SON OF GOD?...IS HE REALLY?

Ok, so I'll admit that I was not one of the alleged 100+ million people that watched the History Channel's "The Bible" series when it aired in 2013, don't judge me. I suppose I didn't have any interest in it due to the fact that anything else bible related that has aired on or was backed by the History Channel, was far from biblically accurate. My assumptions were justified by other Christians that pointed out the inaccuracies.
But given how many believers as well as unbelievers seemed to be enthralled by the series, I felt it would be pertinent for me to pay attention to the newest project by it's creators entitled "Son of God". Now, unless you live under a rock, you surely have heard of this movie or have seen the trailer for yourself. My comments here, however, are not solely for those that have not seen it but also for those that have already been to their theater to view it. (imagine my surprise when I did some research and found that most of the scenes in the movie were from the series itself)

I have to preface what I say next by giving some credit where it may be due. There have been countless movies created in the past about the bible and in particular about the person of Jesus. Most of these have been far from perfect portrayals of the life, death and resurrection of Christ. However, in my opinion at least, there have been some good things that came from some of these. Most notably would be Mel Gibson's account, "The Passion of the Christ". The "good things" I speak of can really only be seen as such when we take into account our cultures love of and celebration of violence. Our youth, as well as us, are inundated with it. From the video games where the most violence seems to win the day to the internet videos of fights and even deaths that are shared and gawked at non-stop, they are unconsciously numbed to the true nature of what they watch so freely. So, in light of that, I believe it may have been beneficial to some to see the excruciating pain and torture that Christ actually endured before being murdered by sinful men. I'm not saying that we could ever properly portray the horror of what he endured that day (both physically and spiritually), but I do think that it opened the eyes of those that simply saw the crucifixion as some Sunday school story devoid of any real pain or blood. So, solely for his no holds barred portrayal of those final moments of Christ's life, Mel Gibson gets kudos from me.

But now we get into the real issue with movies such as this but, in particular with "Son of God".

When we do not allow our theology, as well as our recounting of the stories, to be informed by the bible, we will always be prone to make great errors in the gospel narrative. And in this regard, "Son of God" does not fall short at all.

Where do we start? I suppose it would be wise to point out that, of the most popular movies about Jesus, none of them seemed to be able to get the physical part right. Let's see what scripture has to say, shall we? No one would claim that Isaiah 53 was about anyone other than Jesus himself, so let's read verse 2:

"For he grew up before him like a young plant,
and like a root out of dry ground;
he had no form or majesty that we should look at him,
and no beauty that we should desire him."

Now, we can perhaps argue about the details of his physical appearance, but we shouldn't be confused that he was nowhere near what the world would deem handsome or attractive.
Take Diogo Morgado, on the other hand, and what you have is the New Testament version of a Calvin Klein model. The number of women he would have caused to lust in his time on earth, had he actually looked like this guy, would be unimaginable. Christ did not need what we define as physical beauty to draw men to himself. In fact, coupled with not being attractive, he was very ordinary in appearance. When Judas told the crowd of soldiers with him "The one I will kiss is the man; seize him.", it was for a reason. Because, despite his 3 1/2 years of ministry, some still could not tell him apart from his own disciples. And his hair wasn't flowing as if it could be featured in a Vidal Sassoon commercial either, but we'll leave that alone for now.

Next, we address some of what Christ's character said and did in this movie. While I understand the complexities of creating a script for a book that contains mostly narrative, and the need to fill some of those silent moments with exciting words or actions, I believe that the bible is not just any book and warrants more scrutiny in that process. We could perhaps talk about how none of the synoptic gospels portrays the meeting of Jesus and Peter the way the movie plays it out, but let's skip to what Christ tells Peter when he does encounter him:

"But when Simon Peter saw it, he fell down at Jesus’ knees, saying, “Depart from me, for I am a sinful man, O Lord.” For he and all who were with him were astonished at the catch of fish that they had taken, and so also were James and John, sons of Zebedee, who were partners with Simon. And Jesus said to Simon, “Do not be afraid; from now on you will be catching men.” And when they had brought their boats to land, they left everything and followed him." - Luke 5:8-11

Even in the gospel according to Luke, who is notorious for offering the most detail about the incidents in the life of Christ, we don't read the climactic words that he utters in the movie:

Jesus: "Peter, come with me. Give up catching fish and I will make you a fisher of men."

Peter: "What are we gonna do?"

Jesus: "Change the world!!!" (camera pans around the two of them on the boat as an orchestra plays captivating music)

No sir and ma'am, Christ did not say that and he surely did not come to implement some sort of social change in the world. In fact, we could argue that "changing the world" was nowhere on God's agenda when he voluntarily decided to offer his son as the sacrifice for our sins. The ultimate change to this world will come when Christ returns in triumph and God melts it away in a fervent heat. Does Christianity change the world? To a degree, yes. God does use us to implement change in some areas of life, but the world in general remains enslaved to sin. Most importantly, as well as accurately, Christ changes US.

And finally, though there are countless other errors to point out, the most glaring mistake made in this movie. If the creators of it truly had any intention of perhaps leading unbelievers to Christ, then would it not be safe to assume that they would want to introduce them to the true Christ? You know, the one that was simultaneously meek and powerful. The one that was compassionate, but uncompromising. The one that never failed to make the truth known, no matter how controversial it may have seemed.
In the scene that, without question, offered them a chance to introduce this very Christ, they dropped the ball big time. It is a quiet scene when we hear Christ say "I am the Way...the Truth...and...the Life..." (bear with me, I'm trying to type it the way he said it, ok). But the last three dots are the issue, because immediately after "the Life" comes.....the next scene!!! You read that right, I was left with my mouth wide open. How do you flounder on the words Christ used to set himself apart from any other false belief system in this world? In case you aren't aware of the entire quote, here it is:

Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."

It is those nine words that come after "life" that are crucial. Universalism teaches that all men will get to heaven. Oprah teaches that it doesn't matter what you call God, that everyone's path may be different but their destination the same. In fact she said "There couldn't possibly be just one way...". If you introduce a Christ to the people and they can leave there believing that he is simply one of many "paths to god" or "just an alternative option", then you have not only failed at introducing the true Jesus, but are guilty of doing that person more harm than good! 

Bottom line, we don't have the option or the right to water down the word of God and especially not the gospel! A theology that fails to acknowledge the holiness of God, the utter sinfulness of man, and the sheer dependence we must have in Christ alone as our savior, is a theology that we should never propagate or share with anyone! We are tasked with going into the nations and teaching them all that we have been taught. In shore, the properly interpreted word of God.

I started this blog by pointing out that even the most inaccurate portrayal of the life of Christ could have some benefit. In this case, I pray that it starts the conversation about who Christ really is...

Seriously...read the book, it's better!

WebRep

currentVote

noRating

noWeight

HOMOPHOBIA...the truth behind the matter

I'm certain that we have all heard this word in the media by now. Be it social media and the conversations that take place there or in what passes for actual media nowadays, the discussion around the homosexual lifestyle seems to always include the idea that those who oppose it must be "homophobic". I won't take up the space to list it here, but will let you look up the official definition for yourself here.

Whether you actually took the time to look it up or not, I'll continue...

Regardless of what side of the debate you stand on, we all have to admit that there has been a huge cultural shift when it comes to the homosexual lifestyle. It's gone from something that was reviled in social circles and "kept in the closet" to being flaunted openly and normalized in mainstream entertainment. This shift has been inevitable in a society that values freedom of expression and one's right to do as they please above all else. In and of itself this shift would not be so controversial. But unfortunately it was also accompanied by the notion that everyone must go along with it and accept it as normal. Those that do not have now been labeled as intolerant and homophobic.

It's those two titles that I would like to examine more in-depth here. You see, in most debates they are almost exclusively aimed at Christians. Now, are there some people that profess to be Christian, yet behave in hateful and vile ways when dealing with homosexuals? Sadly, yes. But that should not be used as the standard of measurement for all Christians, rather as the behavior of some that either have not fully matured in their walk or that have made a false profession themselves. However, there seems to be an expectation that even true Christians (followers of Christ) should simply accept the new secular paradigm as normal and go with the flow. And this is where the problems arise.

The Christian's position on homosexuality is well known and has been the same since the penning of the bible. Where it may be true that some have wavered in their stance and convictions in the past, the bible and what it informs the believer of has always remained the same. Now, there have been attacks on the authenticity of the bible or even the interpretation of the texts in question, but that's a topic for another discussion at some point. In general and historically the stance of the Christian church has remained unchanged. 

This being the case, why is it so surprising that we remain opposed to any sort of normalization of what we clearly see and define as sinful? Why have there been attacks on the likes of Kirk Cameron, Chic-Fil-A, Phil Robertson and countless other professing Christians when they voiced their beliefs (after being asked, mind you)? Why was the owner of a bakery sued by a homosexual couple for refusing to create a "wedding cake" for their ceremony? The answer to all of these is one and the same, because they have been labeled intolerant and homophobic!

No matter your stance and how well you've made it known in the past, if you speak your mind and refuse to compromise on your convictions then you stand the chance of being mocked and accused of being on the "wrong side of history". Or if you happen to own a business and run it based on those same uncompromising convictions then you may find yourself being boycotted or sued for some perceived infraction of someone's rights. The signs and chants for "tolerance" will be brighter and louder than anything you are given the opportunity to say. Never mind that you asking for the same "tolerance" in regards to your beliefs and choices.

So are we "afraid of homosexuals" simply because we won't agree with or affirm their choice of sin? Or is it more accurate that the supporters of it and the ones that level these accusations suffer from a severe case of alethephobia (a fear of hearing the truth)? Because if you don't believe in our God - and make no mistake, you can't serve God and blatantly disobey Him - or the bible we so feverishly cling to, then why does it matter if we still call it a sin? Why does it matter if we opt not to indulge you and your vices? Are we actually harming anyone by refusing to do so? So, it seems apparent that it's only a problem if they feel there is some truth to what we claim. Because, not matter how rebellious they try to be, they can't deny the tug they feel in their own consciences when they engage in behavior that God finds offensive. That "tug" is the result of God having written His law inside of us, leaving us without any excuse or alibi for the offenses we commit against Him.

No, we're not afraid OF you...we're afraid FOR you!

This is why we (those of us that don't, that is) refuse to compromise and rather continue to declare the truth. There is more at stake than the temporary satisfactions this life and the sins in it can offer. You may scream YOLO at the top of your lungs while diving headfirst into your vices, but on the other end is eternity. And it is the same God that we offend that has provided the one and only way for us to be sure we will spend that eternity with Him rather than separated from Him.

So, choose your indulgences, or choose life...either way, the fear of God should compel you...