Not even Jesus or the DoD will work with Stephen Baldwin
August 15, 2007 by William K. Wolfrum
It’s not easy being Stephen Baldwin. Mainly due to the fact that he’s, you know, Stephen Baldwin. But also due to the fact that he can’t even keep a job with Jesus – or the Defense Department. It seems the Defense Department has decided to avoid completely crapping on the Separation of Church and State portion of the Constitution. For now, at least.
‘DOD Stops Plan to Send Christian Video Game to Troops in Iraq’
Plans by a Christian group to send an evangelical video game to U.S. troops in Iraq were abruptly halted yesterday by the Department of Defense after ABC News inquired about the program.
Operation Start Up (OSU) Tour, an evangelical entertainment troupe that actively proselytizes among soldiers, will not be sending the “apocryphal” video game in care packages as planned, according to the department.
“Left Behind: Eternal Forces” was inspired by Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins’ best-selling book series about the battle of Armageddon, in which believers of Jesus Christ fight the Antichrist.
The game has inspired controversy among freedom of religion advocates since it was released last year.
“It’s a horrible game,” said the Rev. Timothy Simpson of the Christians Alliance for Progress. “You either kill or covert the other side. This is exactly what the Osama bin Ladens of the world have portrayed us.”
…
OSU Tour is one of the newest members of the Defense Department’s America Supports You program, which connects citizens and corporations with members of the military and their families at home and abroad.
OSU Tour’s entertainment aims to help military children and families become stronger through faith-based entertainment, according to its Web site. Sports personalities, comedians and actors, including Stephen Baldwin, make up the show.
OSU president Jonathan Sprinks in a recent press release said of Baldwin, “Since God made a difference in his life, he’s been very outspoken.”
–WKW
I like how you left this part out:
————————————
Troy Lyndon, the producer of the game, said the game’s “warfare” is not violent, and that it emphasizes “spiritual battles” over fighting with guns. The game gives incentives to recruit believers instead of killing the forces of the Antichrist, according to Lyndon.
Lyndon added, “There is no forcible conversion to Christianity, and killing is never an objective in any of the 40 missions in the game.”
————————————-
How very honest of you.
Stephen Baldwin’s threeway movie needs to be re-released.
I graduated from the largest evangelical Christian High School in the entire country back in 1984, in good ol’ Orange County CA, and I bet this game is on the school’s computers for recreation purposes. Then again, back in ‘83 the school embarked on a 25-year plan of expansion that the Principal told us wasn’t really necessary, since we were already in the end times. Talk about preparing our youth for a bright future.
Madness, my man. But remember, a long long time ago, all the Puritans got on boats over there in Europe. And they sailed right here, and started a country.
We were blessed with this curse. And curse it does.
Jason,
Have you played the games? Seen them personally? Sure, the point is to win a spiritual battle in a war zone created by an out of control superpower. Violence and killing aren’t the point, but if necessary that’s okay. Here’s a screen capture.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/08/15/dodstopsplan_mn.jpg
Oh no, no killing here.
Please.
The POINT, my friend, is we are a SECULAR nation, founded on the principle of separation of church and state. We should not be aiming to have our own revolutionary guards.
I own the complete game, Dadler. I know for a fact that violence against non-Christians is explicitly denounced in the game, in the game’s manual, on the game’s website and by the game’s creators. The game promotes peaceful solutions even in the face of armed conflict. Isn’t that something you would like to see promoted to our troops? Apparently not.
The screen capture is a tiny portion of the full screen of fraction of a second of gameplay. Having played the game, I am 100% confident that the armed figures are the forces of the Antichrist firing upon the peaceful doctors, singers, etc. of the Tribulation Force. So take your sarcastic, ignorant “Oh no, no killing here” and “Please” comments and throw them off a cliff.
And no, we’re not a “SECULAR” nation and we most certainly weren’t founded on the separation of church and state. That’s a modern myth. Our nation (i.e. the people, not the government) has always been dominated by people of faith and early lawmakers – including your beloved Jefferson – incorporated faith into their jobs.
[...] UPDATE II, 8/16/07, 12:58 PM: Via William K. Wolfram comes the news that the American Talibaners won’t be sending their sick little video game to our troops. [...]
[...] UPDATE II, 8/16/07, 12:58 PM: Via William K. Wolfram comes the news that the American Talibaners won’t be sending their sick little video game to our troops. [...]
Jason,
Ah, the “myth” of the separation of church and state. So you’d like more state religion, how Talibanish of you. Yes, certainly, the first amendment is indeed a myth — read the words again. Using a game like this for the military purposes for which it was proposed MORE than crosses the first amendment line. And explain to me, logically and rationally and factually, exactly how in the game Muslims are peacefully allowed to stay Muslim and prosper. How are peaceful solutions in the face of armed conflict presented. And peaceful solutions to what? To the problem of people choosing not to believe what you do? As for the troops, my brother is one. I have a good grasp on that one. And a great deal of enmity for those who would continue sending him into harm’s war, in a war started for no legitimate reason, in a country that did nothing to us and was no threat. I’d like to see the troops home and now. Would you not? Or is it better to keep them in the middle of a civil war? Is it better that the Iraqi people fight themselves AND us to determine their own destiny?
Jefferson, huh? Have you read anything about the Enlightenment, of which our most cherished founders were the product? Or how its view of the almighty is just a tad different that of modern evangelism’s? Deism and all that. Having survived my high school years immersed in the evangelical life, I can certainly say with confidence we see the world entirely differently. I chose to stop believing an obvious metaphor literally. You haven’t, I suppose. Free country. For now.
But why the wise teachings attributed to Jesus of Nazareth need to be abused and twisted, and why so many Christians need to believe the metaphor literally, that a magic man will descend from the sky and all that, I have no idea. Except the fear of death, mortality, will do that to some folks.
A quote from Jefferson for Jason:
In a letter to Adams, Jefferson concluded about religion: “the result of your 50 or 60 years of religious reading, in four words ‘be just and good’ is that in which all our inquiries must end.”
Nice straw man arguments, Dadler. I never said anything about wanting a state religion, but your ilk always jump on that ridiculously false and paranoid notion whenever someone questions your false interpretation of the First Amendment.
The game wasn’t intended to be used for military purposes as you falsely claim. It was part of “care packages” for the troops provided by the non-military group OSU. Here’s what they troops are still getting:
* Greeting card
* 75 Minute Phone Card
* White Socks
* Baby Wipes (suggested by Col Oliver North)
* Gideon’s pocket size New Testament
* Extreme Sports “Livin It” DVD
* and an assortment of snacks.
Oh, look at that. A Bible. And I bet the greeting card has a Christian message, too. Why aren’t you bitching and moaning about that now?
“And explain to me, logically and rationally and factually, exactly how in the game Muslims are peacefully allowed to stay Muslim and prosper.”
This is a weird question and not easy to answer. Prospering isn’t really an issue in the game and your question is phrased in a way that completely ignores the game’s premise. In any case, most – if not all – levels have both neutral and hostile characters who may or may not be Muslims. It is not necessary to convert each and every neutral and hostile character in each level to advance to the next level. I suppose if one were to use their imagination, you could say that the Muslims in the world of Left Behind can quite easily prosper in a worldly fashion as either neutrals or part of the Antichrist’s side.
“How are peaceful solutions in the face of armed conflict presented.”
You can either try to turn the hostile forces neutral by raising their Spirit level via musicians or recruiters (who can also turn them good) or you can simply avoid them.
“And peaceful solutions to what?”
To being attacked.
“To the problem of people choosing not to believe what you do?”
lol! Whatever, man.
As far as Jefferson is concerned, did you know that just two days after he wrote his much misused letter to the Danbury Baptists, he attended Christian worship services in Congress? Did you also know that he authorized the Treasury and War Office buildings to be used for Christian worship services? Does that sound like someone who believed in the “separation of church and state” as it is interpreted today? Hardly!
“in a war started for no legitimate reason, in a country that did nothing to us and was no threat”
Reason: Saddam was defying U.N.-imposed sanctions. This was admitted by all sorts of officials in our government from the president on down long before George W. Bush took office. All he did was actually put our nation’s money where our mouth was instead of sticking cigars in the vaginas of chubby interns and bombing aspirin factories in Africa.
What Iraq did: Saddam had previously and without provocation invaded Kuwait. We kicked his butt back to Baghdad and since then, all we did under Clinton was issue warnings and lob a couple missiles at him. Saddam continued to defy the U.N. and the U.S. more and more.
The threat: our allies and interests in the area were most certainly under threat from Saddam since the Gulf War, and the threat grew and grew because of the inaction of both the U.N. and the U.S.
Finally, what makes your interpretation of Jesus’ teachings superior to anyone else’s? Because your interpretation is more “tolerant” (while ironically being extremely intolerant)? My interpretation is far more tolerant than yours because I can admit that I could be wrong on secondary, non-critical matters like the End Times. I can admit that because the issue of the End Times has absolutely zero impact on my salvation through Christ. If I’m right, I’m saved. If I’m wrong, I’m still saved. And I would never, EVER call other people’s beliefs on the matter abuse or twisting of Jesus’ teachings, nor would I denigrate and ridicule them for their beliefs.
My interpretations of Jesus Teachings are nothing more than READING them, not READING INTO them. Do you think he magically made fish appear when he fed the five thousand, just snapped his fingers and there it was? Are you a litreralist.
As for the video game, it had no place being distributed to soldiers, most of whom already have little to no knowledge of Iraqi culture. Positing this battle as one to convert sinners to Christ is as wrong as one can get.
Your notion of Saddam’s threat as reason to ignore the real 9/11 causes is the stupidity that has us mired in a civil war in another nation. Go read what your founders have to say about that. There isn’t a shred of credible evidence to support the false assumptions this war was begun for. It was a sham, a waste of life, and a wild distraction from the real problem.
Believe what you choose to, worship what you choose to, but if superiority is not part of your belief, why would you need to convert anyone?
And whatever man is right. I asked a legitimate question and you couldn’t answer it legitimately. WE attacked them, bud. So you’re going to teach with a game how to peacefully solve the problems you’ve created with a war so wrong and unwinnable it’s off the charts?
Some soldiers, like my brother, don’t need to be preached to in order to do the right thing. He had to fight all day to save an Afghan village his superiors wanted him to burn to the ground. And he saved it, his idiotic superiors were overruled finally. Jesus didn’t do that, my friend. Intellect and rationality and humanity did.
And I still can’t get over the venom you have toward someone who has told you he respects the wonderful teachings of Jesus of Nazareth. Love your neighbor, help the poor, be good. What I have a problem with is taking those simple teachings and twistintg them into the literal belief in a magic man coming down from the sky.
And thanks for not mentioning that I exposed your ignorance on Deism and our founders. They didn’t believe in God like you do, they believed in nature as god, they believed God took no role and did no meddle at all in human affairs. That was the God of our most cherished founders, not the childish literalism of those who fail to grasp the beauty of metaphor.
Enough with our jousting, sure you’re a nice guy in person. Peace, bro.
Add Jason,
By the way, are you of fighting age? Just curious, since I assume if you are you’d be enlisting to help my brother, who is going back to Iraq for his third tour in a few months.
If you are of fighting age, and support this debacle like you claim, then unless you enlist I can’t really take your support seriously. If the battle is that important you have no excuse for not being over there. Go fight.
Last Add Jason,
Two links for you:
The Jefferson Bible, in which the founder attempted to weed out the hocus-pocus and focus on the simple teachings — he didn’t believe Jesus “saved” anyone from a hellish fate, just that his moral teachings were great.
http://www.angelfire.com/co/JeffersonBible/
Saddam, WMDs, and the Bush family war profiteering. Now, if you’re going to tell me the Bush family’s profiteering on wars all over the globe doesn’t bother you, or the profiteering of ANY politician who was tasked with choosing this war, then I’d be surprised and dismayed. My useless Democratic senator Feinstein is in the same wretched profiteering boat.
http://www.counterpunch.org/floyd03052004.html
Alright Bill, I’ve sucked up enough of your bandwidth yapping. Keep on keepin’ on. And good to see you guesting at Crooks & Liars.
Peace out.
Gosh. A “you’re a chickenhawk” argument. Here I thought I was dealing with rational adults.
I have links, too:
http://www.butterfliesandwheels.com/badmovesprint.php?num=18
Jason,
Why are you avoiding the quite rational issue of your real committment to fighting this war. I asked a simple, painfully pertainent question, and you didn’t answer. I’ll ask again. Are you of fighting age? To shill for a war you are perfectly able to fight, but unwilling to do so, raising this point is nothing but rational. It is a difficult question to face, but I would think you are a big enough and mature enough adult to face it.
I know you do not fail to see the hypocrisy in having other young people fight a battle you consider so vital, but not so vital you are willing to sacrifice to help them fight. The military is overburdened, morale is low, they need help. Whom should we expect to fight this war if not those young people who shout how important it is, and how we can’t get out before winning? If not you, then whom, Jason? That is as rational a query as you can get.
I repeat: sign up and fight. If you cannot, state the reasons why. If you are too old, or disabled, or have a legitimate excuse, so be it.
Dadler, the “chickenhawk” argument is illogical and irrational. It is the last defense for people who have no other argument against the war and it is the same as saying, “Well, if you support fighting fires, why aren’t you signed up to be a firefighter?” The argument is ridiculous on its face and the only response necessary is to point that out. I don’t need to make you privy to my personal life and/or any medical conditions to justify your argument. It’s not avoiding the issue. It’s responding to an unhinged argument in the only logical way possible.
Separation of church and state is not in the constitution—it is in a letter written by Thomas Jefferson which is hardly a legal document.