Controversial Christian Game Under Fire

Violent video games have long been the subject of concern, but now a religious title is stirring controversy. Left Behind: Eternal Forces, a T-rated PC real-time strategy game based on the popular Left Behind book series, has come under fire by online political groups.

The best-selling Christian fiction works, totaling about 63 million sold in 30 languages, target the 14 to 16 year-old demographic.


The premise of the game is that the Rapture has taken place. In other words, God has come to Earth and taken to Heaven all those who believe in Christ, leaving behind the faithless and the non-believers helpless against The Antichrist and his followers. You must recruit and convert an army that will engage in physical and spiritual combat with The Antichrist.

In the novels, the Antichrist is personified by a man who is both the Secretary-General of the UN and People Magazine's "Sexiest Man Alive." Perhaps Kofi Annan and George Clooney should start worrying.

Included in the list of enemies in the game are: rock musicians, urban "thug" types, dangerous "activists," and the ever-threatening "college educated cult leader," all of whom can be played, but none of whom can actually win the game. There are also reports that the evil characters are the only ones with ethnic names.

The term "physical and spiritual combat" is used to describe the process of laying waste to heathens with sophisticated military weapons, and then praying when you accidentally kill someone you shouldn't have (because that takes away from your "spirit points,") or using your coercive skills to show enemies "the truth."

But because no blood is depicted in gameplay, the company maintains that Left Behind: Eternal Forces is a game with positive values.

Not surprisingly, a game where your objective is to either kill or convert non-Christians is causing a great deal of controversy. The Campaign to Defend the Constitution and The Christian Alliance for Progress are two political groups petitioning Wal-Mart CEO Lee Scott to have this game removed from store shelves.

A Wal-Mart spokesperson said the company has no plans to pull the game from any of the 200 of Wal-Mart's 3,800 stores that carry the game. Wal-Mart, however, did pull Take-Two subsidiary Rockstar's Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas from its shelves after the M-rated game was found to contain hidden scenes in which the characters are involved in sexual acts.

The GTA controversy spurred some in Congress to call for legislation restricting the sale of violent games to minors, as well as fines for retailers who do not abide by the law. Left Behind: Eternal Forces has raised a new question: just because no-blood is shown, is a game non-violent and acceptable -- even when the goal is to kill non-Christians?

Left Behind Games boasts over 10 thousand retail stores carrying their game, among these are: Target, Sam's Club, EB Games, Gamestop, Best Buy and Circuit City, the most popular places for video game purchases. There is no word of any official petitions for these outlets.

259 Responses to Controversial Christian Game Under Fire

  1. WeezulDK says:

    Here we see the hipocrisy of organized religion in action.

    'nuff said.

    • TWill says:

      First of all this game has little to nothing to do with religion, but only money. Secondly, it is based on a fictional novel. Thirdly, the fictional novel and the game have nothing in common except with the topic of the rapture and their name. e.g. no events occur in the book as described in the above article which depicts this game.

      The craziest part is when people make comments such as:
      1. “hypocrisy of religion” when they base their comments on a cheap action game that has nothing to do with any “organized religions” belief structure on events post rapture.
      2. “boy kissing=evil; killing non-believers=encouraged” you have fallen off the deep end with this one as even the lame game is not suggesting this. The game is placing the persecuted few believers that come after the rapture against the anti-christ (ultimate evil) and his dominions in an attempt to save those who are innocent.
      3. This game will not give Christianity a bad name. If any thing, the continuing laziness and ignorance of those who claim to be Christians will and is giving Christianity a bad name.

      As far as Christianity goes, the only purpose in life is to help others, promote justice, protect the innocent, and fellowship with the creator. Crazy how things are twisted and lies are spread! Crazy how people can come up with assumptions of a group of people based on something so abstract as a video game. One thing I can’t figure out is where racism, hate, and discrimination come from… Could it be ignorance, blindness, or both? (Ignorance as in un-informed, not as in stupidity – blindness as in inability or unwillingness to see the truth)

      • Grazer says:

        [i]2. “boy kissing=evil; killing non-believers=encouraged” you have fallen off the deep end with this one as even the lame game is not suggesting this.[/i]
        No, but the same people supporting and promoting this game because it promotes punishing the non-believers are the same people that want Bully pulled because it [u]allows[/u] the male character to kiss other male characters.

        [i]One thing I can’t figure out is where racism, hate, and discrimination come from… Could it be ignorance, blindness, or both? (Ignorance as in un-informed, not as in stupidity – blindness as in inability or unwillingness to see the truth)[/i]
        Sounds like you have it figured out pretty good. The problem may be you think your group is immune to it. (Note: I am not saying you are an intolerant or hateful person; but your comments do seem to suggest that you do not consider people who believe in the same grandpa in the sky as you to not be true believers because they believe in a different way.

      • TWill says:

        1. ""punishing the non-believers"" I could have sworn that I read that if, in the game, non-believers were killed even by accident, the game had you pray for them e.g. rempent. Lame but my understanding. And that the battle was between the few persicuted and the anti-christ and his followers... his followers anre not non-believers as they would then be believers in Satin him self (anti-christ)""punishing the non-believers"" I could have sworn that I read that if, in the game, non-believers were killed even by accident, the game had you pray for them e.g. repent. Lame but my understanding. And that the battle was between the few persecuted and the anti-christ and his followers... his followers are not non-believers as they would then be believers in Satin him self (anti-christ)
        2. hehe, am out of time to go back and re-read all the post on this, but I know what my point was when i wrote them... hehe
        3. There is no immunity to the fallacy of Man. I think it comes down to the fact that I was not a follower of David Koresh.. :P

      • Grazer says:

        So the game also encourages the "If I say I am sorry, everything is peachy" mentality.

      • TWill says:

        Who knows what the game does or does not do, but maby it is not a sorry, but remorse for the loss… Ive got your peachy right here!!! Hehe… j/k

      • Grazer says:

        How do you show remorse in a game? You will always have the ulterior motive of wanting to win. Of course, the same could be said for real life "repenting", except instead of "winning" its "going to heaven".

      • WeezulDK says:

        It's amazing to see how some topics work some people up.

        Actually, you're wrong, this game *will* give Christianity a bad name, by merit of the fact that basically it is showing that if you're not someone who's "accepted Christ" then you're part of the "Anti-Christ"'s legions, to be cut down and destroyed.

        If it was really played with a "Christian" ethic, you'd be playing for 30 seconds: You see an opening cinematic, you'd be approached by the first bad guy, you'd be beeyotch-slapped on one side of your face, then you'd turn the other cheek, and be slapped again into unconsciousness, and the credits would roll. Game Over.

        Not showing blood doesn't make a game "non-violent".

        I think the MSRB needs to focus on the fact that violence itself doesn't need to be accompanied by blood to be called a "bad thing" for kids. It's the *intent* and *action* that is portrayed is what should be merited, not the graphic display of bodily fluids.

        And a point that should be made to some people who would defend it, the Bible is a "fictional novel" to many people in the world.

        Especially to the athiests, since about 1 billion or more people in the world belong to that category. (See the wikipedia article on Religion for the numbers, I'm not making this up.)

        Christianity (and many other religions, ironically) has shown historically that it is not always about the "good" things, and sometimes is about the bad (conversion by intimidation/conquest), can you say "Inquisition" or "Crusades"??

        Racism, hate, and discrimination are the basis of many faiths. If you don't believe me, read the Bible, it plainly documents all of those tenents at various times. They're not necessarily espoused openly now, but they have been an acceptable behavior for many through the years. It doesn't make it any more right, either.

      • PC_Tool says:

        Did they turn their cheeks in the Crusades?

        Conversion has always been at the center of Christian religion, as has protecting the remaining souls from those that would turn them from the path to Christ.

        Post rapture, if you haven't accepted christ, you are either the "bad guy", or trying to find the few "good guys" among the millions of "bad guys". In many post-rapture scenarios, this includes killing the "bad guys".

        Claiming Christianity or Catholocism are tame, tolerant, or non-violent completely goes in the face of several of our bloodiest moments in history.

      • Grazer says:

        That is why I always have to laugh about people claiming or wanting otherwise. I was reading an article about how the majority of christians think the church should be more flexible and progressive. Apparently, the concept of absolute "truth" is lost on them.

      • WeezulDK says:

        You just pointed out the whole problem:

        Christianity and Islam really espouse some very pacifistic views on one hand, and "wield a sword to smite down the unbelievers" in the other. Although Islam is more severe on those who would believe and then "abandon" the faith, i.e. honor killings, authorizing the death of a "backslider", etc.

        I call it hipocrisy, plain and simple.

        Conversion of someone to a religion itself is an act of subordination of the will, sometimes violent.

        Hardly what an "enlightened" and "peace loving" religion would put forth, wouldn't you agree?

      • PC_Tool says:

        The problem is misunderstanding.

        The game is set post-rapture. The events and actions depicted in the game should obviously have no bearing on "reality".

        Christianity doesn't call for the killing of non-believers...Post rapture, however, all bets are off and the only thing you have to worry about is winning more souls for Christ and keeping yourself alive to be able to do so.

        Well, and remaining a believer. I hear the alternative is rather toasty. ;)

      • TWill says:

        “”Post rapture, if you haven't accepted Christ, you are either the "bad guy", or trying to find the few "good guys" among the millions of "bad guys". In many post-rapture scenarios, this includes killing the "bad guys".””

        once agin not accurate from my pov; the bad guy would be the anti-christ or his daemons. The rest would be those blinded or in the dark just as those post rapture converts were. The idea is that if you knew of the rapture and then it happened and millions of people were gone you may get your "good book" out and start to figure things out. Again, I am not sure that the fictional game goes along with your comments or pov.

      • PC_Tool says:

        Not according to The Book.

        Your POV doesn't mean squat to believers, or in the eyes of the religion it teaches.

        According the the Bible, the folks around post-rapture are of 3 factions: The new believers, the undecided, and those who've decided to align themselves with the Antichrist.

        The first would be the "good guys", the second would be the folks they are out to save, and the third would be the "bad guys", or, as you put it, the Antichrist's (though mortal) daemons.

        Heh...funny...this is one of the oldest arguments of Man. The single source of a vast majority of the worlds conflicts. Interpretations of the Bible.

        I believe that one, even a true believer, should avoid arguing the details and focus on the main points. After all, the Devil's in the details, eh?

      • Grazer says:

        [i]...and those who've decided to align themselves with the Antichrist.[/i]
        Perhaps because they believe differently than the "new believers"? It would be in keeping with the "all other beliefs are instruments of evil" mentality and track record.

      • PC_Tool says:

        Perhaps not. Again, this is straight from the Bible. The Antichrist and those who follow him will kill anyone not wearing his Mark.

        Ya they were his instruments....of evil. :p

      • Grazer says:

        If history is any indicator, I am guessing his mark is going to be some form of cross.

      • PC_Tool says:

        Could be, but it is believed that God will mark his own as well, and that the differing marks will be plainly evident to believers.

      • Grazer says:

        [i]...the differing marks will be plainly evident to believers.[/i]
        Even imagined differences are usually plainly evident to believers.

      • PC_Tool says:

        Now you're just being a smart-ass.

      • Grazer says:

        Just pointing out the [u]obvious[/u] ;)
        (Now I am being a smart-ass.)

      • Silentmaster101 says:

        hey so if i was the anti-christ, would it be ok to kill me?

      • PC_Tool says:

        In the books (Left Behind), they did just that. Prior to being killed, he was a mere mortal. After that...well, inhabited by Lucifer himself. Of course, that was the plan, so yea, I guess it would be ok. :p

      • AaronDobbins says:

        "One thing I can’t figure out is where racism, hate, and discrimination come from… Could it be ignorance, blindness, or both?"

        This comes from ignorance based on a person's belief system, usually developed by the parents and/or a particular religious faith. The problem is that people who dislike homosexuality because the bible says it is wrong do not view it as intolerance or hate. They view it as Gods way end of story. This is what causes strife and problems with these types of people try to legislate in America and pass laws promoting this intolerance and hate.

      • PC_Tool says:

        Belief in any religion breeds intolerance by definition.

        One God, one way to salvation. Anything else is wrong, evil, or just plain misguided.

        I believe the books even touch on that at one point as a point of persuasion by the Antichrist. He wondered how a benign God could be so intolerant of the ways of others and the religions of others, and on how such intolerance was the real evil...not himself and his "tolerance". This was, I believe, the beginning of his one-world, all-inclusive religion. A religion of tolerance, the belief that no one religion could possibly have it "right" and therefore all must be "right" when taken as a whole.

        ...heh. Gotta love logic like that.

        {Disclaimer:} I am not, nor have I ever been "born again". I find it an interesting story, and nothing more.

      • Grazer says:

        [i][The Antichrist] wondered how a benign God could be so intolerant of the ways of others and the religions of others, and on how such intolerance was the real evil...not himself and his "tolerance".[/i]
        Sounds like my kinda guy.

      • PC_Tool says:

        Yeah, but in the end of the story, he got thrown in a lake of fire with all of the folks to whom he was "their kind of guy".

        Hope you have a high pain tolerance. :p

      • Grazer says:

        I always thought the real torture of burning forever was the eternal boredom after millenia of SFDD.

      • TWill says:

        ...or an eternity of playing Left Behind: Eternal Forces hehe…

      • Grazer says:

        From what I have read elsewhere, probably.

      • PC_Tool says:


      • Grazer says:

        Same Fire Different Day :)

      • TWill says:

        e.g the fall of man, murder, hate, lust, greed.....

      • Grazer says:

        If it weren't for more than half of the 7 deadlies, we would still be living in caves...actually, we wouldn't, the human race would've faded from existence.

      • TWill says:

        Is it possible not to tolerate some ones actions, but to still love them? I do not tolerate some of my kid’s actions (lack of toleration) and there will be consequences, but I love them all the same. If there is a God then who are we to tell him what to tolerate?

      • WadeV1589 says:

        So if I tell you I love you but I kill you for your beliefs, am I still classified as tolerant and merely acting for what I believe to be the most beneficial action for you?

        Your example makes sense but religion isn't a smack on the backside and being sent to your room, it breeds true hatred and a feeling of being right while others are wrong.

        Religion is a big big thing, there are no comparisons to any minor actions as religion can kill millions just as much as it can bring millions together, your kid stealing a candy bar isn't quit the same scale or relevance.

      • TWill says:

        I was not talking about Killing any one, but not accepting ones actions. My definition of acceptance is to condone and agree with, not to kill. And the other arguments posted referred to the afterlife, which I have no control over at that point.

      • WadeV1589 says:

        And my point was, if people kill "in the name of God", should we not condone and love them for it?

        So if I killed you and said "it was for your best religious interests" should I not be tolerated and loved? Afterall it was my first beliefs and I did what I thought was honestly in your best interests based on my religous beliefs.

        This game talks about religion and killing, specifically Christianity and killing. It can't be compared to a naughty child, there is just no comparison.

      • Silentmaster101 says:

        it is a game not real life thus you cannot compare it to anything.

      • WadeV1589 says:

        You mean like that scene in GTA?

        Oh right that got pulled didn't it!

        You can compare because people keep on doing it and until they stop games like this are going to cause a stir.

        Do you get the point now?

      • Silentmaster101 says:

        what a hidden sex scene that wasnt supposed to be in the end game, that didnt really show anything anyway?

      • Grazer says:

        Why do religious people think to tolerate or accept means condone or support. There are words for those concepts, "condone" and "support" spring to mind. One does not have to like or even agree with an action to tolerate it; merely do nothing forcefully to stop it. It seems like all of society is boiling things down to false dichotomies like "if you're not with us, you're against us" and "if you're not a part of the solution, then you are part of the problem."

      • mkygrl7 says:

        Ah! A very enlightend spirit, finaly.

      • Silentmaster101 says:

        yeah, since you dont seem to have that quality for yourself.

      • AaronDobbins says:

        Yep, I'm a live and let live kind of guy. Now where is my doobie and Bob Marley CD.

        ** walks away, turns on blacklight **

        ** faint sound of Bob Marley and the bubbles of a water bong **

      • PC_Tool says:

        Oh, according to the Bible, God no longer loves those who've hardened their hearts against him.

        Hence the whole Lake of Fire bit, you see.

        As for the believers, they make mistakes...even in the Bible. HE still loves them because they have *not* hardened their hearts against him. They work towards salvation.

      • TWill says:

        That is between them and God. But I believe it is more of the fact that they have free will and a hardened heart represents them making their final choice. It is along this line that there is nothing more God can do for them and in accordance with his law they have chosen their destiny. Not sure of the application to the game at this point or how the fictional game defines me as a Christian...

      • PC_Tool says:

        I wouldn't be at all concerned abouthow anyone defines you as a Christian. After all, as you's between you and God.

        Free will is the glory and downfall of Mankind. The source of all our achievements, and the source of all our horrors.

        ...kinda like Beer that way. ;)

      • mkygrl7 says:

        Here's an anology for all of you to think about. How many of you learned to ride a two wheeler by a parent when you were children? Do you remember how our moms or dads instructed us on how to ride and control the bike? Do you remember them holding on to the bike and running along side of us to help us gain our balance? Now, do you remember them letting go at some point? That is exactly what happens our entire lives. We have all been instructed. We have all gained our balance with free will, now...we are watched with the knowledge and wisdom, of a parent.

      • TWill says:

        It would be shame to hate some one for their sexuality, but it is not the same thing not to tolerate it. I use this example in another reply, but I don’t tolerate every thing my children want to do, but I never hate them. This is, in my belief, how God is to us. If any thing I feel a burden for someone who is gay and would befriend them. E.g. the guy I sit next to at work. Referring to my first reply Hate is, in my opinion, du to ignorance, blindness, or both. I hope this applies to your posting.

      • Grazer says:

        Should you not tolerate someone using contraception? I'll be the last to argue that a persons sexuality is not a choice, but many would beg to differ with you. Supposing sexual orientation is not a choice, isn't being intolerant of a person's innate traits the same as not tolerating them?

      • mkygrl7 says:

        I think it comes from "covenanting they neighbor". If we all worried about our own lives, thoughts and actions, we wouldn't have time to point fingers at those who are different than us.

      • AaronDobbins says:

        1. How can you say this game has nothing to do with religion? "Believers" and "Non-Believers" are defined as those with faith and those without faith. Your argument doesn't even make sense (unless I am missing something). Especially since it is based on the aftermath of rapture, which is an event based on the coming of Christ....

        2. This game has everything to do with in the mission is to go out and kill non-believers.

        I really fail to connect your arguments to reality here, but it is the afternoon and I had quite a lunch so maybe I am just in a carb coma.

      • PC_Tool says:

        Actually, the "mission" is to convert those who can be, and to battle those who've hardened themselves against Christ to protect those who have been, or can be saved.

        One must remember that the imagined post-rapture world is vastly different from our own. The only folks left on Earth are those who have not yet decided, or those who work to promote Evil and slaughter the believers.

        I think it's a good story.

        I think his main point was that the book and the game share very little other than the starting point.

      • AaronDobbins says:

        It sounds like a good story, in fact, it could be something I would read.

        My main point is that rapture itself is based on the idea that there is a God, and when the second coming of his son happens and takes believers to heaven, stuff goes down. This in itself is related to faith and religion, given that those who don't believe in a God, or Jesus, would not believe in rapture itself.

      • PC_Tool says:

        ...and why would the game be an issue in that case?

        fictional world, fictional religion...

      • TWill says:

        I was being quite vague when I said the mission of Christianity was to “help others.” You are exactly correct, not for the sake of religion, but in order to share the good news so that others may find truth…

      • TWill says:

        ""How can you say this game has nothing to do with religion?"" I can say this because it is a fictional game, that is lightly based on a fictional novel, which only borrows the idea of the rapture and the persecution of those people for their beliefs from the Bible. The novel is about persecution of people to the point of putting them all to death if they do not submit to the anti-christ. This game is not even based on the ideology of the fictional novel, let alone the ideology of the Bible or it’s prediction of events. Even then we are basing our comments on an article written by a person who has not even seen the game.

        ""2. This game has everything to do with in the mission is to go out and kill non-believers."" Once again you prove my point. The Christian religion has no goal of punishing un-believers, that would be Islam. Also, the game is not about punishing non-believers, but survival of ones who do believe. In the novel, they are the persecuted and the ones being hunted down and killed.

        In the end we live in a free nation, and in my opinion your views are distorted and unfounded. Here are a few quotes from Christians that were in power at the founding of our country. Let’s see what led them to grant you the freedoms you have. I warn you they were pure scum and wanted to persecute and kill just as in the game you seem to state defines ME! Good thing their wishes to shape this country were foiled!!!

        (Thomas Jefferson):
        “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness."
        “Of all the systems of morality, ancient or modern which have come under my observation, none appears to me so pure as that of Jesus.” "I am a real Christian, that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus." [Letter to Benjamin Rush April 21, 1803] “God who gave us life gave us liberty. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are a gift from God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, and that His justice cannot sleep forever.” [Notes on the State of Virginia, 1781]
        (George Washington)
        "It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and Bible." "It is the duty of all Nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey his will, to be grateful for his benefits, and humbly to implore his protection and favors."
        (James Madison)
        “We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not upon the power of government, far from it. We’ve staked the future of all our political institutions upon our capacity…to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God.” [1778 to the General Assembly of the State of Virginia]
        (John Adams)
        “The general principles upon which the Fathers achieved independence were the general principles of Christianity…
        "We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." --October 11, 1798

      • PC_Tool says:

        [i]he Christian religion has no goal of punishing un-believers, that would be Islam.[/i]


        Religion has always been a great reason to go to war. The Bible itself is rife with stories about those fighting, killing, and dying in the name of God.

      • Grazer says:

        Don't forget the inquistion. Yet another way christianity found to eradicate those who disagree with it.

      • TWill says:

        Many things are done in the name of Christianity that were of pure evil. You are correct! That does not mean they were lead by Christian men or with Christian motives, rather people who clamed to be in order to rally people to a cause by their ignorance. After all; look at what the Germans were capable of in WWII! I am 3/4 German, are you going to lump me in with them as well? Regardless of our race, creed, and religion we are all still flawed and nearly helpless. e.g. the need for God

      • PC_Tool says:

        I don't disagree. I never said the Crusade was lead by God himself....or even by Godly men. I simply pointed out that it was in the name of Christianity after someone else made the point that Christianity couldn't possibly condone slaughter.

      • Grazer says:

        You didn't choose to be part German, and being part German indicated very little about you as a person outside of potential physical characteristics. Being of a particular religion however, generally tells me how you view the world. I think one of the problems is people claim "Christianity" is their religion, when there really is no religion called "Christianity". It is a family of somewhat closely related religions claiming to be loosely based off the supposed teachings of Jesus Christ. Most are based off a this book called the bible, which was compiled from smaller books of diverse origins many many centuries after Christ's lifetime; and then translated so many times as to become unrecognizable from the original work. (Did you know the oldest bibles use almost no punctuation, and rules for punctuation at that time were little more than guidelines in most languages?) Christian men didn't lead Christian atrocities? What, were they impostors? More likely they just interpreted the book differently than you.

      • WadeV1589 says:

        Also in the world of frequently used but poorly thought out arguments:

        Killers are human, I am human, does that mean you're going to lump me in with them as well?

      • Grazer says:

        Yeah, it still surprises me they don't teach formal logic until college. It is astounding the number of people that wouldn't be able to tell you the difference between "All killers are people" and "All people are killers".

      • Silentmaster101 says:

        what about killer-whales? huh? they kill seals!!!

      • Grazer says:

        [i]...killer-whales...kill seals!!![/i]
        and whales, too. Go figure.

      • Silentmaster101 says:

        or more importantly, how many thingg have been *claimed* to have been done in the name of religion, but really are done in the name of selfishness.

      • PC_Tool says:

        The Inquisition, you say?

        ..didn't expect that.

      • tankist says:

        well , thats probably because no one expects it. although if it is not spanish but some other kind of inquisition...

      • PC_Tool says:


      • AaronDobbins says:

        brillaint...never would have guessed this forum would lead to a Monty Python reference.

      • PC_Tool says:

        EVery forum should lead to a Monty Python reference.

        We must keep our priorities in line, after all.

      • WadeV1589 says:

        The game directly relates to the coming of Christ so it has a fact-based part. So it has a lot to do with religion as, correct me if I'm wrong here, but if the whole concept of religion and Christ did not exist, how could this game exist?

        It's not even a vague reference, it is directly about religion. It's all about it.

      • Silentmaster101 says:

        no. it is all about a book, and the fictional future portrayed in it. the fictional future is based on religion, but since the rapture is only fact to people of religions who believe in it, this game is ONLY about the future placed out in that book.

      • WadeV1589 says:

        Could the book exist without the religious belief in the coming of Christ?

      • Silentmaster101 says:

        no but creating something from something else doesnt mean it represents the views or even has much in common with its origin anymore.

      • WadeV1589 says:

        So why did the GTA seen have to be removed?

        Ok so it didn't...which is my point here that you're missing. It was and until that stops happening, games like this have to be censored too otherwise it is a double standard which should not be tolerated as it defeats equality (and this is the equality of everyone's views as real people make real opinions that influence these games).

        This game has a "matter of fact" basis (i.e. the belief in Christ). Games like GTA had a "matter of fact" basis too (drugs etc). If you cut something out of one based on moral views of one group but then let another game go for the same type of thing approached from different angles, you are putting one group above another which is unfair and from an ethical standpoint is derogatory.

        Get it now?

      • mkygrl7 says:

        My goodness, you sure do have a lot to say. It is amazing to me, how much time we have all wasted in this ofrum posting and arguing our personal adgendas. Have you ever thought about ministering?

  2. MMPD says:

    personnaly, I would have to agree the game needs to be removed... It is a mockery. That period of time should not be emulated in any game.

  3. Grazer says:

    So, boys kissing = evil; but killing non-believers = encouraged? I see we've come so far since the dark ages.

  4. IceyKola says:

    Sounds to me that game will give a bad name to Christianity. Not that most of the media doesn't already despise Christianity. I may have to double check, but I don't remember anything in Revelation saying that we have to kill the followers of the anti-christ. Just to stay away from them. To me this is an illconceived game, and if that's what the book is about it's also illconceived. Might as well stop calling it a Christian game.

    • plumlipstick says:

      Revelation is a pretty bloody book of the Bible. From the persecution, war, and assassinations described there, I'd say that Christians would be fighting and killing people if only to escape from an area. For what it's worth, I don't think this game is necessarily a Biblically accurate game. I think it is a game based on a series of fictional books and movies.

      • AaronDobbins says:

        The same could be said about GTA though. It isn't based on any work of fiction or non-fiction.

      • mynamehere says:

        You're pretty much right, I just think people need to have an understanding of where the basis is.

        Maybe if people were more familiar with the basis for this game, and yes, it's fictional, all you Hollywood fans can call it "based on a true story".
        After the rapture all the true Christians will be gone, and so will the presence of God that's keeping things in check, with some sort of morality and a conscience in all people (why do you think even atheists sometimes wonder about God's existence?), some people will convert from witnessing this, yes, people from all walks of life including street thugs, criminals, prostitutes, etc.. With this gone morality will decay and people will be even more self serving than ever, and more violent (think it's bad now?...just wait).

        Think, back in Jesus' day the religious leaders had him killed, they also persecuted and killed other believers, these were men who knew all about the law (commandments) and followed it, but didn't understand what the scriptures were saying, that's why they didn't believe he was the Messiah, they also found loopholes in the law where it benefited them (they were forbidden to kill him, so they got the Romans to do it), remember, this was (as is now) a world where God's presence is keeping things in check, just think it says that there's going to be a huge persecution at this time (great tribulation), that means that the new Christians are being hunted down and BEHEADED, brother will kill brother over this. This will go on for 7 years. If you don't think there's gonna be some violence you're just plain in denial.

        True, I haven't played this game (though I have thought about getting it), and I don't know the if the game play is (out of context? is that even right??) It's a strategy game.

        There’s a FAQ on the game's site that answers some questions.
        Here's an example:
        Why does this game have to contain violence at all? Why is it necessary for a fun and successful game?

        Violence is not required to make a fun game. However, it is required to make a game about the end of the world in the Left Behind book series. We have taken great care to make certain that there are real consequences for poor gamer behavior, unlike most games in the market. For instance, unnecessary killing will result in lower Spirit points which are essential to winning.

        Sounds to me like it's not an all out slaughter/gore fest like a lot of others. Don't get me wrong, I'm an FPS fan myself, I just think people should gather info on things before tearing into them.

        BTW, this isn’t meant to be a religious rant.

  5. kronix2 says:

    This highlights blatant hypocrisy. If it was a "Muslim" game where the goal was to kill and convert non-Mulsims, it'd be banned or boycotted without question.

    • AaronDobbins says:

      Good point. The same would go if it were a game in which African Americans were specifically targeted by White Supremists, or homosexuals targeted by heterosexuals.

      I think the point is as stated before, that this game promotes prejudices and intolerance based on stereotypes. It implies that rock stars, thugs, "activists", and college educated people are non-believers.

      I am not saying this game should be banned, but that we need to treat all such games as equals. If you are going to ban one, then ban them all, and if not, then let them all be on store shelves and let consumers decide (the true American way anyway).

      • netrace says:

        Exactly. Turn it around. A game where Muslims and Atheists "win" by killing all christians would cause a public outcry from all the holier-than-thou folks.

      • Grazer says:

        Hey, I wanna play that game.

      • Silentmaster101 says:

        i second that

      • AaronDobbins says:

        And you can guarantee that wouldn't make it on the shelves at Wal-Mart. Heck, they had to go back to "Merry Christmas" because they were being boycotted by religious folks because they were saying "Happy Holidays"....funny how the Bible talks about tolerance and love...I didn't read in the fine print where it said as a footnote "as long as you believe in the same things we do"....

      • kronix2 says:

        Muslims and atheists are probably one and the same to whoever conceptualised this game.

        Funny, as Muslims (and in particular, fundamentalist Muslims) have a lot in common with Christians (and in particular, fundamentalist Christians).

        Kind of insulting, really. Being forced to side with Christians or Muslims is like being forced to choose whether you want to lose your left eye or right eye.

  6. Austin814 says:

    I havent read the series, but I wonder if Christ has come and taken all but the faithless who would be doing this battle? I dont agree that the game should be removed though. We have freedom of choice, if you dont want it you dont have to buy it. If its a mockery of the past and it shouldnt be emulated then Age Of Empires and Black & White and Solders of Furtune and Battlefield Vietnam and Return to Castle Wolfenstien etc should also be banned. If you ban a game because it involves religein how far are you from banning the sale of the Bible?

    • Grazer says:

      I agree that is a very slippery slope, but as a T-rated game, I think encouraging (and putting forth as morally right) the killing of non-believers is enough to warrant pulling it from the shelves for re-rating.

      • plumlipstick says:

        I'd go for that provided that it was part of a larger recall of violent games. To single it out when there are games with similar content and worse in some cases would be unfair. What is the difference between killing a nonChristian or killing a pregnant woman, something I saw recently while visiting a friend and her son. I wasn't so impressed with that game either.

      • Grazer says:

        What was the aforementioned pregnant-woman-killing game rated? And was it encouraging the killing of all pregnant women, or pregnant woman of a particular race or belief system? And was it encouraging that action as a morally just one?

        I don't have a problem with violence in video games. I do have a problem when the game puts it forth as the morally right thing to do.

      • Silentmaster101 says:

        and who excactly are you to tell other people's kids what is morally right? not everyones morals are the same obviously, thus the rating system should not consider that. if people say that it is morally right to worship satan, but not commit evil acts, then who are you to tell them different?

      • Grazer says:

        [i]if people say that it is morally right to worship satan, but not commit evil acts, then who are you to tell them different?[/i]
        I have no problem with that. I have a problem with giving a T rating to a game saying its okay to kill people in the name of god and that you just have to say you're sorry if you kill the wrong person.

        [i]and who excactly are you to tell other people's kids what is morally right?[/i]
        God. But don't tell anyone. ;)

      • Silentmaster101 says:

        oh well now that thats cleared up, can you make my water into wine please? good aged stuff, maybe 8 barrels from '74 or so should about do it.

      • Grazer says:

        You know what they say. "[I] help those who help themselves" and "Test not the [me] thy [me]"
        Plus, your alcoholism is becoming a problem and my son loves you too much for me to do that. Now if you're looking for a good smiting?

    • ptksr says:

      The people that become followers of Christ in the books are those that had became religious/found salvation/what have you after the rapture. New christians.

      Incase somebody brings it up, in the books violence is used by the new christians, and considerable violence is used by the forces of the Anti-Christ.

      My question is why is The Campaign to Defend the Constitution going after this? This has nothing to do with their stated issues.

    • plumlipstick says:

      The premise is that after the rapture a small band of people become Christians from witnessing the rapture and understanding what it means. They work to resist the tide of evil spreading across the globe. It's fiction based on a what if scenario just like hundreds of other games. The series is wildly popular in the Christian community, and I'm surprised it took this long for someone to make a game from it.

    • IceyKola says:

      "If its a mockery of the past and it shouldnt be emulated ..."

      It's not a mockery of the past... it's a "mockery" of the future. The setting of the game is the end of the world. I just fear that the game may create more racism or religious hatred.

  7. plumlipstick says:

    I'm not clear on why this is such a problem. In most games, the object is to kill somebody or smash somebody to win. Why is it an issue this time because the bad guys are nonChristians? It's just a variant or theme of a game, a spin to market to a certain segment of the market. If people don't like it, they won't buy or play the game. If that happens, the stores will stop selling it and find something new. That means the game virtually goes away. That's how our economic system works.

    • Grazer says:

      In most games, it is not the object to single out a specific group of people based on race / ethnicity / religious belief / etc ... I don't think it is the violence in the game so much as the intolerance the game encourages as morally right.
      It is not so much that all the bad guys are non-Christians, but that all the non-Christians are bad guys.

      • PC_Tool says:

        Isn't that the point of *any* religion? Those that aren't either need to be "saved" or work for the bad guy?

        The game doesn't say, "Go kill non-believers". The game is based in a fictional end-time following the events depicted in the singular work the entire religion is based upon.

        It would irk me if the games setting was today and the purpose was to kill non-believers, but post-rapture ain't today. Not by a long shot.

    • mkygrl7 says:

      This is a problem now, more than ever because we are at war with another country, (religious sect). We can't laugh at them for getting angry because someone drew cartoons of their God and published it in Newspapaers around the world and then turn around and create games that promote their beliefs to kill those that don't believe what they believe!

      • Silentmaster101 says:

        Yes we can, we are americans, we can be as hyppocritical as we like. hell we can even bitch about games that arejust excersizing freedom of speech and freedom of religion. you miss the fact that it is perfectly legal to believe hilter was god and march around with swastikas on flags, you just cannot commit violent acts or directly abuse someone else. it may be sad, but if you want to express your religion you have to allow others to do the same. and on top of that its a bloody game, not a child-raising guide.

  8. WadeV1589 says:

    I think the issue here is it is not like other games that "encourage violence" because it is using a very hot topic that is extremely sensitive both morally and politically.

    GTA with it's mindless "you're not a good guy, do what you must" gameplay is not the same as "you're a born again christian, kill the atheists and those who will not believe in Christ".

    Now personally I would not mind this game at all (and I'm an atheist with a mild hate for christians with a large mouth - think street preachers) if it was not for the fact games get pulled and modified for homosexual acts as mild as kissing. If we are going to pull games for that then this game simply has to be pulled. If it isn't then people are definately singling out homosexuality while allowing killing based on religious belief. Both things should be allowed in games but not just one of them. You can't have it both ways and that is what this game is doing.

    I am strongly opposed to double standards and until people learn, we have go to extremes, and in this case that means pulling this game until the guys who moaned about homosexuality but have no issues with this game realise their errors.

  9. hiyoag says:

    I think this is a great game and I'm going out to buy it.
    The game sounds like it shows christians exactly how Jesus wants us to behave. Jesus wants us to hate and kill all non-christians....

    Oh, wait a minute.....

    • Grazer says:

      lol, way to interject some humour into this topic.

      • hiyoag says:

        It's either laugh or cry at this point.
        Calling myself a christian is becoming embarassing. I'll never understand how "Love thy neighbor" gets twisted into:
        GOD hates [email protected], all non-christian's are going to hell, rejection of all scientific theory(ala inteligent design nutcases), WWJD, no gay marriage, abortion is just goes on forever.

        Why aren't Christians defining themselves by what they believe in instead of what they hate?

        Sorry...I think I left tech somewhere......

      • Paradise-FH- says:

        you should ask the islamic extremists that question.

      • drumcat says:

        You should ask anyone who participates in religion that one.

      • Paradise-FH- says:

        i think buddhism and a few other religions might take offense to that :P

      • Grazer says:

        Why, you think islamic extremists have insight into a religious right christian mentality?

      • Silentmaster101 says:

        because maybe islamic extremists are like the far right side of the religious right of the muslim religion. As in so right they are almost left. i assume that and right wing group would have some similarities with another.

      • Grazer says:

        Somehow I feel that is not what Paradise-FH- was trying to imply or bad, looking at their other posts, maybe they were.

      • mkygrl7 says:

        Hiyoag, don't fret...true Christians are building up their armor. Don't ever be imbarassed to call yourself a Christian. Those who place labels and kill in the name of Christ are mis-guided and will be handled accordingly when the time comes.

  10. imafurby says:

    Sounds cool. Though think it should be called "Kill 'Em All - Let God Sort It Out"

  11. Paradise-FH- says:

    i love how it's ok to kill the anti-christ's minions but not ok to cast magic missile.

    when did it become a race between [certain] christians, islamic extremists, mahmoud ahmadinejad and george bush to see who can misinterpret a belief the worst?

    • bourgeoisdude says:

      Whenever the press distorted the storyline in the game.

      Although everything stated in this article is not inaccurate, the part [i]left out[/i] makes it inaccurate. Don't like the game? Don't buy it then...

  12. drumcat says:

    Who let this be rated T? What if this was specifically killing all Jews? What if this was killing Muslims? I'm not here to censor it, but I do question how some hidden content about sex draws an M, but the cop-killing stuff got the original T... then OMFG we can't have that sex in the hidden scene, give it an M, but if you recreate what is essentially a Holocaust, screw it, make it a T.

    Actually, I'm surprised W didn't make it available to public schools for re-education...

  13. nwfoss says:

    Like it or not the Bible is very clear who gets in to heaven and who does not. I find it funny how all these people can quote how some christian said that God hate all "[email protected]" but they can never tell you who said that. I will bet you anything that the christian community is doing more than many others to help people who have aids even they beleive that the lifestyle that these people live is wrong. Read Romans 1:24-27 and explain to me the meaning of this passage in todays world

    • DigitalSin says:

      I don't recall reading anywhere in the bible where it "clearly" says anyone even goes to heaven. Matter of fact, it more clearly says who will "inherit the earth". And it more clearly says you don't go to heaven, with the easy to understand verse "And NO MAN HATH ASCENDED UP TO HEAVEN".

      • PC_Tool says:

        "There is no way to heaven but through me. I am the light and the way. Those who believe will have their names written for eternity in the Book of Life and shall never die."

        Need that any clearer for ya?

      • TWill says:

        You see, even Satan can quote the bible, but he just does not get it…

        Matthew 4:5-7
        5: Then the devil took him to the holy city and had him stand on the highest point of the temple.
        6: "If you are the Son of God," he said, "throw yourself down. For it is written: " 'He will command his angels concerning you, and they will lift you up in their hands, so that you will not strike your foot against a stone.
        7: Jesus answered him, "It is also written: 'Do not put the Lord your God to the test.”

      • Grazer says:

        The last passage you sighted reminded be of that line from "The Wizard of Oz", "Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain."

      • bourgeoisdude says:

        Your point? Yes, the Devil is capable of reading, he takes that straight from Psalm 91:11.

      • DigitalSin says:

        Yet it says the meek shall inherit the earth?

        So which is it, you go to heaven or stay on earth?

        Besides, again, no that is NOT clear. Jesus is commanding his disciples to pray to G-d thru him. It's like saying "There is no way to Sprint accounting department except through our 800 number". Does that mean I am literally going to the department, or I am just trying to reach them?

      • PC_Tool says:

        You're taking things to literally.

        [i]Yet it says the meek shall inherit the earth?[/i]

        Meek = can accept God. It is assumed that those who are not "the meek" are too proud, full of their own self-righteousness to be able to accept God.

        [i]So which is it, you go to heaven or stay on earth?[/i]

        Both. According to the Bible, after Armageddon Christ reigns on Earth for 1000 years, joined by *all*, liveing and dead, who believe and have accepted Him as their Saviour.

        [i]Besides, again, no that is NOT clear. Jesus is commanding his disciples to pray to G-d thru him. It's like saying "There is no way to Sprint accounting department except through our 800 number". Does that mean I am literally going to the department, or I am just trying to reach them?[/i]

        Jesus IS God. (and the Holy Spirit...3 in one, the trinity)

        Jesus is telling them that in order to gain Heven, salvation, etc., they must accept him as their Saviour. This is not tech support. ;) This is a decision to live you life in a certain way, not for yourself, but for His Glory, in His Name. Total acceptance of the belief that any one person is completely unable to live righteously without His guidance, adn the task of glorifying His Name, Presence and Will in everything one does.

        According to the Bible? No need to call the department, Jesus is your telephone, the department, and everything else. :p

      • mkygrl7 says:

        I imagine my Father in Heaven looking down shaking his head at his children who fight and argue so much over such things. I imagine my Father in Heaven thiking...all this ye shall know my child when the time is right. Everyone release this to your GOD. Relax, enjoy the life you have. You will have all the answers sooner than you would like.

      • Grazer says:

        I imagine him going, "Ok, time to stir up my ant farm." or he could be thinking "I know I gave them free will, be they weren't supposed to use it."

      • Silentmaster101 says:

        No no no, you got it all wrong, everyone goes to heaven, except this guy named Meek, which is left behind so everyone can watch his hilarious antics with a dog, a ghost of his friend and an A.I. its the future of citcom. Red Dwarf anyone?

      • PC_Tool says:


        And his name was Lister...and it was a cat.

        Sheesh. :p

      • Silentmaster101 says:

        ooops its been a bit.

      • Grazer says:

        I want to lie shipwrecked and comatose...and it was a cat.

      • PC_Tool says:


        No, no, no...after "comatose" comes "Drinking fresh Mango juice". "and it was a cat" isn't even *in* the song.

      • Grazer says:

        Now who's being a smart-ass?

      • bourgeoisdude says:

        "hath" is past tense, dude...nobody 'hath' entered into heaven but the Son of God. They enter heaven at the rapture, or when they are "caught up together with Him in the air", but the "dead in Christ shall rise first."

        If you want to argue the Bible, maybe you should read it more often rather than quoting scripture out of context. Besides, not like you would believe the Bible is inspired or really what's the point?

      • Grazer says:

        [i]quoting scripture out of context[/i]
        Is there any other way to quote it? If you quote it "in context", it usually contradicts itself.

      • bourgeoisdude says:

        Show me--not that you would care either way, but show me where scripture contradicts itself, and, Lord willing, I will be able to show you how it does not.

        ...or just post a URL of someone else's work, as you would do anyway, since it isn't worth you diving into the Bible for anyway.

        I do recommend you consider what your true intentions are, however, before replying to my post...will it even make a difference if I show you that it clearly agrees when you claim it disagrees? Would you really change your mind about this? If the answer is 'no', then don't even bother.

      • Grazer says:

        "Turn the other cheek" isn't contradicted all over the place? How about "thou shalt not judge", or "let he who is without sin cast the first stone"? Yeah, I am paraphrasing horribly probably. It has been a long long time since I cracked the pages on any [u]version[/u] of that anthology.

        My true intentions? Probably mostly entertainment, with a hint of concern for those leading their lives according to an outdated arbitrary morality based off a book of dubious origins (and multiple versions); and with a good helping of contempt for those that would use such text and trusting people to justify their own bigotry and intolerance to those that are just going about their daily lives.

        If you can't tell, it wouldn't change my mind, so I won't bother looking for a specific instance of contradiction to sight. If you could sight where it agrees, that would not be enough to influence me. For me to lead my life by a book with versions, the version in question had better have not a single inconsistency and have reasons I agree with to support all its claims...and should it require me to worship some godly being, that being had better be worthy of my worship.

      • bourgeoisdude says:

        "Turn the other cheek"

        Matthew 5:39, part of Jesus' "sermon on the mount":

        [i]"37 But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.

        38 Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:

        39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.

        40 And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also.

        41 And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain.

        42 Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.

        43 Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy.

        44 But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;

        45 That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.

        46 For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same?

        47 And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so?

        48 Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect." KJV[/i]

        So you will see how Christians today violate these principals every day, but nonetheless they do not contradict other scripture.

        "How about "thou shalt not judge"

        Sadley, this is almost always taken in the wrong context as you have put it. This one's from Luke 6:37, from the same sermon by the way:

        [i]"30 Give to every man that asketh of thee; and of him that taketh away thy goods ask them not again.

        31 And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise.

        32 For if ye love them which love you, what thank have ye? for sinners also love those that love them.

        33 And if ye do good to them which do good to you, what thank have ye? for sinners also do even the same.

        34 And if ye lend to them of whom ye hope to receive, what thank have ye? for sinners also lend to sinners, to receive as much again.

        35 But love ye your enemies, and do good, and lend, hoping for nothing again; and your reward shall be great, and ye shall be the children of the Highest: for he is kind unto the unthankful and to the evil.

        36 Be ye therefore merciful, as your Father also is merciful.

        37 Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven: " -KJV[/i]

        Again, using context, the "judge not" principle is becoming something to many Christians that is almost the complete opposite of what was actually said!

        "let he who is without sin cast the first stone"

        Another great one, from John 8:7:

        [i]"1 Jesus went unto the mount of Olives.

        2 And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them.

        3 And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst,

        4 They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.

        5 Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?

        6 This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not.

        7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.

        8 And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.

        9 And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.

        10 When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?

        11 She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more. " - KJV[/i]

        This is not as clear as the others without explaination, so here it is:

        Basically, the first problem here is that the Romans had Jesus caught in a trap--if He answered to stone her, then he would be disobeying the "law of the land", a.k.a. the Roman law, but if He said "No", He would basically defy the Law given through Moses. So...what to do? Well--Deuteronomy 17:6 is clear on the issue of putting someone to death:

        [i]"6 At the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses, shall he that is worthy of death be put to death; but at the mouth of one witness he shall not be put to death." -KJV[/i]

        So WHERES THE OTHER WITNESS? If she was caught in "the very act", where's the man?? Well, it does not tell us, but more than likely the man is one of the Pharasees here, hence the whole trap was nothing but a setup to begin with! When Jesus told them "He who is without sin cast the first stone", He was not saying "He who has never sinned"--He was speaking in context of [b]the issue at hand[/b]! The Pharasee's would be putting themselves in a trap now, since in Deuteronomy 19:16-19 it says:

        [i]"16 If a false witness rise up against any man to testify against him that which is wrong;

        17 Then both the men, between whom the controversy is, shall stand before the LORD, before the priests and the judges, which shall be in those days;

        18 And the judges shall make diligent inquisition: and, behold, if the witness be a false witness, and hath testified falsely against his brother;

        19 Then shall ye do unto him, as he had thought to have done unto his brother: so shalt thou put the evil away from among you." -KJV[/i]

        I'm guessing since they had to bear a false witness against her because the witness was the one who likely was commiting adultry with her! They set it up, so [b]regarding that matter[/b], they had sinned.

        So, does this suffice for an answer that it at least does agree with itself on some issues?

      • Grazer says:

        Everything must agree with itself to some degree. I wasn't trying to say the bible was wholly inconsistent...ok, now that I look back, I guess I did flat out say that, but I thought it was clear I was exaggerating and slightly jesting. I hope you didn't look that stuff up (or recall it from memory?) just for me, as I already said I am beyond salvation in not so direct words.

        I'll be damned before I bow before an undeserving and duplicitous deity.

      • PC_Tool says:


        "Yeah, God...thanks for the Gift of Life



        Sorry, couldn't resist. The comment just struck me as humorous. I apologize to anyone who's religious sensibilities I may have offended.

      • Grazer says:

        Gratitude only goes so far.

      • mkygrl7 says:

        Oh my goodness, I think we can all argee, you know your Bible. There is but one thing to remember when you get so passionate..."For those who believe, no explination is necessary. For those who do not believe, no explination is possible". Remember the Zelots!

      • PC_Tool says:

        I really wish you would install a spell-checker. Your posts have been littered with spelling errors. Normally, I wouldn't care, and wouldn't say anything, but I am enjoying reading your posts and they are getting in the way fot hat enjoyment.

        As to your quote:

        Is it not one of the tenets of Christianity to help those who do not believe onto the path towards salvation? One would think that might require a bit of explanation, don't you think?

      • TWill says:

        YOU are correct in a way, with exception of your condescending tone Brother.

      • DigitalSin says:

        I do believe the Bible is inspired, but the new testament isn't my thing so to speak.

        Point is, to say it "clearly" says anyone is going to heaven is incorrect, because it doesn't. It is very much interpretation.

        By the way, nice Christian attitude if that's what you call yourself.

      • bourgeoisdude says:

        Ahh, Jewish? Fine, fine.

        "By the way, nice Christian attitude if that's what you call yourself."

        My attitude is toward the intent, not the reader. There is little speak of heaven in the OT next to the NT per se, but the fact that you believe the OT is inspired without having the NT limits my stance here--read my long excerpt below, and see if the NT doesn't seem to mirror the Old in many ways. That, to me, is what makes the Bible so powerful--the fact that it can have so many prophecys, so many references--and in the end, every single last one of them match up perfectly.

        I know for a fact that no mortal man could have written the Bible, because no man could ever make such a perfect Book.

        There are references in the Old Testiment, specifically regarding Elijah, that pretty "clearly" indicate at least he [i]will[/i] enter into heaven. Question, though: How do you define heaven? If the heaven of the New Testiment, then surely you know why there is little mention of it, since it is explained in the New. You likely will point to the fact that Sheol is the heaven that Elijah went into, while that no man ascended to is actually "Abraham's bosom". So, that is spoken of extensively in the new testiment. If you don't believe it, that's fine, but for me, it is what makes the Bible so "alive" and relevant today.

      • DigitalSin says:

        "How do you define heaven?"

        And that's a great question. Even in Judaism there are plenty of definitions. Some Jewish mystics believe the soul does ascend to heaven for a certain period (a kind of re-incarnation). Others believe there is no heaven per se, and others believe it is purely a mental component. Anyway, that is probably more off-topic, but that is a good question you asked.

        I respect your points and apologize for coming off rude.

      • mkygrl7 says:

        Interesting how this went from being about a video game to gays and heaven. The bottom line would seem to be for all of us ill-qualified mortals to stop trying to a job that is not our responsibility and that we are severely underqualified to do. We were not put on this earth to judge. It is not our job. Our jobs are to live life and be the best human beings we can be. There is but one Judge and we shall all see the Judge sooner or later.

      • Silentmaster101 says:

        I disagree Judging is what we do best. we make judgements all the time, whether unfounded or not.

      • Grazer says:

        If we followed the whole "judge not" mentality there would be no courts and no government and no one would be specifically punished for any wrongdoing. Just pointing that out.

    • bourgeoisdude says:

      No--the people who will understand that passage will already "have ears to hear", but it does nothing for non-Christians...

      ...let's not spread the bad news to folks, they do not believe the bible is the word of God so why should they even care? If we share the gospel--well, isn't the gospel the "good news"? Just sayin I've gone the route you are arguing and you cannot win, because this particular issue is not an intellectual issue but rather a morality issue.

  14. Neoprimal says:

    I'll wait for the game where all non-Christians get to kill off Christians (with no blood ofcourse), easily done by 'enlightening' and 'converting' them through the truths according to The DaVinci Code.
    Now ofcourse, I'm kidding - but you can see why I personally don't agree with the sale of the game, and I'd be very afraid to find any of my friends playing/enjoying it. And this is completely different than games like World of Warcraft or even GTO because the bad guys, are non-Christians....that's everyone who's not a Christian, that's everyone who doesn't see everything from a Christian's pov, thats, ALOT of people. I find particularly disturbing that only the bad guys have ethnic names, noone else caught that? That's a serious undertone. I don't know but this seems built on prejudice. Imho this is the kind of stuff that fuels religious zealotry and that can't be good for anybody - as religion is held so deep in peoples hearts and minds....furthermore, not to be melodramatic here, but lets not forget that 9/11 occurred because of a peoples religious' belief and hatred of the 'western culture'. I just really don't like where this is going.

  15. malves says:

    Everyone should lighten up. It's only a game. Didn't you play Cowboys and Indians when you were a kid? Shooting Indians down in cold blood to "win the West". Nobody stopped that now did they? And we don't have a country of all depraved killing citizens like everyone thinks this will cause. Get real.

    • bourgeoisdude says:

      No, if a video came out today where it was a FPS and you killed indians to win, it would be ruled "racist" and hereby 'unconstitutional'. :)

      Seriously, people need to take a frikin pill and let it go. It's a video game, not a brainwashing machine...

    • drumcat says:

      Well, everyone *should* lighten up, except that other games are being banned, taken from store shelves, and being passively censored. This game appears to be the most egregious of any I've ever heard of, and the *Marts are out to sell it.

      Beyond the hypocrisy, there are censorship and First Amendment principles that need to be pointed out.

    • WadeV1589 says:

      As has been posted already, it is not the content of the game moreso the fact it is being allowed when things like homosexual kissing is being banned. It is such a sickening double standard. Always wanting it one way but not the other.

      However...the religious aspect of it if the Christian/Cathloic community doesn't start preaching to get this off the shelves soon is certainly a bigger issue here because it shows a clear religous influence on the market, something that should not be tolerated.

      • Silentmaster101 says:

        Where is a rule saying that religions cannot make games? or that games cannot include religion? games are ment for private citizens ot use in their homes, its not something to be used in a public place where everyone is forced to be. Get a grip, this country was founded on freedom of religion, no denial of all religions. you dont like it? then make your religion make a game.

      • Frostek says:

        Even moderate Christian groups are trying to get this banned.

        Plus, it's not particularly a good game, so it fails on another count...

      • WadeV1589 says:

        You did not read/understand what I said.

        My point was "why is this allowed when game x is not?", not simply "why is this allowed?".

        It is the double standard issue, this game should not be allowed purely on the grounds that other games have been banned or severely edited due to the topics they touch on.

        I'm all for the game...IF people will stop trying to ban other games as well with the only reason being wanting to force their views on others.

        Stemming on from that, if the religious folk out there do not try to stop this game when they have been so vocal in the past based on the topics of other games, there is actually a bigger real issue here as to how the game market is censored which needs to be addressed.

      • Silentmaster101 says:

        see thats the wrong attitude, you should be all for the game no matter what, and all against banning other games as well.

      • WadeV1589 says:

        Except you know that doesn't work, the attitude will be "you know we're right" not "I see we should be more understanding"

    • mkygrl7 says:

      Yes, I played Cowboys and Indians. But, when I played, I made a "bang" noise with my mouth and a playmate fell to the ground. We did not have the gory, bloody visualizations that are available to our kids in video games these days. As for a country of killing, when is the last time you watched the nightly news or picked up a newspaper? Babies have been killing babies for years now. What's wrong with that picture?

      • PC_Tool says:

        Now our computers make the "Bang" noises and the graphic representations of the bad guy falls to the ground.

        As for the picture, there's nothing wrong with it. It is the natural conclusion of free will. People are allowed to choose, they make their choices, and live by them.

        To you and I, these choices may be "wrong". To God, I would imagine they are merely choices. Yes, they may determine our ultimate fate, but I really don't see the One who granted us free will acting against it...or being sorry he did it.

  16. drumcat says:

    Hillary Clinton should be outraged, right?

  17. TWill says:

    oNe last post: I don't believe the following comment in the article to be true of the game: ""Not surprisingly, a game where your objective is to either kill or convert non-Christians is causing a great deal of controversy"" The only thing that makes sense is that the game allows you to witness to people as you fight the anti-christ, not a convert or die. Why does it also say that you “pray” for those possibly killed by accident that don’t happen to be “converted”? I just wanted to clarify. I don't want people thinking I support the game but I also can’t image this being accurate. If it is, I would pull the game as well. To me it looks more like the author is trying to prompt a response on something he has not witnessed…. And it looks to be working.. hehe

  18. tankist says:

    aha, so now it is religious discussions forum...

  19. TWill says:

    "...a positive moral mesage" -
    looked at the site and i think the auther is way off...

    • drumcat says:

      This is a hoot:

      What distinctive features differentiate LEFT BEHIND: Eternal Forces from other RTS games on the market?
      Parents need a substitute for the degrading moral values of games like ’Grand Theft Auto.’ We’re giving the industry an RTS game that is fun to play as well incorporating inspirational content

      And goes on to say:

      How does your game compare to more widely known games such as Grand Theft Auto or 25 to Life?
      LEFT BEHIND: Eternal Forces was developed to provide an alternative form of entertainment to those desiring more positive game content, while still engaging core gamers in battle. The difference is that our game features fictional battles set on the stage of an apocalyptic world. Our game includes no intestines, no blood spatter, no severed limbs, no vulgar language, no sexual conduct, no morally reprehensible conduct – such as cop-killing, prostitute-bashing, or other criminal behavior, no Bible-bashing believers, no Bible thumpers, no radical extremists killing in the name of God, no abortion clinic stalkers…or other such content in the games you mention.

      • mkygrl7 says:

        How do you figure that your game doesn't include any "no radical extremists killing in the name of God"???!!! That's the whole concept behind the game. You'd better wake up! You are promoting violence in our next generation.

        Can't someone create a game with say rubber bullets that they shoot at Q-bert? He never dies, he just gets bounced around.

  20. tickleonthetum says:

    This kind of thing is only going to increase racial hatred and lead to everything from bullying to hate crimes.

    Also another example of religious hypocrisy.

    Religion is effectively a hobby and if religious people just followed their hobby it would be fine. But they don't. They attempt to force their way of life on others. Therefore games such as this should be frowned upon.

    Note: I bet if a Muslim group brought out a game where you had to try to fly planes into western buildings it would be banned, yet is is EXACTLY the same basic idea.

    • PC_Tool says:

      That's like saying that games like GTA inspire Ho-slaying, Auto-theft, and gang banging.

      Anyone who becomes a racist over this game was one before the game.

      • Grazer says:

        Except GTA doesn't try to imply the ho-slaying, car-thieving, gang banger is actually righteous in his actions.

      • PC_Tool says:

        ..and neither apply or imply that any actions or scenarios in the games should be applied to the real world.

        The game is not saying that doing such things *now* would be a righteous thing, it is putting forth an interpretation of events may or may not occur in the possible future.

        I fail to see how this is any different than any other post-apocalyptic game.

      • Grazer says:

        How about this theoretical post apocalyptic game? Lets say dawn of the dead kind of plot, or maybe 28 days later, except only Jewish people or people with a lot of pigment in their skin turn into the zombies, everyone else is, of course, we have to kill them off.

      • PC_Tool says:

        Being as it's just a game...why not?

        I think the biggest problem most people have isn't a problem with games of that type, it's a problem with their own perceptions or misconceptions.

        They fail utterly to recognize the fact that the game is just that, and not a training exercise or comment on reality.

      • Grazer says:

        I could swear I read about some churches distributing copies. At that point, it does seem to get much closer to becoming a training exercise.

      • PC_Tool says:

        Or simply an effort to spur interest in the religion....

        Depends on how jaded one is. :p

      • Grazer says:

        I've just seen one too many people who believe the dinosaurs were faked and you should be punished for eternity for loving the wrong person.

        [i]"And on the 3rd day, God created Buckshot Rifles so man could fight the dinosaurs...and homosexuals."[/i]

      • PC_Tool says:

        Only one too many? Count yourself lucky.

    • kungfubeer says:

      Note: I bet if a Muslim group brought out a game where you had to try to fly planes into western buildings it would be banned, yet is is EXACTLY the same basic idea.

      No, it would be praised!

      If this same game was released with the roles flipped (Non-Christians having to kill Christians) then there would be little talk about this.

      Regardless of what you think of the game, censorship is the wrong way to go. Parents, its your job, not the governments, to determine what is allowed in your house!

  21. benyahuda says:

    Whew. Glad we didn't have computers to game on when I was a kid.

    We had to play our war games with our BB and pellet guns. Man a hit on bare skin stung.

    Luckily none of us ever lost an eye, lol.

  22. dolg says:

    well i wasnt toi intrested in this game at start but since they start to whine about it ill definitly go check it out :)
    so theyre actually bitin thmself in the foot there the more they complain in media about it the more free commersial for the game they do :)

  23. viperpa says:

    First of all the 2 groups mentioned in this article are extremists themselves. They are trying to force there values onto others. So what are they complaining about?

    The game is what it is, just a game. Not any worse than playing any other RPG game where you can play good or evil. Do we ban games where you can play the evil person that kills the good guy?

    • Silentmaster101 says:

      actually they banned the scotish game "JFK Reloaded" which was a funny game. but horrible. then again it is just a game.

  24. ds0934 says:

    OMG we'd better remove this one from the shelves. Would't want our kids to stop playing GTA and naked chicks volleyball. Give me a break. This is flat-out stupid. It's a GAME people. Not a religious Fatwah.

    • spef says:

      This game is far worse than GTA or DOA (not that i find them offensive) because it specifically targets certain groups of people.

      Stupid religious fanatics... in every religion you find some idiots.

    • mkygrl7 says:

      It may not be a Religious Fatwah, but it would seem to promote killing those that are "non-believers". Is this really what we want our kids learning and becoming desensitized to?

      • PC_Tool says:

        [i]killing those that are working for the Antichrist.[/i]

        There, fixed that for ya. Big difference. Well, to anyone who actually knows what they're talking about.

        Also take into consideration that the events in this game are taking place in a different time/fictional world and it's no differrent than killing demons on Mars. These demons just happen to like like you or me.

      • Grazer says:

        [i]Also take into consideration that the events in this game are taking place in a different time/fictional world and it's no differrent than killing demons on Mars. These demons just happen to like like you or me.[/i]
        Isn't that last sentence where the problem really lies not only within the game, but in the real world as well?

      • PC_Tool says:

        Sure, if you believe in demons.


      • Grazer says:

        In case you weren't joking, I was referring to the decision to look at another human being as something less than human.

      • PC_Tool says:

        I was, but let's take the next logical step, shall we?

        Murderers, human are they? Biologically, sure. Ethically? Mentally?

        In the game, these are the folks following the Antichrist.

      • Grazer says:

        [i]Murderers, human are they?[/i]
        Completely human in every way. Everyone talks like its such a glorious thing to be a human, and it is; but that doesn't mean people are perfect...and often times, it is little more than circumstance that separates the best from the worst.

      • PC_Tool says:

        I explained that badly.

        Remember, in the books/game, the question of God is no longer a question. The miracles and observable proof is right there, plain as the rivers of blood and locusts. That God exists is, at that point, undeniable.

        ..and this is where the game starts.

        There is no question about whether or not the "bad guys" are *really* bad. There's no moral quagmire. It's as plain as the Mark on their forehead or hand (or the Mark of the believer).

        Good vs. Evil. Those with the Mark are not innocents in this scenario.

        Circumstance is no longer part of the equation then, and it's God and His People vs. Satan and His Army.

        Black and White. It's the perfect conflict, there are no questions, no grey areas.

        Which brings me back to my main view on the complaints people have with this game. In the setting in which this game takes place, questions of morality, alternative lifestyle-choices, and such no longer exist as such, they just don't apply. assertion that it's pure fiction.

      • Grazer says:

        [i]Black and White. It's the perfect conflict, there are no questions, no grey areas.[/i]
        Good to know there is no grey area for [i]"...rock musicians, urban 'thug' types, dangerous 'activists' and the ever-threatening 'college educated cult leader'..."[/i]

      • PC_Tool says:

        Again, that was their life *prior* to the rapture, as I understand it.

        Not much time to thug or play in a band when the sky is raining blood and the locusts block the sunlight, ya know?

        That said, this is how *I* understand it is believed that Armageddon would play out. Many, for instance, think that the rapture itself would be one of the *last* things to happen in the End Times, as opposed to the books, which place it as the beginning.

        i haven't played the game. probably never will. I'm merely arguing from my limited knowledge of the game, from having read the books, and what I've gleaned from my own forays into the spiritual and supernatural to satisfy my own curiosity.

      • Grazer says:

        [i]Not much time to thug or play in a band when the sky is raining blood and the locusts block the sunlight, ya know?[/i]
        Isn't that the best time?

      • Silentmaster101 says:

        Mark is evil you say?

  25. VanAlex says:

    I think this game is a package of stupidity, but on the same way I want people to tolerate the fact that I find GTA funny (that doesn't mean I support that behaviour in real life of course), I should tolerate other people's concept of fun, regardless of how stupid and close minded that concept may be:P

  26. drumcat says:

    For all of you saying "whatever", does anyone find it disturbing that politicians race towards being supernanny when it comes to GTA, but they're quite ok with you blasting non-christians? The Nazis used to do that... now I won't say that it should be banned, but it damn well should be rated as AO or M at least if you want ANY kind of consistency.

  27. uberfly says:

    No one would have known this game existed. Sometimes these panty-in-a-bunch types crack me up.

  28. kbsoftware says:

    (sarcasm begins)
    I would normally say leave the game in the store and let the religious groups stop complaining, but then I don't want to be burned alive or drowned. No I'm not a witch :)

    Now If you will excuse me the priest of my local church sent me out to by a jar of vaseline and I'm delivering it. He get very angry if I'm late and then well I won't mention the belt or the ruler :)
    (sarcasm ends)

  29. WeezulDK says:

    I think this all boils down to the fact that this game is being measured by a different yardstick by merit of a double standard.

    Basically, if it's Christian and against anyone who isn't, it's "morally" ok to kill non-believers?

    Since when was it "morally right" to kill anyone, except in cases of capital punishment (edit: or war against an aggressor/despot/oppressor/murdering leader)? (punishment of the guilty/execution is not murder *or* wrong. Read your Bible, thumpers, because even the Bible teaches that it is ok to put murderers to death!)

    If we really want to raise our kids as pansies, and go overboard on the overprotective "bicycle helmet" mentality people seem to have these days, how about this measuring stick:

    Adults Only, no one under 17 allowed:
    If the game isn't educational, has elements of violence, gambling (including gaining points by betting or wagering in any form), sexual reference to anything, same sex, religious references of any kind, if you kill anything in a game, no matter the race, color, creed, religion, planet it comes from etc, Blood (NO MATTER WHAT COLOR), Language, gore, sexual references.

    General Audiences:
    Educational games that do not employ any methods or scenarios listed above that you'd let your 5 year old witness.

    Why don't we just start raising our little wimpified drones now, have to get a head start being *real* parents before our ultra conservative right/far left liberal friends get their hands on them. Heavens to Betsy, golly gee willakers, Mr. Wilson!

    • ripple01 says:

      Where in the bible does it say that it is OK to put murderers to death? If you are going to assert something like that, at least provide a reference to it.

  30. Silentmaster101 says:

    What the hell. It's Frickin game, not a moral instruction tool. If parents cannot instruct their children that this is a game and not real life then they should not have kids. Period.

  31. thomlanphear says:

    I have never posted anything on this site but I am so tired of listening to people complain about games. Here is a religious game and people still complain. If you don't like it don't buy it, if you don't want your kids to have it don't buy it for them, if they buy it take it away. Who are the parents? It doesn't matter if it is this game or GTA or Postal or any other game that someone can purchase. When I was a kid I played Frogger does that mean I am going to get frogs put them on the edge of a highway and try to help them hop across? Give me a break games are for entertainment, Parents be the parent, kids know what is real and what isn't and if you don't like it don't buy it if no one buys it there won't be a sequel and it will go away. All of this complaining about it teaches kids to kill or it is against this or that is really stupid. I have read all the Left Behind books, I am Catholic but I haven't been to church in years. I enjoyed the books for their entertainment value, same as I enjoy playing Delta Force BHD or Command and Conquor. People need to stop looking over everyone elses shoulder and worry about what happens in your own backyard. We don't need the Morality Police looking at everything.

    • Grazer says:

      I think a lot of us are mainly arguing for consistency in ratings (when we are not arguing for arguments sake), this game is rated T (for Teen) whereas games like GTA were rated M (and then bumped to AO due to sexual content)...and they don't try to suggest the player's actions are moral, or target specific groups for violence.

      • PC_Tool says:

        You nailed it.

        If GTA (without the sex)is M, so should this game.

        As for arguing, well, that's just a perk. :p

  32. Grazer says:

    I'm not really sure whether I should be impressed that a topic so heavy in religious themes has been so civil, or disappointed that OS/Browser/HD/etc threads are not.

    • PC_Tool says:

      It's not pitting one religion vs. another.

      I think that's why this is civil compared to other topics (Blu-Ray vs. HD DVD).

      • Grazer says:

        Nope, just one religion against the world.

      • PC_Tool says:

        The books and the game, perhaps, but you were, I believe, talking about the forum. :p

      • Grazer says:

        What I can't go off on a tangent? That's where the most interesting discussions are.

      • Mark GiIIespie says:

        Ah yes... the old Blu-Ray vs HD DVD battle. It was a fine topic in its day. Have to admit I tried my best at pushing the Blu-Ray's superiority... HD DVD won in the end though... oh well.

        *whimper whimper*
        [Future dated.... July 27th 2007]

  33. Hall9000 says:

    How about game play? Is it worth the money? :P

  34. googun says:

    So much for "love thine enemy" (Matthew 5:43).

  35. democlees says:

    An polotics ave gt wat 2 do with religeon ?
    Religeon has caused more grief than any other war or dispute humans ave had, At least t game will make ppl have fun. durr

  36. tipsyboy says:

    This game is a disgrace to the Messiah - Christ - Jesus of Nazareth. Think of it as you think of the Catholic Church in torturing those who would not agree with them, the "Christians" in Ireland and elswhere who are destroying each others et cetera and so on et cetera . . .
    But beware of the false prophets who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inside they are plundering wolves. From their fruits you shall know them. Do they gather grapes from thorns, or figs from thistles? So every good tree produces good fruits, but the corrupt tree produces evil fruits. A good tree cannot produce evil fruits, nor a corrupt tree produce good fruits. Every tree not producing good fruit is cut down and is thrown into fire. Then surely from their fruits you shall know them. Not everyone who says to Me, Lord, Lord, will enter into the kingdom of Heaven, but the ones who do the will of My Father in Heaven. Many will say to Me in that day, Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name do many works of power? And then I will declare to them, I never knew you; "depart from Me, those working lawlessness!" Mat 7:15-23

    • Grazer says:

      [i]A good tree cannot produce evil fruits...[/i]
      This reminds me of something I have always wondered. If god created everything and god is a "good tree", how is it that evil exists?

  37. foxfyre says:

    How cute some feel that they cannot spell out God, as if that is God's real name anyway - its not 'his' name in the Old testament! Oops! But then we still have pious folks mistaking a symbol for that which the symbol represents just like the wackos who kill in the process of objecting to a cartoon with the name Allah in it - all in the name of the SAME God!

    Its ironic, I don't worry any more about some supposedly Christian game (even if it is put out by wackos) than I do about secular games. If the users are not mature enough to already have established values, and if they are unable to distinguish between fantasy and reality, its not the games which are at fault - and its time we start holding individuals accountable for their own action and dump the absurd 'we're all victims' mentality nonsense.

© 1998-2020 BetaNews, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy - Cookie Policy.