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!
Seeking to present open and honest discussion about the culture and times as well as the Christian faith and how it can be practically and logically lived out within that context. Also hoping to answer some of the questions unbelievers may have about what we believe, why we believe it and why it affects our lives. candid: adjective- a : marked by honest sincere expression "a candid discussion" b : indicating or suggesting sincere honesty and absence of deception
