|
I've read the book twice. Why? Because I wanted to do it the 2nd time w/a highlighter and make notes.
The book can be roughly summarized (in my opinion) as:
We've long stood against TV and it's evils.
TV has negative effects on youth who watch violence and are dumbed down by constant base immersion into it's environment.
Radio, Cell Phones, Internet are also great tools for Satan... but we need all those things... so we simply control them. Well... we haven't controlled cell phones but we've done a good job of controlling cell phones (yes... it's just that contradictory in one place).
We need to go back to simply preaching everywhere... and I mean everywhere... mall parking lots, Wal-marts, standing in line at the DMV, in McDonalds... everywhere... just like the parable of the sower who indiscriminately spread his seed on both dry, shallow and stony ground. We need to preach everywhere... well... everywhere except the TV that is. Umm... yeah, that does sound strange doesn't it?
There are a couple of slippery slope arguments about how if you allow television... it's just going to be a catalyst/stepping stone for tearing down all known "holiness" standards. And we all know the illogical implications of such arguments.
It's chock full of anecdotal stories of how Dick and Jane used TV for ministry and their church dried up and lost the power of God. Wow... so if we find positive results then what?
There's some statistics on the ineffectiveness of TV ministries but you can find statistics for anything. I'm not discrediting this argument actually. Barna is pretty objective in his stats, but they are dated. In addition, I don't think that TV is the end all/be all solution for end time revival. Yet it is a tool. And it's no more inherently evil than the internet, radio, etc. It's simply a technological medium. It can be used for good or bad. Period. Are you managing it... or are you avoiding it? Without contact... you can make no impact.
End summary...
I was very disappointed in the book. I would like to hear some more logical and objective arguments against TV and not as much anecdotal stuff and shallow arguments which don't hold up to real scrutiny.
If we have yielded to all the other forms of technology for the most part with the caveat understanding that they must be moderated, filtered, etc, then why continue to isolate TV (television) as being more "evil." The argument against tv and for the internet turns into a more pragmatic argument than a moral one. "Well... yeah the internet is bad... but it's got much information on it... and we need it. So we have to manage it." Well if that's what's causing us to accept the internet over TV then the argument loses all it's moral punch.
In addition... I think we've done a great injustice as a whole in highlighting particulars where the Bible has given us principals. We've said: "TV's are bad" instead of "much of television programming is unwholesome and should be avoided and managed by viewing positive or educational programming and family channels."
The gospel must be preached in every culture, age, country and to every people. The current Articles of Faith will not fit in every culture, age, country and every people. The scriptures do. Why? Because the Bible has particular methods for salvation and it has moral principals that fit every age, culture and people. We've majored in the minors so to speak on so many issues. While ignoring other issues.
God help us,
Troy
|
Linear Mode
