News Jesus Camp: A Movie That Will Make You Cry

[Evo]

Ok, we are crossing the line here on our policy against judging religions. Anymore putting down any religious faith and the thread will be locked.

I'll repeat what I said in my first post.

Any discussions should be restricted to the mix of religion and politics, the impact on Science, impacts on what our schools can teach. I will not allow conversations criticizing anyone's personal beliefs or disparaging religions.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Dont you mean, shocked and awed?

No Cyrus, I don't. When you understand that, you will have matured a bit.

It is no more appropriate to lump all Christians together than it is to lump all people from the Middle East together.

 

[jostpuur]

That's called propaganda. What you describe is an appeal to emotion -- the intent is to provoke a strong emotional response that shuts down your capability to reason through what you are hearing. You provide a textbook example of swallowing it hook, line, and sinker.

If the disturbing scenes had been censored out of the document, it would have still been propaganda, leaning in the other direction. How do you keep the document neutral, if the content sparks emotions in the viewer anyway?

 

[Ivan Seeking]

32% of the world's population are Christians. No reasonable person can argue that they are all the same.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/worldrel.htm

2.5% are Atheists. So the logical extension of the argument would be that everyone in the world is the same, except for 2.5%.

 

[GeorginaS]

It’s an emotionally evocative piece of film. It’s intended to be. It has a distinct point of view and a specific message to convey. The creators of the documentary have an opinion, and that opinion is apparent by the spliced in commentary by the radio announcer who comments about radical practises and discusses them in context with his own vision of Christianity. In those moments we hear a specific point of view from a narrative character.

There is not, at any time, continuous running film. It’s all edited shots, even in the group meeting shots, cutting from one child to the next to the next to the group leader to the group reaction, etc. It’s a produced film.

None of that is wrong! I’m not saying they ought not do that because, certainly, if you’re making a piece of film and have something to say, then say it well. And they did. Again, note: I’m not commenting on the specific ideas expressed in the film. I’m commenting on the notion that this is an “unbiased” piece. It’s most certainly biased. It has a point of view. The film is obviously edited. It has obvious commentary.

Once more for emphasis. I’m not saying that making a documentary with a point of view and message is wrong nor negates the veracity of the point of view. I’m saying this is a piece of film with an opinion. That’s it.

 

[Cyrus]

No Cyrus, I don't. When you understand that, you will have matured a bit.

It is no more appropriate to lump all Christians together than it is to lump all people from the Middle East together.

...you totalled missed that pun. I have no idea what your talking about. BYE BYE!

 

[Hurkyl]

If the disturbing scenes had been censored out of the document, it would have still been propaganda, leaning in the other direction.

I don't understand this comment. Are you saying that the emotionally charged scenes actually contradict the content of the film? I don't really understand how that works.

How do you keep the document neutral, if the content sparks emotions in the viewer anyway?

The point I'm trying to make is that viewers (e.g. robertm) need to practice critical thinking skills to protect themselves from propaganda. (Aside: when I was in school, we were taught propaganda techniques so that we could recognize them for what they were -- is that still taught in schools?)

Besides, sparking emotions isn't always fallacious. To quote fallacyfiles.com:

So, one distinction between relevant and fallacious appeals to emotion is based on the distinction between arguments which aim to motivate us to action, and those which are intended to convince us to believe something. Appeals to emotion are always fallacious when intended to influence our beliefs, but they are sometimes reasonable when they aim to motivate us to act.​

(P.S. did you really mean 'neutral'? An argument can be nonneutral without being fallacious)

 

[drankin]

I've watched about 40min of it so far and find it very boring. I see nothing criminal or political to discuss about it. It just shows how a particular Christian denomination (I believe it's called "Charismatic", not quite Pentacostal) believes and lives their religion. I'll watch the rest when I have time to throw away on nothing really important or interesting.

 

[jostpuur]

I don't understand this comment. Are you saying that the emotionally charged scenes actually contradict the content of the film? I don't really understand how that works.

I was not trying to say anything like that.

I thought that you wanted to in particular emphasize that showing the disturbing scenes is propaganda, but I don't understand why it was less propaganda than not showing them. Calling the document propaganda sounds like ad hominem to me.

The point I'm trying to make is that viewers (e.g. robertm) need to practice critical thinking skills to protect themselves from propaganda.

It could be robertm was being unnecessarily emotional, but despite this there's nothing wrong with the document IMO.

 

[robertm]

Maybe my response were overly emotion, as I have said I have a long and bad history with southern christians. So obviously my personal viewpoint is biased. But that does not mean that I am stupid enough to fall for propaganda techniques.

I assure you Hurkyl that I always practice critical thinking and constantly analyze situations, I can't help it. Emotion very rarely plays into my decision making process, and it has gotten me in trouble with many of my close friends.

I did not post this video because I personally hold the same views as the producers of the film. I posted it because I thought it a very interesting, to say the least, case study of an evangelical bible camp.

For those who still think that this is edited to make the camp seem different than it is in reality then I ask how you explain the fact that the DIRECTOR OF THE CAMP states explicitly that the film, though not long enough to get across the whole message, is enough to (and I quote) "get the basics across about our ministry."



The bottom line for me is:

1. The evangelical attitudes are nothing new
2. The way they push christianity is nothing new
3. The way they murder science is nothing new
4. The way that they indoctrine children without giving them the opportunity to make their own decisions about the world is, sadly, nothing new

There is nothing in this film that I hadn't herd before. It simply is a very real and powerful image of these practices in reality.

Even if you want to negate the film because of its obvious political bias, look at the literature from the ministry. It is just as... provocative as the film itself.

As I said before, nothing new here, just pointing out that these people really do exist, and they really do these things to their children.

 

[GeorginaS]

Even if you want to negate the film because of its obvious political bias, look at the literature from the ministry. It is just as... provocative as the film itself.

I wasn't negating the veracity or quality of the documentary itself with my objections. (And I did watch about half of it.) What I was concerned with was this

It has parts where there is some commentary but the majority of the film is straight footage of the 'normal' life in the camp. I assure you none of this is staged, these crazy would be doing they same exact things whether or not there was a camera there. That is the unbiased, and the horrible, part.

where you gave assurances vis the unbiased nature of the film and, furthermore, the lack of editing in it. Assertions like the one I just quoted gave me pause to question how much critical thinking you were applying to what you were watching.

 

[Moridin]

Jesus Camp U.K

 

[jostpuur]

Jesus Camp U.K

I hope there is some reasonable chance that that kind of teaching could be made illegal in UK. hmhm... amazing that it isn't already I'm not a law expert, but surely for example teaching pseudo science in public schools is illegal? Why not other kind of science contradicting claims too then?

 

[Hurkyl]

As I said before, nothing new here, just pointing out that these people really do exist, and they really do these things to their children.

Is that all? It looks like you trying to imply that this is representative of a larger segment of the population?

 

[robertm]

I'm not quite sure what you mean Hurkyl, I am not implying anything. I said exactly what I ment... there isn't anything to read into.

 

[Moridin]

http://www.gallup.com/poll/21814/Evolution-Creationism-Intelligent-Design.aspx

44% of the US population are young Earth creationists.
80% reject mainstream (ateleological) evolution.

 

[Evo]

http://www.gallup.com/poll/21814/Evolution-Creationism-Intelligent-Design.aspx

44% of the US population are young Earth creationists.
80% reject mainstream (ateleological) evolution.

And they all work in my office. I've never worked in an office with so many people praying, laying on hands, sending prayers out in e-mail.

 

[WarPhalange]

I bet Jesus is rolling in his grave.

 

[Moridin]

And they all work in my office. I've never worked in an office with so many people praying, laying on hands, sending prayers out in e-mail.

Must be quite annoying after a while?

 

[Adeimantus]

It has been noted that the movie Jesus Camp is rather propagandistic in its approach, so I thought I'd post this link for some balance. Here is the Reverend Becky Fischer being interviewed in her own element, where no one has used sneaky editing to make her look bad.

There are two parts, separated by an ad. There's also an ad for the children's ministry at the end. It's best if you watch it all the way through.

 

[Evo]

Sorry, no advertising allowed in links.

 

[LightbulbSun]

It has been noted that the movie Jesus Camp is rather propagandistic in its approach, so I thought I'd post this link for some balance. Here is the Reverend Becky Fischer being interviewed in her own element, where no one has used sneaky editing to make her look bad.

There are two parts, separated by an ad. There's also an ad for the children's ministry at the end. It's best if you watch it all the way through.

What balance is there to be had? Any camp where children go to wither their freethinking mentality is a disgrace and needs to be shut down.

 

[Adeimantus]

Sorry, no advertising allowed in links.

Bummer. Can I just put the address in a post as text? That way it isn't technically a link, and people can just copy and paste?


LightbulbSun:

I think it was suggested at some point in this thread (it's been a while since I read it) that the movie had a general anti-Christian bias. Whether or not that is true, I was hoping this interview, which no one could claim to be biased against Christians, would provide the relevant info in about 25 minutes instead of 90 minutes or whatever the movie was.

 

[Evo]

Bummer. Can I just put the address in a post as text? That way it isn't technically a link, and people can just copy and paste?

No, it's the same thing.

 

[Adeimantus]

No, it's the same thing.

okay, maybe I can find a version without the ads somewhere.



update: well, dang it to heck, the youtube version has even more ads. Nevermind then. Since I have been left without a fig leaf to cover myself with, here is a cool David Bowie song with no ads:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdxIhNOgwBE&feature=related

 

[mgb_phys]

And they all work in my office. I've never worked in an office with so many people praying, laying on hands

Do you think that could work at the industrial tribunal ?
I was just laying hands on my secretary for Jesus!

 

[CaptainQuasar]

Just from what people are posting here, it sounds highly biased, so I don't understand the claims that it is unbiased.

I saw this movie last year and in my estimation Moonbear's guess was dead-on and I agree with Adeimantus. I'm an atheist myself but I have many Christian friends and acquaintances, some of whom are Evangelicals and a few I know to be Young Earth Creationists.

I think that movie is pretty obviously intentionally cut so that it never shows the people in it doing or saying anything normal and so that you don't see the kids at the camp doing any of the things that might happen at a secular summer camp. It appears to me designed to exclusively portray, as the entirety of their identity, as many non-mainstream religious beliefs as possible. And I think it's cut and laid out in an attempt to ensure that unless the viewer has similar beliefs he or she doesn't develop any empathy or find any common ground with the people depicted.

Yeah, people are weird in all sorts of different ways. Some things about the kinds of beliefs these people hold are bad IMO but I don't think that trying to maximize distrust and intolerance serves any purpose - we ought to be trying to understand why they think the things they do, not dismiss it as a simple matter of incomprehensible brainwashed craziness. What this movie tries to do seems like the same attitude as "Muslims just hate freedom and America - it's in their religion, it's part of their culture!"

⚛​

 

[Adeimantus]

I think that movie is pretty obviously intentionally cut so that it never shows the people in it doing or saying anything normal and so that you don't see the kids at the camp doing any of the things that might happen at a secular summer camp. It appears to me designed to exclusively portray, as the entirety of their identity, as many non-mainstream religious beliefs as possible. And I think it's cut and laid out in an attempt to ensure that unless the viewer has similar beliefs he or she doesn't develop any empathy or find any common ground with the people depicted.

Yeah. And what's funny about that is it's completely unnecessary. If you want to be freaked out by Becky Fischer, all you have to do is listen to her talk about herself and her activities in an unedited format. Straight from the horse's mouth, as it were. There was plenty disturbing material in the interview I wanted to link to without the need for editing and voice overs that make misleading generalizations about Evangelicals as a whole. It is true that the stuff portrayed in Jesus Camp is not mainstream Christianity, or even mainstream Evangelical Christianity. But it's also not even close to being confined to Becky Fischer. The http://www.globalharvest.org/index.asp?action=about movement has gained popularity among numerous Pentecostal/Charismatic churches. What is significant about this movement is their explicit intent to take dominion over all aspects of public life, including government and education. And they are raising up an army of young people (their description) to do it. This is not about talking in tongues and laying on of hands. While that stuff isn't my bag, it is largely irrelevant. But this idea of "taking dominion" has real world implications. I seriously doubt that they will succeed in their goals, but the idea that someone who is sympathetic to their goals might attain high public office is still uncomfortable for me.

Some of their literature:
http://www.arsenalbooks.com/category/72/1

 

[LightbulbSun]

Yeah, people are weird in all sorts of different ways. Some things about the kinds of beliefs these people hold are bad IMO but I don't think that trying to maximize distrust and intolerance serves any purpose - we ought to be trying to understand why they think the things they do, not dismiss it as a simple matter of incomprehensible brainwashed craziness. What this movie tries to do seems like the same attitude as "Muslims just hate freedom and America - it's in their religion, it's part of their culture!"

⚛​

Ignorance can be cured, willful ignorance can't.

 

[CaptainQuasar]

Ignorance can be cured, willful ignorance can't.

I guess I regard the attitude of this film - going out of your way to portray or regard a certain group of people as a bunch of incomprehensible wackos with no redeeming or sympathetic qualities - as a form of willful ignorance. Willful ignorance they're intentionally trying to spread to others.

⚛​

 

[Evo]

Locked. This has gone from discussion of the film to judgements on different religious sects.