'Wicked' star, self-identified bisexual actress Cynthia Erivo cast as the Son of God in 'Jesus Christ Superstar'

[PloverWing]

It's ostensibly hypocritical, though.

We're in a time when even voice actors are required to match the race, nationality, and gender of their cartoon characters (even non-human cartoon characters, if the characters are identifiable "race-coded").

That's a reasonable point.

 

[SavedByGrace3]

Jesus said we would be hated for His name's sake. I have found that if people tone down the Jesus and His blood message, they are less hateful.
I purposefully bought some "Jesus tee-shirts" to wear. I did this for a few reasons. One was that we have to have the message out there. I am a billboard for the Lord. Another reason is that we cannot allow this message to become denormalized. The less a culture sees this message, the closer we will be to the faith being degraded to a cult, and that label will be one more step toward the acceptance of persecution. Finally, I did it to keep my own body and nature crucified. Despite my being a believer for 54 years, my carnal nature wants to be shy about the gospel!
Romans 1:16 KJV
16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

 

[RileyG]

Note that many on the political and social left ARE Christians.

Whether this is a good casting decision, I can't say. I'm iffy about the play in the first place. The playwrights have a different vision of Jesus than I do.

That’s true, but it’s been my experience the SECULAR left despises Christians. I didn’t mean Christians who lean left, sorry.

 

[iarwain]

Whether this is a good casting decision, I can't say. I'm iffy about the play in the first place. The playwrights have a different vision of Jesus than I do.

From what I understand, neither Tim Rice (who wrote the lyrics) or Andrew Lloyd Webber (who wrote the music) were/are particularly religious. I believe Webber claims to be an agnostic.

 

[iarwain]

Jesus said we would be hated for His name's sake. I have found that if people tone down the Jesus and His blood message, they are less hateful.

I imagine that diluting the gospel to be more palatable to the current culture is a form of toning down that message.
It's one thing to be hated ourself, it's another thing to see our Lord disrespected so consistently.

I'm guessing anyone who objects to the casting will be called bigots. Mind you, I have no problem at all with casting a black actor to play Jesus. Or a bald one, for that matter - as long as he wears a wig lol.

 

[rockytopva]

We had a banker looking guy by the name of Leo at my workplace. A very distinguished and dignified looking man who would sit with us during our breaks. When we would discuss topics such as this and pause... He would give out a low-belly-based.... "Sick!"

After reading this thread I can hear him saying that now!

 

[SavedByGrace3]

Note that many on the political and social left ARE Christians.

Whether this is a good casting decision, I can't say. I'm iffy about the play in the first place. The playwrights have a different vision of Jesus than I do.

I do not see how anyone who supports 67 million abortions, transology, homosexuality, and the like could be or would even want to be a Christian.
Christianity would put a big crimp in their style. And that stance has nothing to do with "hating" anyone. It is a matter of The Book. Abominations and blasphemies are entirely contrary to what the scriptures have to say regarding these things. That is just a fact. You cannot ascribe to these things and then march into a church, redefine words, and start dictating to us what our beliefs are. If you do not want to be a believer, then you do not have to be. But to be a believer.... you actually have to believe.

 

[Sabertooth]

JCS has always been a secular offering. Why does this surprise anyone...?

 

[PloverWing]

I do not see how anyone who supports 67 million abortions, transology, homosexuality, and the like could be or would even want to be a Christian.

As I assume you know, these are issues about which Christians disagree. Additionally, there are many Christians who agree with your signature, that all who call on His name will be saved.

 

[SavedByGrace3]

As I assume you know, these are issues about which Christians disagree. Additionally, there are many Christians who agree with your signature, that all who call on His name will be saved.

Christians do not disagree with these things. We are all in 100% agreement with the word of God regarding abominations. I cannot speak for those who disagree with it. I am not perfect, but I know that we have to at least be in agreement with what the Word says. It is not faith to deny the Word of God. I normally do not push this area of the scripture... it is not really my word. But I would be remiss to not at least share what the Word says. It says what it says. Let anyone reading be aware and beware. I will share this and be done. Blessings.

1 Corinthians 6:9-10 KJV
9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

Galatians 5:19-21 KJV
19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

Ephesians 5:1-7 KJV
1 Be ye therefore followers of God, as dear children;
2 And walk in love, as Christ also hath loved us, and hath given himself for us an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweetsmelling savour.
3 But fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not be once named among you, as becometh saints;
4 Neither filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor jesting, which are not convenient: but rather giving of thanks.
5 For this ye know, that no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.
6 Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience.
7 Be not ye therefore partakers with them.

1 Timothy 1:8-11 ISV
8 Of course, we know that the Law is good if a person uses it legitimately,
9 that is, if he understands that the Law is not intended for righteous people but for lawbreakers and rebels, for ungodly people and sinners, for those who are unholy and irreverent, for those who kill their fathers, their mothers, or other people,
10 for those involved in sexual immorality, for homosexuals, for kidnappers, for liars, for false witnesses, and for whatever else goes against the healthy teaching
11 that agrees with the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which he entrusted to me.

Revelation 21:8 KJV
8 But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

We could go on and on. But that should suffice. It is correct that when a murderer/rapist calls on the name of the Lord, He will be saved. But that does not mean he can go on murdering and raping.
Peace.

 

[PloverWing]

Christians do not disagree with these things.

We have reached the limit of what CF rules allow us to discuss on this topic. I acknowledge that many Christians interpret the Scriptures the same way that you do. But also, empirically, Christians do disagree on this. My own church is being divided over this debate right now.

 

[SavedByGrace3]

We have reached the limit of what CF rules allow us to discuss on this topic. I acknowledge that many Christians interpret the Scriptures the same way that you do. But also, empirically, Christians do disagree on this. My own church is being divided over this debate right now.

I was born and raised Episcopalian: St. Johns Episcopal church Massena, NY. I was baptized, Confirmed, and had my first communion there. I was even in the choir as a child. My grandparents were among those who founded the church, and my mother had a window dedicated to her after she died in 1967. They also tried to break from Albany many years ago over the homosexual and female ministers issue. Still, even though the local body paid for every blade of grass and stone, they could not take the building with them. I am aware of the issue. And the church is wrong. They do not have to adhere to the Biblical standards. There is no question about translation and interpretation. It is as clear as day. However, they have no right to claim to be a church that follows Biblical standards while not doing so. If they think they are right and the scriptures wrong... dare to say so and move on from there. Just don't pretend and try to ride both horses simultaneously. That is disingenuous and nigh on to being deceitful.

 

[The Liturgist]

Try to play Mohammed if they want to be daring…

I have encountered people who believe that would be Islamophobic hate speech, whereas not blaspheming Christianity with its sexual repression and patriarchy is thoughtcrime is a racist micro-aggression and therefore thoughtcrime.

 

[The Liturgist]

I thought she was good in Wicked (though she's no Idina Menzel). But this casting is disrespectful to Christianity as a whole. Which, I suspect, is the point.

I would never view a musical entitled “Wicked.” Call me a puritan, but I think ots wronf to celebrate evil, and you can’t get much more evil than the Wicked Witch of the West.

Speaking of which, the lady who played her was very nice, and went on Mr. Roger’s Neighborhood around the time the Wizard of Oz became common on television, in order to make sure young children wouldn’t be frightened by her character.

 

[PloverWing]

I would never view a musical entitled “Wicked.” Call me a puritan, but I think ots wronf to celebrate evil, and you can’t get much more evil than the Wicked Witch of the West.

I got to see Wicked performed as a play in New York. (Obviously, I haven't seen the full movie version yet, because they haven't yet made part 2, but part 1 seemed reasonably faithful to the play.) For what it's worth, the story isn't a celebration of evil. It's a story that explores this complicated question: if a system (government, organization, etc.) goes bad, when is it a good strategy to stay within the system and try to change it, and when is it a better strategy to break with the system altogether?

I won't say more about the story, because spoilers, but it's one of the most thought-provoking plays I've seen.

 

[iarwain]

I would never view a musical entitled “Wicked.” Call me a puritan, but I think ots wronf to celebrate evil, and you can’t get much more evil than the Wicked Witch of the West.

I think the title is meant ironically (I hope I'm using that word correctly). The story kind of flips the Oz story on its head, as it gives new motivations to the characters' actions. Kind of like "You thought you knew what was happening, but here's what was going on beneath the surface".

I got to see Wicked performed as a play in New York. (Obviously, I haven't seen the full movie version yet, because they haven't yet made part 2, but part 1 seemed reasonably faithful to the play.)

I enjoyed the movie (and the play), but I thought they stretched things out to much. Ruins the pacing of the story. If they would have kept it down to one movie, they could have fit everything in comfortably. It's been pointed out that the play is actually shorter than the movie (which is only half the story).

 

[RileyG]

I got to see Wicked performed as a play in New York. (Obviously, I haven't seen the full movie version yet, because they haven't yet made part 2, but part 1 seemed reasonably faithful to the play.) For what it's worth, the story isn't a celebration of evil. It's a story that explores this complicated question: if a system (government, organization, etc.) goes bad, when is it a good strategy to stay within the system and try to change it, and when is it a better strategy to break with the system altogether?

I won't say more about the story, because spoilers, but it's one of the most thought-provoking plays I've seen.

I know some of the music. I never seen the play (never been to New York), haven't seen the movie YET , or read the Book yet.

Maybe when I have more free time I will?

I do love the music though!

 

[RileyG]

I would never view a musical entitled “Wicked.” Call me a puritan, but I think ots wronf to celebrate evil, and you can’t get much more evil than the Wicked Witch of the West.

Speaking of which, the lady who played her was very nice, and went on Mr. Roger’s Neighborhood around the time the Wizard of Oz became common on television, in order to make sure young children wouldn’t be frightened by her character.

Yup. She was a school teacher, and she actually experienced third degree burns during one of the scenes and refused to sue. She was one of the only cast members that was nice to Judy Garland. The actresses' name was Margaret Hamilton.

I watched The Wizard of Oz obsessively as a child.

 

[FireDragon76]

I do not see how anyone who supports 67 million abortions, transology, homosexuality, and the like could be or would even want to be a Christian.
Christianity would put a big crimp in their style. And that stance has nothing to do with "hating" anyone. It is a matter of The Book.

Globally, in the developed world, most Christians aren't fundamentalists and don't read the Bible literally, and many don't interpret the Bible as being against gay or trans people.

In the city where I live (Orlando), most historic Protestant churches here actually are generally welcoming and affirming of LGBT persons. Strangely enough, the Episcopalians here are the exception, they aren't LGBT affirming except for one parish, which has alternative episcopal oversight.

 

[JSRG]

I know some of the music. I never seen the play (never been to New York), haven't seen the movie YET , or read the Book yet.

Maybe when I have more free time I will?

I do love the music though!

I haven't read the book Wicked, but I did watch a video someone made about it where they went into a lot of depth about it, and (assuming the information is accurate, which it seems to be) it should be noted the musical (and movie based on the musical) diverges quite a bit from the book, which is also much darker and more adult than the musical. The movie is rated PG, but the book is basically R-rated.