I still have an attachment to the idea that portraying things positively in a 'friendly to the consumer' context has a tendency to hook our human mimetic responses and build an acceptability for what is portrayed. So it is worrying to find a Christian computer game manufacturer marketting a shoot-em-up where unbelievers are to be targetted for extermination. It is justified by a particular premillenialist dispentsationalist theology, but still, even within that framework surely this can't be healthy? Justin Baeder doesn't think so and has had a reply from the manufacturer when he rightly raised the issue.
Is it too much to ask for Christianity to have a do-no-harm policy? Can we at least make an attempt to represent ourselves as something other than killers and harbingers of doom? The world needs hope, needs Christ. If video games can help with that mission, go for it, and God bless you. Otherwise, I cannot help but believe that you are sending a very, very distorted message about the nature of the Gospel and of God, even by the standards of a committedly premillennial eschatological framework.
It concerns the forthcoming series of Left Behind video games and Justin commented originally here
.A Response from Left Behind Games � Radical Congruency
Filed in: violence
One of the interesting things that comes out of Walter Wink's work on the Powers is a cultural reading of what he calls the Domination system and its myth of redemptive violence. So it's interesting to find also a site whose genesis is in a psychotherapist's wrestling with the issues of global violence.
The notion that links all these trends is Dominance—the belief that ‘might is right’, that bullying is natural, that the use of force and coercion are inevitable and essential ingredients of human life—and that its shadow, subordination and victimization, is also natural and inescapable. The extent to which we continue to live from cultures of domination threatens ecological damage that looks set to compromise human and most other life on the planet. livingfromlove is devoted to unravelling and confronting these beliefs. They have seemed to be a ‘given’, a part of human existence. Might they not be self-serving social constructions that promote and support exploitation and generate damage? Might they not be obsolete? An old paradigm of relating that promises to end all relating?
It may be worth keeping an eye on this site.Living From Love : Making sense — current perspectives
Filed in: domination
In theory, soldiers etc are allowed, nay; supposedly encouraged in training, to disobey illegal orders. Now I can understand a military force might want to scrutinise people who claim that right/duty. But the double jeopardy that this represents is vicious, surely? Either risk being tried for warcrimes or be locked up for trying to do the right thing...
Tells us something, perhaps, about military minds and human rights.Guardian Unlimited | Special reports | RAF doctor found guilty over Iraq refusal