Two years ago, I posted an entry on the tetrad of movies that released in late Winter and early Spring. The movies were promoted as Christian, whether they were or not. You can read that post here. This movie is different though. So, I will put in my two cents with the understanding, I am not a movie critic, nor do I care to be. But as a pastor, professor, and a student of the Bible, some have asked, and others will ask, my thoughts on the movie. So, here goes, with a promise of no major spoiler as it relates to the movie. Well, Jesus did rise from the dead, but regarding the movie, that happens early...Regarding life, that isn't a spoiler, that is the reason for our Blessed Hope (Titus 2.13)!
The movie is told through the story of a Roman soldier who must investigate the truth into the disappearance of Jesus from the grave. Thus, it is told through the eyes of someone living in a culture who did not believe (nor would he care to have believed) in a Messiah. In fact, Clavius (the soldier) states his main god is Mars (a Roman guard of war). The movie begins with Clavius beginning to tell his story to a man in the Judean wilderness (as soon as I saw the landscape, I told Susan "That looks like the Judean wilderness." It is nice to have traveled there, but alas the movie was shot in Spain and Malta, so props to the CGI staff!)
Clavius recalls returning from a battle (interesting sidenote: Barabbas is a part of the battle just after having been released during Jesus' trial), and being sent by Pilate to ensure matters of a Nazarene being crucified are carried out properly amidst unrest in the area. Thus, Clavius is present for the death which sets the background for all that follows. My intent here, however, is not to recount the movie, but to provide a few insights.
First, I liked the movie. I went to be entertained, not to grow in my faith. This is Hollywood, not the Bible. I did enjoy the movie and can say that without reservation. It is well-acted, and a good story. There are a few scenes that would not be comfortable for young children (or squeamish in general), but it was not gruesome. What was shown was truly a part of what might have happened (for instance, digging up dead bodies which had died within the same time period to determine if one was Jesus). This was the beauty of the film which largely centers on potential events based upon Matthew 28.11-15. While the events are not perfectly known, certainly Roman soldiers were looking for any of Jesus' followers, Pilate was definitely concerned with a bad report reaching the emperor, and any who saw Jesus dead could have had extreme difficulty trying to reconcile what the possibility of Him returning to life (we criticize Thomas for doubting, but put yourself in those shoes).
Ultimately, the movie does a good job depicting these story lines. It also does a reasonable job of setting the scenery for the movie. For instance, near the end of the movie, when the disciples were gathered at the Sea of Galilee, the background looked EXACTLY like a beach at St. Peter's Restaurant where we had lunch one afternoon, with the mountains in the background removed as well as the restaurant, obviously.
Again, I liked the movie, it was entertaining, but...there is always a but. This "but" is not about the movie so much as it is the expectations. Again, I don't go to movies expecting to be taught about the Bible. Thus, when biblical inconsistencies arise, I tend not to get too disturbed. But others might, and I do realize that such issues can create doubts. This is why I am writing this blog. But because I do not want to nitpick, I will share two issues from the same scene.
First, I have seen a comment or two that the movie is as biblically accurate as any movie in quite some time. I agree that it is biblically accurate WHERE the Bible is directly used. Again, most of the story takes place outside of what is recorded in the Bible. The use of the Bible is NOT exact when it is used, but it is used quite reasonably. Some minor sequence issues might catch the attention of the astute observer, but nothing is earth shattering. For instance, as Jesus prepares to depart the earth, John 14.1 is mixed in with Matthew 28.19-20 and Acts 1.8. In reality, Jesus could have said that He was going to prepare a place as a part of the other verses, but Matthew nor Luke record it. But that IS what He is doing right now, so it cannot be considered erroneous, it is just out of sequence.
The second point (again, related to the same scene) does cause some measure of concern. The portion of Jesus' command to baptize in the "name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit and teaching them to obey all that I have commanded" was omitted. Is the omission purposeful? Did contention arise over those words between the makers, director, producers, etc? I have no insight to the matter, but perhaps it was not essential to the story. The command to make disciples of all nations is essential (but I promised no spoilers), but the how, for what the movie was trying to portray, was not.
One final note, the main character was Clavius, but a couple of Jesus' followers had their character developed a little. One of the high points of the movie for me, was seeing Bartholomew as a living person. His is a name we read in the list of disciples in three of the gospels and Acts. Because we do not hear much of him in the Bible, we know little about him. Such facts give free reign to an actor and director, and all I can say is "Well done!" His character was very refreshing, and especially so, at the point in the movie where his character was introduced.
So, would I recommend seeing Risen? Yes. If you are going to see a movie, this would be a good choice. I wouldn't call it an epic (some are), so if you are not the movie-going type, simply wait until it is on video, and get together with a group to watch it. Watching with others is my primary recommendation - regardless of whether the others present are Christian or not. Risen can create a good deal of discussion, and the conversations that follow this movie might have eternal consequences for someone. Very few movies provide that possibility, so we should take advantage of those that do.
Showing posts with label Christian Movies. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Christian Movies. Show all posts
Sunday, February 21, 2016
Saturday, May 3, 2014
A "Christian" Movie Tetrad
This post is two weeks overdue, but time has not allowed. Even if I had posted two weeks ago, I would not be able to do justice to this subject, but I want to put a few of paragraphs together regarding each of the four "Christian" movies that have come out over the last two months. That said, please note this post is longer than my usual posts.
Before I proceed, let me say I do not claim to be a movie expert. In fact, having been to these four movies probably exceeds the number of movies I went to in 2013 and maybe 2012. I like movies, and often watch them from a critical standpoint, at least theologically. Movies have an enormous impact on our culture and well-written movies can truly "stir the soul". Unfortunately, during this season of my life (now working on my dissertation), time and money don't allow for much movie time.
So, a few thoughts on each of these four movies follows. My intention is not necessarily to give anything about each movie away, yet I am not intentionally avoiding plot spoilers. Therefore, read at your own risk.
The Son of God
This movie should have the highest expectations as it relates to being biblically correct. After all, it is about the "author and perfecter of our faith." (Hebrews 12.2) Personally, I have no problem with scenes that include possibilities that are not a part of the text. For instance, Barabbas is standing nearby as Jesus refutes attempts to discredit Him (Barabbas cries out "No taxes" when Jesus says to pay to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's). However, when the Bible does speak, the film should be accurate. The conversation between Jesus and Nicodemus is at night, but Nicodemus comes during the day (see John 1). This may be insignificant to some, but subtle differences elsewhere might be considered insignificant, yet are much bigger. For instance, Peter's great confession is that Jesus is the Son of God. Yes, but Scripture reveals even more - He is the Christ, the Son of the Living God.
Ok, the movie is called the Son of God, but the distinction here is great. I could (perhaps should) say more, but for now, I leave it at this. I will give kudos to the producer for one thing regarding this movie (and the entirety of the Bible mini-series). Seeing the emotions of certain characters such as Barabbas was quite intriguing. Whether real or imagined, this did bring the Bible alive (I especially remember Lot in the mini-series). The highlight of the movie though was the end. After seeing the entire movie the conclusion goes back through a series of flashbacks from the movie...but whereas the movie begins with the Jesus' question, "Who do you say I am?" being directed at the disciples...the second time (at the end), it is directed at the audience. The audience must deal with this issue.
So that is the highlight...the lowlight is that there is no discussion of repentance.
Noah
What a firestorm this movie created. Of course, it is a biblical story, and one I believe to be true. But thankfully, I was asked to go in with an open mind. And I did. (This served me well in Heaven is for Real as well even though I was not asked to do so for that movie). At the outset of Noah we are introduced to The Watchers. Wait, what? That isn't in the Bible. Ok, well some might say it relates to the Nephilim, but the term Watchers is specifically from the book of Enoch. This book is not considered a part of the Bible (the Canon) except by a couple of groups in Ethiopia and Eritrea (both in northeast Africa).
Having this little bit of information from the outset allowed me to watch the movie from an entirely different perspective. Frankly, I enjoyed the movie, and moreso knowing I wasn't going to have to defend a Christian aspect to it. Yes, Noah is a biblical account, but if the movie had been named after another well-known account of a flood (Gilgamesh) would we care? I understand that liberties were taken as far as Noah's daughters-in-law, but again, the idea of a biblically accurate story was shot minutes into the film after The Watchers were introduced.
As for the stowaway on the boat, well, that was too much...except what if the man was a metaphor for sin? This thought was prompted by Devon Sons. Of course, sin is in the hearts of mankind, but this thought is interesting as we certainly see how the impact of this "sin" (man) grew on the son (by deception) had over time. (Thanks Devon.)
In reality, the perception many people (including myself) have of the account of Noah is usually based upon some picture painted for us in Sunday School, or in a mobile above a crib (with a boat that looked nothing like what the Bible describes). In fact, one aspect of the movie I liked the most was the destruction of the land (due to sin), and the miraculous growth from the seed from Eden. True? Probably not, but I wasn't there, so I can't be 100% sure since it isn't mentioned in the Bible either way.
Unfortunately, most of us think we know more about the Bible than we really do. And our presuppositions often lead to criticize others when we don't know the whole story (Quick, how many pairs of animals and birds were on the boat? - see Genesis 7.2-3 for God's idea on "clean animals").
So, again, I am grateful that I entered with an open mind. And I am more thankful that The Watchers were introduced so early. It changed the dynamics of the movie for me. While the movie had many components present in the biblical account, it certainly was not a Bible story.
God's Not Dead
This was another movie that had a lot of hype - at least among Christians. As a former youth minister, I warned former students against the issue that was the basic premise of this movie - your faith will be challenged in college. But challenge is not all bad because too many kids leave home with their parents' faith, not their own. The challenges faced can help their own faith be forged if a foundation has been established. Unfortunately, as the rest of this part of the post discusses, many (most?) parents are satisfied if/when their child "asks Jesus into their heart" (which really isn't a biblical concept). We are to follow Jesus.
The movie certainly showed the courage of the protagonist and the impact it had on others (the Asian classmate). But, as others have pointed out, each of the main "non-Christians" were depicted in such a way that we were meant to hate them. Wait? We, as Christians, are to hate them? Maybe that is somewhat of a reach, but let's face it, the movie certainly did not want us to like these people. Maybe your world is different than the one I live in (and some parts of the world are), but in my world, it can be difficult to distinguish those who are "saved" from those who are "lost". And while America (my "world "& the setting for this movie) is becoming increasingly hostile to living our faith openly, not everyone is out to destroy Christians - yet!
Unfortunately, the movie was so predictable that when the young blogger got cancer, the only question was who would lead her to the Lord. In fact, of all the main antagonists, we are supposed to believe that only one did not "get saved". This is somewhat the problem with Christianity today, we focus on getting people saved, rather than promoting eternal life (not just a moment - a life that begins now) and making disciples. This movie showed the challenge of "following Jesus" (at least for one student), which is what we are to do. Getting "saved" is a part of that process, but too many people consider that the end, when, in fact, it is the beginning. I do not fault the movie for not showing how these newly "saved" person's lives were different afterward - that wasn't the purpose of the movie. Yet, while we should celebrate when people do come to the Lord, we must not be content. My first thought was what is the next step for them. I hope if it was real life, someone would have picked up the ball.
God certainly is not dead. And this movie was not a dud (for a believer). The movie may have shown some Christians what challenges may await college freshman, but it was likely less effective than these other movies for generating quality discussion - partly due to its predictability, and partly due to its caricature of all unbelievers.
Heaven is for Real
First, I have not read the book. I repeat, I have not read the book. What I am writing is based on the movie only - and only on one viewing. Some of what I have heard from the book might drastically change this post. However, I have not read the book, and do not plan to do so - at least, not anytime soon (dissertation takes priority). Truly, as I drove to this movie, I had both guns loaded ready to tear it apart, but remembering I went into Noah with a more open mind, I decided to tone down my attitude a bit.
I saw this movie on the afternoon the day after it was released. Students would have still been in school, but there were many school-age children there - with their mothers. In fact, just moments before the previews, there were about 30 people in the theatre - aged 8 to 80, but only two males, including myself. It evened out a little through the previews, but probably 60-70 people and maybe 15 males. It made me wonder, do only women care if heaven is real?
Two major points from this movie stand out - first, the boy had a vision...he did not die. I believe near-death experiences are possible. I also believe that people have died and returned (Paul). But I will take my theology from Paul before I will a 4 year old boy. Yet, when it is determined that the boy did not die, this softened my stance (remember, above I said I tried to go in with an open mind - as difficult as it was). In the Bible, we know Isaiah, Ezekiel, and John had visions and what they described is difficult to understand (read Ezekiel 1)!
It should also be noted that much of what was seen was unmentioned (e.g. Paul didn't describe what he saw, Daniel had to seal up his visions, etc.). I have a hard time reconciling what I think about heaven with what was described in the movie. But it is hard to definitively refute anything in the movie - at least what I remember (Again, I have only seen it once, and purportedly the boy says he had wings - although this may be from the book. I don't remember that phrase mentioned in the movie. I certainly don't believe that humans become angels - they are two separate creations).
The other major point is that the father is a pastor. Having not read the book, I did not know this, although it becomes evident early in the movie. Personally, as a pastor, I love the humanity of this character. He is a real person - so am I. Our calling as pastors may set us apart in one sense, as humans we have the same struggles as others - although these struggles are often intensified because of directed attacks by the enemy.
The reason for the importance of the father's profession is that he obviously struggles with what he believes against what his son is saying. The down side is that his knowledge is inferred. A couple of scenes from the pulpit show a Bible, and in one I believe he reads from it. But to the best of my memory, there is no direct reference to the foundation for his beliefs. What verses cause his issue? Again, if my son were to tell me he had such a vision, I would want to believe Him. I would wrestle to reconcile the matter much as this father/pastor did. But I also believe that my conversations would be laced with Scripture (1 Corinthians 15, 1 Thessalonians 4, etc). Instead, we never see him pick up, or carry a Bible apart from at the pulpit. Yes, it is a movie, but wouldn't that make it more realistic - to see or hear, specifically why he is struggling rather than just inferring it.
Do I believe the events of the movie? Honestly, that question doesn't matter. I do believe heaven is for real, but I am not worried about being in heaven...a new heaven and earth awaits (Revelation 21), and my desire is to be with Jesus, not to be in heaven. My desire is for life eternal, a life that I can experience now, not just waiting for a future time in heaven.
I do believe that God can do, and does, things I will never understand. Not only that I don't understand why they are done, but not understand what is done. Thus, is it possible that a young boy had such a vision? Yes, it is possible. But I will not build my theology on a book other than the Bible. Is this narrow-minded? Maybe, but Jesus said enter by the narrow gate. The wide gate leads to destruction. (Matthew 7.13). My reason is that there are many books that are meant to deceive. This book may not be one of them, but only the Bible has been able to withstand the critics for nearly 2000 years. Why? God does not lie (Titus 1:2). People might - especially when profit is involved.
In conclusion, I want to point to one overwhelmingly positive aspect to these movies. People are talking about matters of faith. Yes, there are errors, but before errors can be corrected, discussion needs to be possible. If nothing else, these movies have opened the door for a great deal of discussion. There are accounts that online sites/apps have seen an increase of reading from Genesis 6-9 of 250-300% . Reading the Bible is a good thing. If people are reading, discussing, learning, discovering truth, etc from having seen any, or all, of these movies, that is a positive thing. Should these movies be trusted as the truth? No! Jesus said He was the truth (John 14.6). Jesus is the Word (John 1.1). Thus the Word is truth. And we should find our truth from the word not from Hollywood, not from our own thoughts, and not even from a preacher (or blogger). Each of us should examine Scripture for ourselves, with guidance from the Holy Spirit and others who seek God's truth to learn not only what God's Word says, but how to apply it to our lives.
When we do this, God can use us to show others that even Noah, though a righteous man, needed a Savior. That Savior, the Christ, the risen Son of God is not dead. He defeated death, not only showing us the way to a real heaven, but granting eternal life to all who truly believe.
Before I proceed, let me say I do not claim to be a movie expert. In fact, having been to these four movies probably exceeds the number of movies I went to in 2013 and maybe 2012. I like movies, and often watch them from a critical standpoint, at least theologically. Movies have an enormous impact on our culture and well-written movies can truly "stir the soul". Unfortunately, during this season of my life (now working on my dissertation), time and money don't allow for much movie time.
So, a few thoughts on each of these four movies follows. My intention is not necessarily to give anything about each movie away, yet I am not intentionally avoiding plot spoilers. Therefore, read at your own risk.
The Son of God
This movie should have the highest expectations as it relates to being biblically correct. After all, it is about the "author and perfecter of our faith." (Hebrews 12.2) Personally, I have no problem with scenes that include possibilities that are not a part of the text. For instance, Barabbas is standing nearby as Jesus refutes attempts to discredit Him (Barabbas cries out "No taxes" when Jesus says to pay to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's). However, when the Bible does speak, the film should be accurate. The conversation between Jesus and Nicodemus is at night, but Nicodemus comes during the day (see John 1). This may be insignificant to some, but subtle differences elsewhere might be considered insignificant, yet are much bigger. For instance, Peter's great confession is that Jesus is the Son of God. Yes, but Scripture reveals even more - He is the Christ, the Son of the Living God.
Ok, the movie is called the Son of God, but the distinction here is great. I could (perhaps should) say more, but for now, I leave it at this. I will give kudos to the producer for one thing regarding this movie (and the entirety of the Bible mini-series). Seeing the emotions of certain characters such as Barabbas was quite intriguing. Whether real or imagined, this did bring the Bible alive (I especially remember Lot in the mini-series). The highlight of the movie though was the end. After seeing the entire movie the conclusion goes back through a series of flashbacks from the movie...but whereas the movie begins with the Jesus' question, "Who do you say I am?" being directed at the disciples...the second time (at the end), it is directed at the audience. The audience must deal with this issue.
So that is the highlight...the lowlight is that there is no discussion of repentance.
Noah
What a firestorm this movie created. Of course, it is a biblical story, and one I believe to be true. But thankfully, I was asked to go in with an open mind. And I did. (This served me well in Heaven is for Real as well even though I was not asked to do so for that movie). At the outset of Noah we are introduced to The Watchers. Wait, what? That isn't in the Bible. Ok, well some might say it relates to the Nephilim, but the term Watchers is specifically from the book of Enoch. This book is not considered a part of the Bible (the Canon) except by a couple of groups in Ethiopia and Eritrea (both in northeast Africa).
Having this little bit of information from the outset allowed me to watch the movie from an entirely different perspective. Frankly, I enjoyed the movie, and moreso knowing I wasn't going to have to defend a Christian aspect to it. Yes, Noah is a biblical account, but if the movie had been named after another well-known account of a flood (Gilgamesh) would we care? I understand that liberties were taken as far as Noah's daughters-in-law, but again, the idea of a biblically accurate story was shot minutes into the film after The Watchers were introduced.
As for the stowaway on the boat, well, that was too much...except what if the man was a metaphor for sin? This thought was prompted by Devon Sons. Of course, sin is in the hearts of mankind, but this thought is interesting as we certainly see how the impact of this "sin" (man) grew on the son (by deception) had over time. (Thanks Devon.)
In reality, the perception many people (including myself) have of the account of Noah is usually based upon some picture painted for us in Sunday School, or in a mobile above a crib (with a boat that looked nothing like what the Bible describes). In fact, one aspect of the movie I liked the most was the destruction of the land (due to sin), and the miraculous growth from the seed from Eden. True? Probably not, but I wasn't there, so I can't be 100% sure since it isn't mentioned in the Bible either way.
Unfortunately, most of us think we know more about the Bible than we really do. And our presuppositions often lead to criticize others when we don't know the whole story (Quick, how many pairs of animals and birds were on the boat? - see Genesis 7.2-3 for God's idea on "clean animals").
So, again, I am grateful that I entered with an open mind. And I am more thankful that The Watchers were introduced so early. It changed the dynamics of the movie for me. While the movie had many components present in the biblical account, it certainly was not a Bible story.
God's Not Dead
This was another movie that had a lot of hype - at least among Christians. As a former youth minister, I warned former students against the issue that was the basic premise of this movie - your faith will be challenged in college. But challenge is not all bad because too many kids leave home with their parents' faith, not their own. The challenges faced can help their own faith be forged if a foundation has been established. Unfortunately, as the rest of this part of the post discusses, many (most?) parents are satisfied if/when their child "asks Jesus into their heart" (which really isn't a biblical concept). We are to follow Jesus.
The movie certainly showed the courage of the protagonist and the impact it had on others (the Asian classmate). But, as others have pointed out, each of the main "non-Christians" were depicted in such a way that we were meant to hate them. Wait? We, as Christians, are to hate them? Maybe that is somewhat of a reach, but let's face it, the movie certainly did not want us to like these people. Maybe your world is different than the one I live in (and some parts of the world are), but in my world, it can be difficult to distinguish those who are "saved" from those who are "lost". And while America (my "world "& the setting for this movie) is becoming increasingly hostile to living our faith openly, not everyone is out to destroy Christians - yet!
Unfortunately, the movie was so predictable that when the young blogger got cancer, the only question was who would lead her to the Lord. In fact, of all the main antagonists, we are supposed to believe that only one did not "get saved". This is somewhat the problem with Christianity today, we focus on getting people saved, rather than promoting eternal life (not just a moment - a life that begins now) and making disciples. This movie showed the challenge of "following Jesus" (at least for one student), which is what we are to do. Getting "saved" is a part of that process, but too many people consider that the end, when, in fact, it is the beginning. I do not fault the movie for not showing how these newly "saved" person's lives were different afterward - that wasn't the purpose of the movie. Yet, while we should celebrate when people do come to the Lord, we must not be content. My first thought was what is the next step for them. I hope if it was real life, someone would have picked up the ball.
God certainly is not dead. And this movie was not a dud (for a believer). The movie may have shown some Christians what challenges may await college freshman, but it was likely less effective than these other movies for generating quality discussion - partly due to its predictability, and partly due to its caricature of all unbelievers.
Heaven is for Real
First, I have not read the book. I repeat, I have not read the book. What I am writing is based on the movie only - and only on one viewing. Some of what I have heard from the book might drastically change this post. However, I have not read the book, and do not plan to do so - at least, not anytime soon (dissertation takes priority). Truly, as I drove to this movie, I had both guns loaded ready to tear it apart, but remembering I went into Noah with a more open mind, I decided to tone down my attitude a bit.
I saw this movie on the afternoon the day after it was released. Students would have still been in school, but there were many school-age children there - with their mothers. In fact, just moments before the previews, there were about 30 people in the theatre - aged 8 to 80, but only two males, including myself. It evened out a little through the previews, but probably 60-70 people and maybe 15 males. It made me wonder, do only women care if heaven is real?
Two major points from this movie stand out - first, the boy had a vision...he did not die. I believe near-death experiences are possible. I also believe that people have died and returned (Paul). But I will take my theology from Paul before I will a 4 year old boy. Yet, when it is determined that the boy did not die, this softened my stance (remember, above I said I tried to go in with an open mind - as difficult as it was). In the Bible, we know Isaiah, Ezekiel, and John had visions and what they described is difficult to understand (read Ezekiel 1)!
It should also be noted that much of what was seen was unmentioned (e.g. Paul didn't describe what he saw, Daniel had to seal up his visions, etc.). I have a hard time reconciling what I think about heaven with what was described in the movie. But it is hard to definitively refute anything in the movie - at least what I remember (Again, I have only seen it once, and purportedly the boy says he had wings - although this may be from the book. I don't remember that phrase mentioned in the movie. I certainly don't believe that humans become angels - they are two separate creations).
The other major point is that the father is a pastor. Having not read the book, I did not know this, although it becomes evident early in the movie. Personally, as a pastor, I love the humanity of this character. He is a real person - so am I. Our calling as pastors may set us apart in one sense, as humans we have the same struggles as others - although these struggles are often intensified because of directed attacks by the enemy.
The reason for the importance of the father's profession is that he obviously struggles with what he believes against what his son is saying. The down side is that his knowledge is inferred. A couple of scenes from the pulpit show a Bible, and in one I believe he reads from it. But to the best of my memory, there is no direct reference to the foundation for his beliefs. What verses cause his issue? Again, if my son were to tell me he had such a vision, I would want to believe Him. I would wrestle to reconcile the matter much as this father/pastor did. But I also believe that my conversations would be laced with Scripture (1 Corinthians 15, 1 Thessalonians 4, etc). Instead, we never see him pick up, or carry a Bible apart from at the pulpit. Yes, it is a movie, but wouldn't that make it more realistic - to see or hear, specifically why he is struggling rather than just inferring it.
Do I believe the events of the movie? Honestly, that question doesn't matter. I do believe heaven is for real, but I am not worried about being in heaven...a new heaven and earth awaits (Revelation 21), and my desire is to be with Jesus, not to be in heaven. My desire is for life eternal, a life that I can experience now, not just waiting for a future time in heaven.
I do believe that God can do, and does, things I will never understand. Not only that I don't understand why they are done, but not understand what is done. Thus, is it possible that a young boy had such a vision? Yes, it is possible. But I will not build my theology on a book other than the Bible. Is this narrow-minded? Maybe, but Jesus said enter by the narrow gate. The wide gate leads to destruction. (Matthew 7.13). My reason is that there are many books that are meant to deceive. This book may not be one of them, but only the Bible has been able to withstand the critics for nearly 2000 years. Why? God does not lie (Titus 1:2). People might - especially when profit is involved.
In conclusion, I want to point to one overwhelmingly positive aspect to these movies. People are talking about matters of faith. Yes, there are errors, but before errors can be corrected, discussion needs to be possible. If nothing else, these movies have opened the door for a great deal of discussion. There are accounts that online sites/apps have seen an increase of reading from Genesis 6-9 of 250-300% . Reading the Bible is a good thing. If people are reading, discussing, learning, discovering truth, etc from having seen any, or all, of these movies, that is a positive thing. Should these movies be trusted as the truth? No! Jesus said He was the truth (John 14.6). Jesus is the Word (John 1.1). Thus the Word is truth. And we should find our truth from the word not from Hollywood, not from our own thoughts, and not even from a preacher (or blogger). Each of us should examine Scripture for ourselves, with guidance from the Holy Spirit and others who seek God's truth to learn not only what God's Word says, but how to apply it to our lives.
When we do this, God can use us to show others that even Noah, though a righteous man, needed a Savior. That Savior, the Christ, the risen Son of God is not dead. He defeated death, not only showing us the way to a real heaven, but granting eternal life to all who truly believe.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)