the others I looked up. How does one conclude that Delilah or Jezebel (apparently two of the six Bible-based characters) qualified as a “real housewife of the Bible” who was pursuing a happy marriage? And, as you mentioned earlier, why is it necessary to “modernize” the story line in order to present it as culturally relevant? I’ve been wrong before about such things, though.
Daisy said:
From what you’ve written this DVD sounds like a sordid soap opera not any Bible I’ve ever read.
This was an interesting statement as I’ve sometimes been amazed at how very real the Biblical accounts actually are. Not as in “sordid soap opera”, but the detailed mentions of such things as marital unfaithfulness, war, rape, family disruption, domineering women, political intrigue, God’s miraculous intervention in our temporal realm….
From that perspective, I guess I have to ask “Why wouldn’t someone want to pattern elements of her fictional story after the best drama ever to unfold?”
@Heather- a couple of thoughts here. First, Im not sure we can legitametly assume she has a liberal view of scripture because she is creating a fictionalized retelling of a bible story. Id have to hear from the woman’s mouth or hand that she thinks the story she is telling is biblical, and not just a “what if” version of the story. If something she writes doesnt directly contradict scripture, but just fictionalizes and “what if”s parts of the story for story’s sake, id say it would fall into the same category as most of the “biblical” fiction that lines christian bookstores and is consumed en masse by Christian women. That doesnt mean I think the piece would be quality, but I think its better to play it safe and not assume we know a person’s theology based on something they are trying to do artistically. But it does put me on gaurd, so I take your point.
As to the point of modernizing a bible story- I dont think there is any harm in doing it in itself, if its done correctly. jesus told parables all the time as a way to relate important spiritual truths to those around him. The prodigal son, for instance, might hit home more to a modern, unsaved audience if told in a modern context than an ancient one, and theres no harm done if the story remains biblical and continues to contain jesus’s message. Id say Jesus would be totally down with that. Now what this lady is doing sounds like shes taking a lot of “artistic license”, so Id have to see it before I really judge it. Ultimtely what it comes down to is is she being true to scripture in her telling, not contradicting it or reinterpreting the meaning? If she isnt, it could be interesting, but im still not all that excited by it because, as I said above, Im usually pretty cynical about the quality of “christian’ media.
Actually, Nicole, I mentioned in one of my comments above that “Saved, Single, and Having Sex” was very possibly a book condemning that kind of behavior. Statistics do show that Christian singles aren’t much more chaste than the general populace.
I was open to that possibility that she was encouraging chastity in her book. which is why I didn’t mention the book in the original post.
From that perspective, I guess I have to ask “Why wouldn’t someone want to pattern elements of her fictional story after the best drama ever to unfold?”
Excellent point.
I looked up the book on Amazon and yes, it definitely is a good book–confronting the issues of sex addiction and/or sexual behavior among Christians. It does not condone these behaviors.
Thanks, Multiple Mom. I appreciate your taking the time to do what I should have done before hastily throwing up my post.
Though I will point out (again
) that I never mentioned the book in question in my original post.
Not to be overly crude, but this strikes me as the same sort of “art” as was the “Piss Christ” that angered all those Catholics and Christians so long ago.
Just take symbols of import to a small slice of the population and sully them up to make a buck with the majority of the population.
Though I will point out (again ) that I never mentioned the book in question in my original post.
You’re in the clear, Terry
But I’m thinking I should have spent more time considering what/whether I needed to comment. Saying that it seems someone has a liberal view of scripture does look pretty judgmental, I guess.
Nicole,
I agree with you on the point about coming to conclusions about a person’s theology/faith based on such scanty information. To be “liberal” with one’s use and application of scripture is not always the same as holding to a liberal theology, though. And yes, Jesus’ teaching did include parables. If the message is accurately preserved, I really don’t have a problem with “modernizing” them in order to help people better grasp what He was saying. It’s probably good to note, though, that Jesus was not simply offering an alternative to what currently passed as entertainment; and His presentations did not contain error or speculation. If a book or video is meant to be a biblically based teaching tool, I’d think it makes sense to not speculate too much on what a person did or said. If the characters are not meant to portray the lives of certain individuals (and only character traits), that allows much greater latitude in the story line, too.
If something she writes doesnt directly contradict scripture, but just fictionalizes and “what if”s parts of the story for story’s sake, id say it would fall into the same category as most of the “biblical” fiction that lines christian bookstores and is consumed en masse by Christian women.
Sure. Discretion is always warranted. And I fully understand that just because I no longer have much use for most Christian fiction offerings, prefer more straightforward renderings of Scriptural truth, and am very wary of sex and relationship “experts” of any religious stripe, it does not automatically mean that certain authors, consumers or practitioners are not true believers.
Again, I probably should have kept my initial thoughts to myself. What I did say was done in an ungracious manner and not intended to be a personal slam against Ms. Adams.
@Terri- we seem to run into this problem a lot where I am commenting on something other commenters said, and you assume I mean you. You did provide that caveat, but i was speaking specifically to people who were not. I think you think I am being critical of you more than I am, friend- it was a continued discussion, and I was addressing the discussion as a whole and not criticizing you. Just want you to know that.
@Heather- all good points. And im going to be 100 honest here and say, from my own personal taste, I have little interest in this thing and I am guilty of jumping to some of the same conclusions about people and their theology- thats probably why im more apt to play “angels advocate” as it were because Im being critical of my own thought process along with everyone else’s! And I dont have much use for those novels, either… not only for the points stated above but because, alas, it seems that the christian world has provided very few good writers in the last fifty years or so. THanks for the discussion!
I think you think I am being critical of you more than I am, friend- it was a continued discussion, and I was addressing the discussion as a whole and not criticizing you. Just want you to know that.
Excuse the sensitivity,Nicole. It’s hard at times to figure out what exactly a commenter is referring to. That’s why I tend to preface my responses to comments by highlighting the specific comment I’m addressing.
I’ll refrain from being so defensive in the future.
In general, I’m thinking the readership here is a crowd that is kind of leery of using the Bible as entertainment for the masses. Of course, I’m also fairly certain we’re not the target audience for this set of movies either.