Please carefully read the following excerpts from the son-in-law of one of the murdered missionaries portrayed in the film End of the Spear. He clearly points out that the decision to keep a sodomite activist in the lead role was unbiblical, done with inappropriate non-disclosure, and based on an ends-justifies-the-means philosophy. He further laments the lack of courage on the part of Christians to speak out against that which is clearly wrong. Finally, he explains why he will not encourage anyone to buy the DVD and rejects this film as part of the true heritage of his family. I want to say to all of my readers that I wholeheartedly agree with this heroic commentary. It is a breath of sanity amidst a sea of obfuscation and impoverished theology.

Below is an excerpt from the article by Dan Kachikis as it appeared in the February 8 edition of Christianity Today. (Please take the time to read the entire article on ChristianityToday.com.)

I have been waiting for a national Christian leader to comment on “End of the Spear” and the casting of Chad Allen in the lead role. Their voices are strangely silent. After all of their build up, that we finally have a movie of our own, they seem to be frozen in indecision or mired in accepting silly arguments for Chad’s inclusion. My deceased wife, Beth Youderian, was Roger Youderian’s daughter. Roger was one of those men who died on “Palm Beach” in 1956, at the end of a spear. Beth and I were strong supporters of the work Mart and Steve have been doing. Beth would have been appalled at this decision and I feel betrayed.

I’m sure Chad is a nice guy, but he wasn’t the man for this role. Making the “story the star” and using the best secular means to tell it, sounds like “the end justifies the means.” Would the Christian community be ok with doing the “Billy Graham Story” with an atheist pedophile because he had the best audition? Would Franklin Graham, James Dobson, Falwell and the rest, sit silent and just say that it’s the story that’s important? And why not have secular professionals perform your church music if it enhances the worship of God? If we cannot respond to this firmly, but in love, this is a sad day for the Christian church in the US. This film and it’s making have become a parable for the weakness of the American church. How dare we wonder why our divorce and “lives adrift” counts look just like the secular world. We talk one thing, and live something else....

My mother-in-law, Roger’s wife, was in Panama for part of the filming and was never told. She didn’t find out until 3 days after the film’s release. Apparently everyone else in Panama knew, including the other wives. I can only conclude that this was kept from her because my brother-in-law, Roger’s son, has not been a fan of this project. Had they asked both of them, they would have said no. Had I known, I would have said no, for myself and for Beth.

Will blessing come from the movie? Yes. God’s plans are bigger than we are. When a pastor living in adultery preaches, do people trust Christ? Yes. Does “fruit” or God’s blessing always justify us? No. So now we have our Christian movie. But I will never buy the DVD, encourage anyone to watch it or consider it a part of my kids heritage.

It is for me a symbol of a confused North American church. Many Christian groups will see it. Some will glory in the testimony, others will wish they had found out first that someone who doesn’t represent what they want their kids to be, plays the most important part in it. Maybe in four or five more weeks, after the film has made most if its revenue, someone will broaden the “sorry if you feel hurt” line to “we’re sorry we made such a selfish, spiritually blind decision.”

...

But until then, maybe we can make Hollywood sit up and take notice. We’ll show ‘em what good Christian entertainment is all about. We’ll make ‘em notice us Christians. Oh, I think they already have, as we stand here with egg dripping down our faces. We showed ‘em.