Jesus Camp: A Movie That Will Make You Cry

  • News
  • Thread starter robertm
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Movie
In summary, the film discusses an Evangelical Christian Bible camp and how some of the kids there are taught radical views about their religion and politics. The camp is shown to be a bad experience for the kids, with one boy crying because he believes he's going to hell. This is only one example of how religion can impact children negatively.
  • #36
Moonbear said:
That could just be very good video editing.
That just means the people watching are buying the claims, not that they are real.

Sorry, I just have to be skeptical anymore. There are just too many things out claiming to be documentaries that really aren't to just assume I can trust any of them at face value. I already know there are religious fanatics, so what could this add that makes it worth watching, or what gives it credence that it's not just another anti-religion or political statement. Just from what people are posting here, it sounds highly biased, so I don't understand the claims that it is unbiased. There are plenty of Christian summer camps and youth camps and retreats that would NEVER consider anything so bizarre as kissing the feet of a Bush cut-out figure, so what is the significance of a documentary portraying an odd one that does if not to bias people against religion?

I don't think the movie is making a statement about Christian's or Christian camps in general. It's just about one really messed up camp.

Even if the scenes have been cherry picked and the rest of camp time was spent normally, I would still consider the camp messed up. I think that's what people are referring to when they talk about 'not biased'.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #37
First, I have attended one of these Evangelical prayer meetings. I went with an old High School friend that had been "born again" and wanted me to see how great it was. It was the biggest eye opener I've ever seen. Scary. No religion was discussed, what was discussed was their agenda that night was demanding the cancellation of tv shows that they objected to. They handed out letter templates and told everyone to use them as a basis for their letters and write as many as they could and sign different names, then bring them back the following week where volunteers would drive them to different areas to be mailed so that they wouldn't look too obvious. The pastor said that the broadcasting stations market research said that every 1 person that took the effort to write represented 10,000 others.

The only "prayer" in the prayer meeting was at the end when everyone was asked to close their eyes and "envison a dollar amount, of at least 20% of their annual income, or higher" and that is the amount that god wants them to donate to the church. And to remember that this is how you're going to get rich, for God has promised that ye shall reap more than ye shall sow, he guaranteed them profits of over 10 times what they gave to the church.

I work' with a Young Earth Creationist Fundamentalist like the people shown in this documentary. It's very real. Several people I work' with go to churches where they speak in tongues.
 
  • #38
Really the way that they destroy science is almost as bad as what they do to the kids... No one who believes in a young Earth theory just can not see logic. I think they are really hurting these kids critical thinking skills by telling them how it is instead of just helping them think about it themselves. They are training them to accept evidence with no logical backing. That does not bode well for their futures...
 
  • #39
Moonbear said:
That just means the people watching are buying the claims, not that they are real.
That would also include the Oscar Academy. I imagine they did a reasonable vetting before nominating the thing for Best Documentary last year.

And what do you mean by "real"? Do you think the camp itself was faked or do you think it was just misrepresented?

1. The camp is very real: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2003365311_jesuscamp08.html

The summer camp featured in the documentary "Jesus Camp," which includes scenes with disgraced preacher Ted Haggard, will shut down for at least several years because of negative reaction sparked by the film, according to the camp's director.

2. The documentary is mostly a fair depiction, with a couple scattered signs of bias. (see the wiki). The extent of the objection appears to be about three specific shots in the movie, which can as well be excised without changing the picture.

The pastor of Jesus Camp also runs a huge, growing organization called Kids in Ministry.
http://www.kidsinministry.com/

Some of their "learning kits" are quite crazy: http://www.kidsinministry.com/onlineresources/bloodvisualkit.php

And the child Evangelism movement itself is growing quite rapidly. There have been articles about them that I can dig up. But here's an interesting tidbit:http://www.christianpost.com/articl...bes_Give_Rise_to_Grade_School_Evangelists.htm

Children as young as nine years of age can now more effectively evangelize their friends thanks to the makers of the famous Evangecube and the evangelistic organization founded by the late televangelist Dr. D. James Kennedy.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #40
Moonbear said:
That could just be very good video editing.

...

That just means the people watching are buying the claims, not that they are real.
Kinda like footage of the moon landings?

Seriously, I respect rational scepticism, but what is the point of casting doubt on a film you haven't even bothered to watch?
 
  • #41
robertm said:
Moonbear, I care not what the original purpose of the documentary was, when I saw the footage of that poor young boy crying his heart out b/c he thought he was the anti-christ that was plenty. I ask you how you would propose faking that?

Little kids can act and cry like any other actor. And there are a lot of parents who emotionally abuse their children in other ways as well. You'd have to live in a bubble not to know there are truly horrible parents in the world, and yes, plenty of them show up to church every Sunday and act the part of good Christians, but it doesn't mean the two are necessarily related. It's more revealing of the individuals in this group being particularly bad parents, and if the intention was to expose this single group as a group who is emotionally abusing children, great, call in the authorities and have them deal with it, just like some of those "boot camps" for troubled kids have been exposed for child neglect and abuse. But if it's meant to slur religious camps in general, then it's just another film intended to fester prejudices.

I've attended some prayer meeting type things that people have invited me to, mostly out of curiosity, and I know people who have gone on religious retreats and told me about their experiences, and most of it is about the same as you'd expect of some goofy support group, where they do silly things like go around in a circle and tell each other something good about the person next to them or the person across from them, or they have to share one good thing that happened to them that week. If you've ever watched the sit-com Dharma and Greg and seen the goofy hippie group things they do, it's a lot like that. It seems pretty lame, but isn't anything harmful, and if a child had issues with self-confidence, might even help. There is nothing political, nothing pressuring anyone to "feel the spirit" if they don't, mostly just going around affirming one another with positive things (it seemed to me that this was the main draw of the group, that a lot of these people had self-esteem problems and the feeling of belonging to a group that helped boost their confidence by welcoming everyone and saying nice things about them for an hour a week or however often they met is what kept them going back...it looked like a group therapy session). Nothing at all like what folks are describing of this one group.
 
  • #42
Becky Fisher, the lady that ran the camp and is now running 'Kids In Ministry', states herself that the film is a good estimate of what the camp is all about. She also encourages all to watch it despite the negative feedback. Her and the producers of the film remained in close contact throughout the process and she approves of everything that the film shows. So that puts to rest your fears of a hoax or actors or showcasing.

NOTHING good could ever come from the kind of thinking that the evangelical movement promotes. It is only one small step from extremism.

Also this one group is not small, nor is it alone. This is not a tasteless slur or smear of religion and the propose of my post was not to do so. Regardless of what I personally may feel about all religions, my problems with what is shown is on a local scale with these individuals. If anyone makes a broad opinion of an enormous organization based on a single documentary then they are obviously not very intelligent. Read a little about the producers yourself and I think you will find that their purposes were far from a smear.

If you are still interested the JUST WATCH IT and see for your self. If you feel like you would be wasting your time then don't. But you can not expect to have a real opinion of it without even seeing it!

I consider myself to be fairly intelligent and I think I do not fall prey to emotional trappings so easily. After seeing the film, and I have seen many religious documentaries, I choose to post this one because I thought it not a tasteless smear but a very evocative case study.

Again, the film is a case study and DISREGARDING what the intentions of the film may have been, it shows in my opinion terrible crimes. After watching you still disagree, then great! More discussion!
 
  • #43
Note also the militant overtones. This "warriors for Christ" theme is consistent with perhaps the most ironic aspect of the modern extremist-christian cult movement - a lust for war. See the link at the link below. It is most enlightening. Note the drumbeat for war - Warriors for Christ!
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=189445

This is an incredibly dangerous cult movement that may or may not be dying.

But I do think that blaming this sort of thing on all religion is like blaming science for Hitler and his superior race. There are many devout Christians who are shocked and appalled by this stuff.
 
Last edited:
  • #44
It is refreshing to see a person of the Christian faith who does not support evangelism. Thank you for not giving up your intelligence for the sake of a belief. :approve:

It makes since that there would be many christians apposed to this kind of radicalism. I guess I have a cynical view of Christianity as I grew up in the Southeast US and have had very few good encounters with religion.

My own mother threw me out of the house for a few days when she found out that I was an atheist...
 
Last edited:
  • #45
robertm said:
It is refreshing to see a person of the Christian faith who does not support evangelism.
I think you may have confused (Christian) evangelism with the various examples stupidity we see in this thread.
 
  • #46
Ivan Seeking said:
Note also the militant overtones. This "warriors for Christ" theme is consistent with perhaps the most ironic aspect of the modern extremist-christian cult movement - a lust for war. See the link at the link below. It is most enlightening. Note the drumbeat for war - Warriors for Christ!
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=189445

This is an incredibly dangerous cult movement that may or may not be dying.

But I do think that blaming this sort of thing on all religion is like blaming science for Hitler and his superior race. There are many devout Christians who are shocked and appalled by this stuff.

Dont you mean, shocked and awed?
 
  • #47
Ivan Seeking said:
Note also the militant overtones. This "warriors for Christ" theme is consistent with perhaps the most ironic aspect of the modern extremist-christian cult movement - a lust for war. See the link at the link below. It is most enlightening. Note the drumbeat for war - Warriors for Christ!
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=189445

This is an incredibly dangerous cult movement that may or may not be dying.

But I do think that blaming this sort of thing on all religion is like blaming science for Hitler and his superior race. There are many devout Christians who are shocked and appalled by this stuff.
Agreed, these people are an extreme fringe, but a growing fringe.
 
  • #48
robertm said:
Moonbear, I care not what the original purpose of the documentary was, when I saw the footage of that poor young boy crying his heart out b/c he thought he was the anti-christ that was plenty.
...
However, negating all the politics, the images and the things that literally come out of these peoples mouths are very powerful and very sad.
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.
 
Last edited:
  • #49
No I do know the difference. My opinion of both differ very little. I.e. one is a small step from the other
 
Last edited:
  • #50
Hurkyl said:
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.

That boy was not crying to trick me. He was crying because he was hurt. Just because I feel an emotion response does not mean that I swallowed any bait...

Not to mention I do not base my opinions of the evangelical church solely on one source. I have had a long history of dealing with christians of this sort.
 
  • #51
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.
 
Last edited:
  • #52
Cyrus said:
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.
 
Last edited:
  • #53
Hurkyl said:
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?
 
  • #54
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%.
 
Last edited:
  • #55
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.
 
Last edited:
  • #56
Ivan Seeking said:
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!
 
  • #57
jostpuur said:
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)
 
Last edited:
  • #58
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.
 
  • #59
Hurkyl said:
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.
 
Last edited:
  • #60
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.
 
  • #61
robertm said:
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

robertm said:
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.
 
  • #62
Jesus Camp U.K

 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #63
Moridin said:
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 :confused: 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?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #64
robertm said:
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?
 
  • #65
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.
 
  • #67
  • #68
I bet Jesus is rolling in his grave.
 
  • #69
Evo said:
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?
 
  • #70
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.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

What do you think about this video from the selfish gene writer
Replies
4
Views
4K
Did The Office Finale Make You Cry?
Replies
14
Views
2K
Chris Sharma: Rock Climbing videos
Replies
3
Views
6K
Saw this program on tv with two guys playing the accordion
Replies
6
Views
2K
News Have we become detached from Iraq
Replies
23
Views
3K
Is This Quantum Mechanics Documentary Worth Your Time?
Replies
3
Views
2K
What Happens When You Channel Aliens?
Replies
2
Views
4K
PSA: Drowning does NOT look like it does in the movies
Replies
16
Views
3K
Dangerous Knowledge Documentary
Replies
14
Views
5K
I need a new group of friends, but I don't know how
Replies
8
Views
8K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top