- RSS FeedSubscribe
- « Previous PostFriday Ramblings
- Next Post »Pierced for Our Transgressions
An Almighty Flop
- 06/30/07
- 40
It looks like Evan Almighty is sinking. Thought by some to be a sure-thing summer blockbuster, it garnered some glowing reviews in the Christian media but only lukewarm reviews in the mainstream. With other, better family fare now on the big screen (think Ratatouille which has opened to rave reviews), Evan Almighty is going to be lucky to recover the estimated $176 million it cost to make it. The question is: why?
At FoxNews author Mark Joseph offers his opinion.
In its aftermath, once again the chatter from Hollywood is how, despite another earnest and sincere attempt to make a movie for "those people," the elusive faith-based audience that came out to see the Passion of The Christ has once again failed to turn out en masse for a movie thought to be tailor-made for them. The problem with such an analysis is that it's not unlike making a movie featuring blackface and wondering why the African-American audience isn't interested.
He goes on to list many reasons Christians stayed away. "The inability of Evan Almighty to connect with the faith-based audience ... goes to the choices made by the studio, the director and the writers as well as the systemic problems with the way Hollywood has always done business and seems resistant to changing." He points out several problems with the film itself that may have caused Christians stayed away: the film portrayed conservative political leaders as corrupt; the statement in the film that God is "in everything;" the suggestion that God's primary concern with humans is random acts of kindness. He also points out some things that happened before the film's release: Evan posing like Marilyn Monroe holding down his robe; Steve Carrell's body of work doesn't give confidence that he'll play the role well; the film's director saying he rejects traditional religion, and so on. Certainly some of these warned Christians off. Simply seeing Carrell holding down his skirt made Christians realize that this film would be at least somewhat irreverent. Hearing the director's comments about his faith realize that he his brand of Christianity was far from orthodox.
But the real problem, I'm sure, is the one Joseph offered first. The studios just do not understand Christians. They think they know what will appeal to Christians, try to give it to them, and then find that they've failed. Why? Because they don't know the audience. They try to appeal to some watered-down, ridiculous notion of what a Christian is and then are surprised to learn that true Christians really bear no resemblance to that caricature. It would be like me making a movie that tries to appeal to Buddhists or environmentalists or Mac users or some other group I just don't understand. It wouldn't work. I don't understand them, have no credibility with them, and there is no reason to suggest that I would produce anything to interest them. If the movie studios want to make movies that appeal to Christians, it might be a good idea to actually create a panel of Christians that can guide them, telling them what will and will not fly with a Christian audience. The studios could save a lot of money this way!
I do know that Christians love to rally behind movies that are actually worth watching--ones that carry a biblical message (or even just a nice message) and eliminate all the raunch. The studios are going to give up on this audience if they can't find a way to please them. Yet it's their own fault that they keep missing the mark simply because they don't understand the audience.
I am a follower of Jesus Christ, a husband to Aileen and a father to three young children. I write books and blogs for fun while doing web design and consulting for a living. I worship and serve at 
Published in 2008, this book
This is a guide that calls men,
This review of the bestselling
New to the site? You can get
Comments (40)
My wife and I took in this movie as a diversion (and yes I would say it is very funny, a nice story, and an exciting movie--but nevertheless, a diversion and distraction from the real world, the world of faith) and I can understand the warnings against seeing it. Back in college I would go to a certain fellowship group and listen to different people preach, and sometimes the sermons were very dubious theologically and sometimes even seemed counter-biblical, and well I would sit there feeling sorrow for the other students who approve of those teachings and for the preacher and I would think of ways to disprove the teaching biblically and I would feel really disappointed in a lack of courage on the ministry's part to find people to preach well and so on... If someone had come in and preached a sermon with all the teachings consistent to the theology of "Evan Almighty" I would feel all those same things. However, in the movie theater, I felt none of those things. And that is because I expect so much more from a person in a position of ministry than I do from Hollywood. Still, if it is the glory of God that is at stake here and not just the glory of the people conveying God's message, then my reaction should be the same for both situations... right?
It seems like us narrow-minded anti Hollywood trash posters may have been right on this one. I'm waiting for all the testimonies of how many people have trusted in Jesus because a Christian friend took them to this movie or used it in a conversation at the office.
I praise God for the Almighty Flop. Not that I have hopes of Hollywood cleaning things up, but maybe this will help them realize that we're not going to pay for the crap they put out!
I think you're absolutely on target here, Tim.
Hollywood doesn't get it. Worse, even the Christians in Hollywood don't get it.
For the first time in about four months my wife and I rented a movie, an independent film that was critically acclaimed and won awards all over the place when it came out in 2005. It was billed as a life-affirming comedy, just the kind of thing my wife and I wanted to see. Some Christian critics had said wonderful things about the movie.
By the time the credits rolled, we were just left slack-jawed at how life-quenching the film was. Yes, wonderfully acted. Yes, interesting characters. But the story and the script--it wasn't funny and it just made you feel bad about life.
As I thought about the film before I went to bed, I realized that in the last thirty years the divide between a truly Christian worldview and a secular one has grown wider and more menacing. When it comes to entertainment, I finally understand that in most cases, we're being lied to. The film lies, the critics lie, our neighbors lie. They've all bought the "Emperor has not clothes" lie. They ascribe worth to the worthless in ever-increasing amounts so that few can discern any truth out of anything dished out to them. People will rave, but the reason for raving simply doesn't exist.
I can't remember the last film I saw in a movie theater. We rented four movies to watch in the last year. And yet I know people who see dozens of films in the theater and hundreds of rentals each year. And I don't understand why. Virtually no recent films exist worth that kind of time and money.
It's like the old saying: "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."
Shame on us.
The studios just do not understand Christians.
Ummmm.... precisely.
Come to think of it, even Christians have a hard time understanding those who proclaim to be Christians...
But then how in the world is Hollywood going to package what cannot be contained in a box? A box that sometimes we Christians try to stuff God into.
Personally, I would like to see more God-centered Christians penetrate the entertainment industry as producers, writers and directors. It is really tough. The guy who did To End All Wars is a good example, Brian Odawa (sp?) or something like that.
Dobson was also highly critical of Evan Almighty.
"It would be like me making a movie that tries to appeal to Buddhists or environmentalists or Mac users or some other group I just don't understand."
Amen to that!
I had an interesting chat with some co-workers after work last night. None of them are Christians...but we ended up talking about religion and the ways they have been "evangelized" in the past by evangelicals and Jehovah's Witnesses. Essentially, what bothered them is that the people who reached out to them seemed to care more about their own evangelism methodology than actually caring about them and just trying to relate to, or understand them. I explained that, while they were probably sincere people, it's easy for Christians to get so caught up in their own community that they distance themselves entirely from unbelievers, to the point that they never try to put themselves in their shoes. Seems like Hollywood does the same thing.
Tim,You said, "They try to appeal to some watered-down, ridiculous notion of what a Christian is and then are surprised to learn that true Christians really bear no resemblance to that caricature."
I agree and disagree with you. Yes, Christians who go to your church and read your blog really do not bear any resemblance to this caricature. However, you have to remember that most of what passes for contemporary evangelicalism, especially here in the states, paints this caricature wonderfully.
Great point about the non-Christian making a movie for the Christians.
One other thing to throw into the mix is the fact that this is a sequel and most Christians probably found the first one (Bruce Almighty) to be over the line in a variety of ways.
In other words, I actually think the movie might have done significantly better for the Christian, for the Christian now, only for the Christian, if it had a different title and no relation to the first movie.
I know that was/has been a stumbling block for me with regard to seeing it.
i get what everyone is saying here, and i certainly think that hollywood hasn't the faintest clue what it is christians want - not least because christians don't even know what they want. christians (yes, even real, bible-believing ones) watch secular movies all the time and sometimes support the clean, positive-message ones. so the studios throw us a bone (or so they think) and do a movie faintly reminiscent of our very own sacred text. and we scoff at it.
i think it's important that we make clear to the studios that it's not simply because they twisted the bible and they didn't make the movie like WE would have made the movie - complete with 20-minute gospel presentation or something. of course we don't want them to twist the bible; but we also can't expect anything like the full gospel to be included. and i think you are right - hollywood is close to giving up on the christian market. let's face it - they're very close to giving up on the entire genre of family-friendly movies with an actual message. what we're going to start seeing is more and more slapstick comedy and pop-culture references and mindless action, and less and less and less of a market for substance. and then, when christians FINALLY start making interesting, quality films with attractively packaged christian values and no sex or profanity - nobody will stick around to see it.
So if you could make a movie that had a 'biblical' message, what would it be about? The majority of stuff that happened in the bible was R rated. I am a hobby film maker, and I have complete sympathy for anyone who attempts to make a film that Christians would enjoy. It's an impossible task. How do you talk about redemption without talking about hopelessness, how do you talk about salvation without talking about sin, how do you show the light without showing the darkness, and how can you possibly depict God or Christ in a movie without breaking the second commandment.
I think of Paul when he used the idol of an unknown god to witness to the lost. The legalistic would have called that blasphemy because he took something that was pagan and attributed it to God. But it wasn't blasphemy. He was using what the culture understood to tell them about the love of Christ. I don't the the producers of this recent movie had salvation in mind for the audience. But that's what we should have in mind as Christians. If you think it is a sin to see the movie, then don't see it. Consider it like food sacrificed to idols, but just because it causes you to sin, doesn't make it wrong, it just means your faith is weak. And I'm not trashing your faith, it is important to follow your convictions. I just don't think you should be rejoicing over the fact that Evan Almighty didn't do as well in the box office as the thousands of other movies that are out there boldly declaring that there is no god.
Just remember people, a lack of sin doesn't save you. Grace saves you. If all the world sees is Christians trying to avoid sin, then of course the won't understand. But if the world could see Christians showing grace... wow, how would that change the world. So let's not hold Hollywood up to our rigorous Christian standards and let's show a little grace when the 'miss the mark'.
I think Hollywood's problem is that they're greedy. They have tried to make a movie that was biblical and would appeal to Christians, but that was funny enough to appeal to secular viewers. Hollywood failed on both accounts according to the reviews.
Mel Gibson didn't care about what people thought of his movie. He was going to make the Passion how he (with his Catholic influence) saw fit. If he tailored it to fit what the average person wanted to see, he would have made it totally different, and it probably wouldn't have been a success.
Hollywood, stick to making secular movies. And Christian producers, if you're out there - you make the Christian movies...
Personally, I'd like to see all of Hollywood go belly-up. I can't think of more than a handful of movies (literally) made after 1975 that I'd consider watching more than once. BTW, there are a lot of old films I've watched many times, so I don't condemn films as a whole.
I can see that Hollywood doesn't understand Christians, and that's not a surprise to me. Why should it? It's almost entirely populated by pagans. But its sad that Christianity Today (which sold out to the marketing for this film and appears to be bending over backwards to vouch for it) doesn't seem to understand Christians either.
Did you say, "Mac users?"
We actually were challenged about the sort of movies that we watch some time ago. Would this be the sort of movie (or other media) that we'd feel comfortable inviting Jesus in to watch? Is it uplifting, true, noble, worthwhile? Will we be better for having spent that time watching it?
A lot of our movies disappeared after that and our trips to the theater dwindled. Our TV watching is down. I have a handful of movies that are possibly borderline to me (yes, I know that all things are lawful, but not all things are helpful in this case). However, the majority of our film collection is definitely friendly enough that it could be shown to a 4 year old.
I don't necessarily care if the movie is "Christian" or not, but I definitely tend to shy away from movies to which I cannot take my daughter. We have several recent movies that are decent with a good message, but I know there have been a lot of truly awful movies that I just don't remember. Even ones that come about and sound interesting for a brief time, I forget about in the months afterwards and never get around to renting/buying.
I think this has been a theme in Hollywood, though - try to make moves like "Saved" or this one instead of movies that we want to see and can take our families to. Bring on the G or barely PG movies - we don't need or want the cursing, unnecessary violence, or rude/crude behavior.
Yeah funny, I don't understand mac users either.
From Slice Of Laodicea: A reader wrote in to announce that Northeast Christian Church in Louisville, Kentucky closed the doors of their church today and the entire church showed up for a congregational viewing of Evan Almighty. No ticket, no “worship” in front of the silver screen.
Maybe the movie flops among Christians is the fact that Hollywood tried to make a comedy about the single most destructive judgment to date God demonstrated against sinful man. Millions of people were wiped from the face of the Earth because of their wickeness.
Real funny.
Perhaps Hollywood should just go the route of trying to tick us off like they did with The Da Vinci Code. It seemed like the movie got plenty of attention and churches got to "create buzz" with the ubiquitous Da Vinci sermon series.
I REALLY dislike Hollywood's current "Christian-relevant" movies which so self-consciously present a veneer that should appeal to "people of faith" - another term I hate - but underneath are just trash. Several years ago my dh and I bought a dvd recorder and have since recorded literally hundreds of old movies from classic movie channels. It's amazing how faith shines through in so many of them! It's not simply a theme put forth to attract Christians, it's the prayers given by Humphry Bogart as he buried fallen sailors at sea, by Freddie Bartholomew in "David Copperfield", Jo praying for Beth in "Little Women", the young sailor about to go under the knife for an appendix opperation in "Destination Tokyo", and many more. That faith came across naturally because, even if the actors, directors, etc, of such movies were not believers, they lived in a culture where belief was an ingrained fact of life - it didn't need to be tacked on to appeal to a certain segment of society. So......I think I will stick to my collection of classics and not waste my money or time on "Evan Almighty" and its ilk, thankyou very much!
I didn't see "Bruce Almighty," finding nothing in its description to commend it to me, not the least of which was its nonchalant transgression of the Second Commandment. Same with "Evan." I was actually more put off by the aggressive marketing to churches than I was by the film itself, although the reiteration of the Noah story--not a depiction of the original story of Noah, but a repetition of it in a contemporary setting--was problematic for me in that a key feature of the plot involved God using a flood as a judgment device. Unhappily for the film's producers, God is on record promising he would not do that again.
And that brings me to my chief issue with these films and the whole "thought" process behind them. The reason they're not embraced by Christians is that they don't treat the primary material with respect. Say whatever you want about "Ben Hur" or "The Ten Commandments"--at least there was no effort by the people making the film to undermine the biblical elements. But today the idea seems to be to play fast and loose with the God of the Bible. In "Bruce," I take it the plot revolved around the hypothetical "What if a man suddenly acquired the powers of God?" This ignores texts such as Isaiah 48:11 in which God declares, "My glory I will not give to another." In "Evan" the whole Noah's ark bit ends up providing an object lesson in (of all things) environmentalism and corporate greed and the importance of random acts of kindness. As if God was more in favor of random acts than deliberate, self-sacrificing ones.
A serious biopic of Paul could make a great and exciting film. The Josiah story has terrific dramatic elements. David and Absalom--William Faulkner was able to do marvelous stuff with that material. But can anyone sell the studio suits on this? No, they're just thinking "Steve Carrell and all those animals." Their vision is limited by their worldview.
Can anyone commend Bill Hybles, Youth Specialties, et. al. with their attempts to "Christianize" films like this? Indeed we the rancorous cast stones and wish for "God centered Christians" to "penetrate Hollywood." Might the aforementioned say to us. "Hey, we're trying here!"?
Hey guys-
I was one of those people on the other post who was very opposed to seeing the movie. However, I did see it anyway and I was pleasantly shocked. The theology in the movie was off and there was some "Oh my ---" swearing, but otherwise, it was a nice story.
Compared to most movies out there, it was great.
I rarely find grounds on which to commend Mr. Hybels for anything...
[Snark off]
There is some value in supporting efforts that are being made in the right direction, Matt. If faced, however, with the choice between "Christianized" movies that make major mistakes and no such movies at all, I'll choose the latter. If we can't excel, we shouldn't settle for mediocrity.
I am a Christian, a movie lover, and actually a minister, and I did go see this movie. I thought it was a wonderful, fun, inspirational story about a man who gained wisdom from following God even though it was tough. I don't know what you hope "Hollywood" might accomplish through movies. Do you hope that they bring the same message of salvation that we are supposed to live out in the way we love and serve eachother? Or are they supposed to preach at people & let them know that they are sinners? Most people know that & they are too afraid & freaked out by most of the people on this blog to come & ask you how to get out of sin.For me this movie did a great job in recreating the amazing story that really occured thousands of years ago, but ended up differently. The Northeast Church was doing a series on Heroes from the Bible. Noah was one of those guys, if you go see this, you'll better understand Noah's faith, his struggles & just be in awe of God's grace & goodness.Why are you blasting "Hollywood" (said like it's one guy in a darkroom making all the evil decisions) for making a movie with no cuse words, no nudity, no violence, etc... If this ticks you off, please be quiet, because my family likes those movies & those are the movies I want them to see.
Jason: Because I'm not content with a movie purporting to depict the actions of God in this world that merely avoids cursing, nudity, and violence. I want a movie that affirms the glory of the God of the Bible and that does not lie about his character in order to make people laugh and spend money and think they have learned something about God when what they have actually seen is a distortion and thus an idol.
I have all manner of respect for your service to God and his people, but gently suggest that maybe your standards are a bit lower than they should be.
Please feel free to e-mail me if you'd rather discuss this off line.
to commentor # 11:
I can totally understand and relate your thoughts. Christians who involved in the Arts are often orphaned by the Church. They try so hard to honor God and their siblings in their work yet it is always never good enough for anything to the Church's eyes, no matter how good it turned out.
It would be like me making a movie that tries to appeal to Buddhists or environmentalists or Mac users or some other group I just don't understand.
I know exactly what you mean, Tim. :)
The trouble is, Hollywood does think it understands Christianity, in large part because it thinks all Christians are either Catholics (either hypocritical or ineffectual Father-Mulcahy-type ones) or Fundamentalists who have no brains but strong vocal cords. Alas, when serious Christians protest, it's easier to write us off as cranks because we're on camera waving signs. Damned if you do...
Do you know why Jews are seldom shown in a negative light in movies? It's because the major Hollywood studios were mostly owned and operated by Jewish people during the first few decades of the film industry, and the effects have lingered. (Not that I'm suggesting they should make anti-semitic films, please understand; it's just an example.)
The Mormons have been making movies for a number of years that only play within their own church, but that's not really a workable solution. No, I think the only way is for conservative Christians either to avoid films altogether (which isn't likely to go beyond the most Fundamental ones), or for us to have a larger presence in Hollywood. The only way that movies showing positive Christianity will ever be made is if actual, honest-to-goodness Christians are involved in the making. Alas, too many would rather take the Kirk Cameron route and spend their talents making third-rate movies that nobody but the already-convinced will ever watch.
Must be tough going to "Northeast" Christian Church in Louisville. I wonder how many people say, "You mean Southeast Christian..."NO, I mean NORTHEAST CHRISTIAN.I'd change to "the other" Christian Church
To those (at least one) who said it was a good movie in part because there was no obscene language, I'd say taking the Lord's name in vain definitely counts as obscene. Were God standing before me in person today, I can't imagine him dancing around while people took His name in vain all around me. And yet Morgan Freeman doesn't seem to mind.
"I want a movie that affirms the glory of the God of the Bible and that does not lie about his character in order to make people laugh and spend money and think they have learned something about God when what they have actually seen is a distortion and thus an idol."Ken, how did Jesus tell us what the Father was like? Didn't He use stories about a man who owned a vineyard, or a father with a prodigal son. Would you dare say that in Jesus' storytelling He was distorting God?This is a little thing they call story telling. I don't have an exact, complete recollection of the movie, but from what I can remember there are no lies about His character. I'm not going to go out & base theology on this movie. Usually this is not what good movies are for. (before you question the "good" I just used, I mean ones that you walk out of and say, "that was great!") They tell you a story that you can see a little bit of truth in or a little bit of yourself in. They challenge you, encourage you, pain you, or exhilarate you. These are called stories. Jesus used them to explain a lot of things that Pharisees sitting all around would have said, "God doesn't need to own a vineyard, He owns the cattle on a thousand hills..." If you want to side with those types of folks then rock on. I'll sit at the feet of Jesus & watch you try to tell Him that His standards are a little lower than they should be.Bro, this is not mean to bash you, I just want to show you that there is benefit to this movie. It is, if anything, a great conversation starter & contemporary look at a hero of our faith.
Good grief people. This is a great movie to take your family to see. What other movie encourages one to open your Bible to Genesis 6:14 or to really think about the meaning of the story of Noah? What OTHER CHURCH PASTOR DOES THAT?????
A whole lot of judgment going on here. No wonder "Christians" get a bad rap these days. Open your eyes and look around. Lots of people who don't know Jesus seeing this movie and maybe seeking Him out for the first time.
As for the church who rented out the theatre to show Evan Almighty: does anyone here actually know what kind of life change is going on at this church? Again . . . lots of judgement. Maybe Hollywood and the media are right about us "Christians."
Historically, I have never been a legalist in terms of religious-themed films i.e. I enjoyed the Ten Commandments with Charlton Heston despite the film's inaccuracy on some points.
However, as I have gotten older and considered it more, I am increasingly uncomfortable when actors "play God" on screen, especially when the "God" character speaks words not found in Scripture. I would be very hesitant to stand before the Lord and be charged with putting words in His mouth that He didn't say. Or portraying Him in some aspect that violates His holiness and His character.
[H]ow did Jesus tell us what the Father was like? Didn't He use stories about a man who owned a vineyard, or a father with a prodigal son. Would you dare say that in Jesus' storytelling He was distorting God?
That would have been difficult to do, since Jesus was the exact representation of God's being and the vehicle by which God has spoken to us "in these last days." Furthermore, Jesus said that his teaching was not his own, but it came from God who sent him. And he taught with an authority previously unheard by his generation. Who better than the one who came from heaven to tell us what heaven is like? Who better than God the one and only Son to describe the Father with whom he has been since eternity past?
What screenwriter can claim--apart from direct quotation of the Scriptures--that he has told an accurate tale of God?
Jason, if you were to analyze all the dialogue spoken by Mr. Freeman in his role as "God," would you be able to affirm that every last word comports with the biblical depiction of God rather than some man-made idea of what God should say?
And what in the movie was the reason "God" instructed Evan to build an ark?
Hope, I'm sorry you see an exercise in discernment as judgment. The world does not need another Hollywood comedy to bring it to Christ, nor are we promised that God will use such a vehicle. Didn't we just go through all this a couple of year ago with The Passion of the Christ? Where are all the tens of thousands that were supposed to flood the churches after seeing that movie? The right preaching and right hearing of the gospel suffices for that purpose. God has always blessed the going forth of his word. It is his ordained method of saving souls. That should be good enough for the church.
I watch movies now and again. Recently however, I've just been wondering. Would I watch them if Christ, or even the apostle Paul, was with me in my home? Would I avoid putting it on, for fear of how they would react? I probably would, and yet Christ is in my home.
Maybe it's time for me to reconsider what I try to make acceptable for a Christian to do. Even the old period dramas, and pre 60's movies, are full of what God considers an abomination. I have to be honest with myself, should acting out even mild adultery, fornication, or violence be 'entertaining' to me? Should I not abhor it as God does?
Thanks for provoking further thought Tim, even if you never intended too.
I may be crazy for posting this, but here goes ...
We live in a spiritual culture where spiritual issues are constantly being raised through books, music, movies, TV, etc. Bruce and Evan are unique in that they actually point to biblical answers (faith, submission to God's will, human depravity, the absolute moral goodness of God).
Are they on the order of preaching when it comes to communicating the gospel? Of course not. Are they theologically accurate in explaining the gospel? Nope, they're not even trying. Their main goal is to make a buck. But in spite of all that, do they create the possibility of communicating and explaining the gospel? I think they do if you are willing to work at it a bit.
I'm a pastor and every so often I try to use movies in this way. Check out a sermon based on Bruce at this link: www.northheartland.org/2004/020804m.htm. This was part of a five-week series in which I used one movie each week to "parabalize" just one main point of a gospel explanation. All five together tell the whole story.
From reading this thread and others, I understand that there is tension among sincere Christians with even seeing these movies and I respect that. There are movies I won't see and wouldn't consider using in this way because of conscience issues.
However, here's the deal, friends: people (Christians and non) are watching them! Do I wish they'd be discerning enough to turn some of them off? Yep. But I also want them to learn how to appreciate "works of art" in such a way that they can see the reflection of the story of redemption (i.e. "ears to hear"). So, it's worth it to occasionally model how to do it.
By the way, if anyone wonders ...
1. We are a seeker-oriented church. 2. This is not the only way we teach or even a typical way. 3. Lost people do get saved and saved people do grow in Christ through our ministry. 4. Sometimes it even happens because of using movies. It did in this series.
Grace and Peace,
Rick McGinniss
P.S. My wife and I saw Evan. It was OK, but I don't think I would use it parabolically. It just didn't seem to have any zip plotwise or actingwise or something .. although I did like the visual of "God" (well, sorta) rejoicing and dancing over His creation. Seemed almost biblical ...
There are thousands of seekers, losts souls sitting in theatres watching this movie . . . many more than going to our churches listening to our sermons. People don't get from point A (lost) to point B (followers of Christ) overnight. They have to begin somewhere. If that's in a movie theatre or some other type of different vehicle other than a church (oh my goodness) where they are encouraged to open their Bible to begin reading a scripture about a story about Noah so beit. And then what? Maybe they ask a friend about what they read. And then they ask a Christian friend about this whole God thing. It has to start somewhere.
Nobody is saying this movie is bibically correct. It's a comedy. It's a fun movie to take your family to see. It gets people talking and that's a good thing. It's just a small link in a long chain of events that may introduce someone to Jesus.
Maybe you should get off your high horse and stop telling others where they are wrong in their thinking here and talk to some lost souls yourself.
There are thousands of seekers, losts souls sitting in theatres watching this movie . . . many more than going to our churches listening to our sermons. People don't get from point A (lost) to point B (followers of Christ) overnight. They have to begin somewhere. If that's in a movie theatre or some other type of different vehicle other than a church (oh my goodness) where they are encouraged to open their Bible to begin reading a scripture about a story about Noah so beit. And then what? Maybe they ask a friend about what they read. And then they ask a Christian friend about this whole God thing. It has to start somewhere.
Nobody is saying this movie is bibically correct. It's a comedy. It's a fun movie to take your family to see. It gets people talking and that's a good thing. It's just a small link in a long chain of events that may introduce someone to Jesus.
Ken, maybe you should get off your high horse and stop telling others where they are wrong in their thinking here and talk to some lost souls yourself.
In response to Hope ... your heart and mine apparently are in the same place on this issue and sometimes it is frustrating that others tend to overlook what we see so plainly. But don't forget that in many things we are also not seeing what they see ... which means that they could also tell us to get off of our high horses ("so, you think you know more about lost people than anyone else? how arrogant") ... which means that we will probably then tell them louder how right we are ... which means they will tell us ...
I think you see what I'm getting at: a sickening, God-dishonoring "us vs. them" slapdown where the loudest and sharpest voice seems to win. But no one does, really.
I'm rather intellectual in my approaches to things and I truly marvel at the brilliance of many of the theological systems that have been developed over the centuries and applied to doing ministry, eg. Ken's "the preaching and right hearing of the word are the way to do it" on one end of the spectrum (reformed, I presume) to Hybels seeker-targeted approach at the other end (arminian, I presume). Both ends have great arguments and supporting theology - otherwise they wouldn't still be around after hundreds of years.
But, all of that misses the point. Paul said:
The goal of our instruction is love from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith. 1 Timothy 1:5 (NASB77)
Whatever the argument or theology is, if it doesn't produce people who love (and, as they hold firmly to their positions, do so in a respectful and loving manner), then something is dreadfully wrong; much more serious I think, than whether or not Bruce/Evan are appropriate to watch or support as a "Christian culture" (whatever that is).
The argument over who is right and wrong and all the shooting back and forth (from both sides) over methodology ... I can't tell you how demoralizing it is as a pastor to see it and sometimes be the target of it. What happened to the idea of "if I possess all knowledge and have not love" my theological brilliance is worthless?
By the way, Paul later writes in that passage that on this side of Heaven we do not NOT have all knowledge. We see spiritual reality and truth through a dark glass or as in a dull mirror. We have enough vision for all of us to make out the main points - the big stuff - but as to the finer details, we can tell something is there, but it's fuzzy.
I think that makes a pretty good case that no theological system (or my own intepretation) is 100% accurate on anything beyond the basics. One day, every single one of us, even the most learned and godly pastors, teachers and theologians, when the veil is removed is going to see truth in its totality and say, "oh, wow, was I ever off on that one! Thank you God for being gracious and transcendent enough to make use of even my miscalculations in accomplishing the work of Your kingdom."
So, maybe on this side of Heaven we should be a little more accepting of the fact that others may sense a calling from God do things a little differently from us when it comes to evangelism. Why can't there be room for people who say "God has called me to preach only the Word in my efforts" and room for people who say "you know, there might be a usable tool here in this movie thing because it's kind of like a parable and Jesus told parables"?
And why can't those who feel led to either of those strategies (or some other) both say to each other, "It's not for me ... I wouldn't be comfortable doing that ... but trust that you have heard from God and I challenge you to work at that approach with all your might my brother or sister, because you work for the Lord and not for men"?
I long for the day when that kind of encouragment and LOVE begins to characterize the interactions between good-intentioned godly men and women. It's so ironic: we debate what is worldly and not worldly in our approach to movies and million other things when what is most clearly worldy is our lack of love, critical spirit and argumentative nature. Sometimes I fear we strain at gnats and swallow camels.
I may be taking this thread off topic - if so, my apologies.