Mark Moring of the “Christianity Today Entertainment Blog” takes issue with Driscoll’s rant against the film. Moring writes, “I saw some distinctly Christian themes in the ideas of self-sacrifice, unconditional love, incarnation, and even a model for missions.” Moring also cites responses from other critics such as Menachem Wecker, faith-and-art blogger for the Houston Chronicle who disagrees that the film is demonic and applauds the film for its spiritual approach to life and its “Christian undertones.” Keith Johnson and Larry Shallenberger of the Children’s Ministry and Culture blog cite four mistakes that Driscoll made in his evaluation:
1) Misunderstanding or Oversimplifying What the Author is Saying; 2) Not Letting the Author’s Universe Exist on Its Own Terms; 3) Choosing Combat Over Conversation; and 4) Failing to Find the Redeemable in the Movie.

Let’s face it. Mark Driscoll is a lightning rod. And like most lightning rods they like to say outrageous things in order to make a point. In this case Driscoll thought it would be attention grabbing to criticize a pop culture icon to illustrate a point he was making in a sermon. Pastors do this all the time. But not every pastor is Mark Driscoll. And not every pastor posts their sermon illustrations on YouTube because, quite frankly, unless you’re Mark Driscoll most people couldn’t care less. But setting aside the sensationalism for a moment, does Driscoll have a point?

Is Avatar a sermon on paganism? Certainly pantheism is pagan in its origin and I definitely believe James Cameron is preaching a message. But I really think Cameron’s use of pantheism in the film is intended as more of a medium than a theology.

Cameron has been quoted as saying he wanted to make “something that has this spoonful of sugar of all the action and the adventure and all that.” He wanted to produce something that was thrilling, but also that has a conscience “that maybe in the enjoying of it makes you think a little bit about the way you interact with nature and your fellow man”. He added that “the Na’vi represent something that is our higher selves, or our aspirational selves, what we would like to think we are” and that even though there are good humans within the film, the humans “represent what we know to be the parts of ourselves that are trashing our world and maybe condemning ourselves to a grim future.” Cameron also admits the film specifically criticizes America’s role in the Iraq War.

So if Cameron is in fact preaching a religion in “Avatar” then the message is unquestionably an apologetic for the religion of Liberalism. Like so many other Hollywood pinheads, Cameron is bowing down at the altar of environmental extremism, anti-war, anti-capitalism. It’s the good agrarian natives who live in harmony with the earth versus the greedy money grubbing imperialists who are hell bent on pillaging the planet for financial gain. This is “Pocahontas” in the twenty-second century. Can’t you just hear the lovely Princes Neytiri singing “Colors of the Wind” to Corporal Jake Sully (or was that Captain John Smith) explaining to him all about the wonders of nature:

The rainstorm and the river are my brothers
The heron and the otter are my friends
And we are all connected to each other
In a circle, in a hoop that never ends

How high will the sycamore grow?
If you cut it down, then you’ll never know

Okay, so what does all that mean to you and me? Can a Christian watch “Avatar” without seeing the overt demonism? I don’t know. Can a Christian watch “Star Wars” without seeing the overt Buddhism? Can a Christian watch any fantasy story without seeing something overtly offensive to their Christian faith? The answer’s up to you. If your conscience is pricked then don’t do it. But if watching make-believe creatures living in a make-believe world practicing a make-believe religion doesn’t tempt you to sin then exercise your Christian liberty and enjoy it with a clean conscience.

Nancy Pelosi embraces the Tea Partiers. Here’s an interesting compilation of news clips featuring the Speaker of the House commenting on the Tea Party movement.

This is so laughable one wonders how Ms. Pelosi can even say these things with a straight face. After repeated well documented comments last summer in which Pelosi tried to downplay and disparage the Tea Party movement, referring to it as “AstroTurf” and “faux-grass roots” and mischaracterizing it as swastika carrying hate-mongering, now we find the House Speaker singing a different tune. When reminded of her remarks in an interview over the weekend she responded, “No, what I said at the time is that the Republican Party directs a lot of what the Tea Party does, but not everybody in the Tea Party takes direction from the Republican Party and so there was a lot of shall we say AstroTurf as opposed to grass-roots.”

Oh really? So that’s what you meant. You didn’t really mean to belittle the entire Tea Party movement, just those who are supposedly taking their marching orders from the Republican Party. You know, all those conservatives and independents and moderate Democrats that are showing up by the droves.

But then came the crème de la crème, the pièce de résistance. Nancy went on to say, “But you know we share some of the views of the Tea Partiers in terms of the roll of special interests in Washington DC and that just has to stop.”

Wow. This statement is so outrageous even the interviewer can’t resist chuckling, “So common ground between Nancy Pelosi and the Tea Party movement.”

Now I don’t know which is funnier, Nancy Pelosi feigning agreement with the Tea Party movement or Nancy Pelosi suggesting that Tea Party goers are protesting special interests in Washington. You go girl!

You may have heard the internet chatter over the George W. Bush “Miss Me Yet?” billboard. Many were speculating that the image is nothing more than a clever Photoshop hoax. But apparently Bob Collins at Minnesota Public Radio has verified that he’s seen it with his own eyes along I-35 near Wyoming, Minnesota.

This has led blogger Wesley Messamore over at the humblelibertarian.com to come up with some interesting variations of his own on the Bush Billboard. Check ‘em out. Here’s my personal favorite.

Update: Some anger persists after the airing of the ad:

NOW president Terry O’Neill said it glorified violence against women. “I am blown away at the celebration of the violence against women in it,” she said. “That’s what comes across to me even more strongly than the anti-abortion message. I myself am a survivor of domestic violence, and I don’t find it charming. I think CBS should be ashamed of itself.”

You’ve GOT to be kidding me. You CAN’T be serious. Has this woman lost her ever loving mind? I have two words for Ms. O’Neill:

GROW UP!