Friday is for… A Movie Review (This Week) and Previews of “Coming Attractions”

 The following are the initial examples of my weekly local newspaper column, which is intended to be somewhat interesting culturally, thought-provoking and usually evangelistic, though without beating people over the head with the gospel.  These recent columns are reprinted here with permission of the Times-Guardian of Canyon Lake, TX (@2007).  All views expressed are mine and not that of the paper or its editor.

 

“A Review of ‘Evan Almighty’ (I)”

I had the opportunity to see a movie last Friday (which I don’t do much, with the last really good flick I saw at a movie theater being “Amazing Grace”).  And, I chose to pay money to see “Evan Almighty,” a choice about which I was happy in one way, but still have mixed emotions about in another.

Why did I choose “Evan Almighty?”  Honestly, there was nothing else showing besides the latest “Die Hard” installment that I was even remotely interested in watching.  However, I must admit that I was actually interested in seeing how the movie handled the Noah/flood story angle which dominated its trailers on television.

Before proceeding, let me say that I think this discussion deserves two weekly installments.  So, after briefly laying out a few general overview thoughts, I will spend the rest of my space in this column treating several specific things that bothered me about the movie from a theological perspective.  Then, next week, I will consider several things that I thought were worthy of commendation, again from a theological vantage point.

Admittedly, all of these may well be angles that most average viewers would never consider.  But, that just might be the very reason why what I have to say this week and next may be of real value to you: because you would not think about these things, even though it would be definitely be in your best interest spiritually do so.In general, if you have not seen “Evan Almighty,” it does not pretend to be anything other than a clever sequel to “Bruce Almighty,” starring Jim Carrey and Morgan Freeman (as the “God” figure).  There is nothing “almighty” about the Evan Baxter (played by Steve Carrell of “The Office” fame)/Noah-revisited character.  The wording in the title simply plays off “Bruce Almighty.”  If anything, Evan is portrayed as quite klutzy (e.g., some funny physical humor by Carrell), and as a lightweight intellectually and biblically/spiritually (e.g., his clueless attempt at bedside prayer, which is probably about where the average American nominal “Christian” is today).

In numerous ways, this is targeted as a “family movie,” carrying a PG rating.  Suffice it to say that the humor is kept within an acceptable range for children.  It is cast with credible actors and the visual and special effects are quite well done, sometimes eye-popping.

As I said earlier, my problems with “Evan Almighty” are biblical and theological in nature.  First, “Evan Almighty” trivializes God.  But, don’t misunderstand what I’m saying here: Morgan Freeman is my fellow Mississippian and one of my all-time favorite actors.  Yet, there is nothing from any of the scenes in “Evan Almighty” (or “Bruce Almighty,” for that matter) which remotely reminds you of anything that Scripture presents about God revealing Himself to humanity—and that includes God being born into this world as the God-Man, Jesus Christ.  This movie presents God re-interpreted in man’s image, not man made in God’s image, as Scripture teaches (Genesis 1:26-27).

Second, it trivializes the purpose of the original biblical Flood.  The account in Genesis clearly states that the Flood was judgment upon the almost entirely corrupt population of the earth, unlike what the movie presents from Morgan Freeman’s mouth.  Yes, there was redemption for sinful humanity in the biblical account, through Noah and his family.  But, there is nothing about the biblical concept of redemption in “Evan Almighty.”          

Third, the movie trivializes what the Bible says is involved in changing the world.  Freeman’s “God” says the world is transformed by “acts of random kindness” (the wording allows the Noah-oriented pun acronym ARK).  By contrast, while Scripture says that we are each to love God and our neighbors (Matthew 22:34-40), the actual means of true transformation is intentional acts of evangelism—individual people sharing the life-changing good news of Jesus Christ with those who have not yet trusted Him for salvation.  As we will see next week, “Evan Almighty” has a great opportunity to make this exact point, but backs off before clarifying what is meant.

“A Review of ‘Evan Almighty’ (II)”

Last week, I began my review of the movie “Evan Almighty” with a positive overview and three stated areas of concern: 1) It trivializes God (i.e., His person, character and power); 2) It trivializes the purpose of the original biblical Flood (i.e., its character as righteous Divine judgment on an almost thoroughly evil world); and 3) It trivializes what the Bible says is involved in changing the world (i.e., we need intentional acts of sharing the good news of Jesus Christ, not just “acts of random kindness” [which words were given the acronym ARK, trying to be clever]).           

However, there certainly were some good things about “Evan Almighty.”  Please understand, though, that this is not a complete list of the good features of the movie—in my opinion, of course—any more than last week’s article contained a full list of its problems.             

 Again, I will list three things and briefly discuss them.  Hopefully, these will provide you, the reader, with some provocative food for thought.           

First, “Evan Almighty” did realistically—even if humorously—depict the sense of confusion caused by God’s unexpected call upon someone’s life.  I’ve seen those strange stares when I tried to explain to people—many of whom were close kin or friends of many years—that God was calling me into ministry for Him.  Particularly troubling to me was trying to explain to my career military father that I was not going to pursue my undergraduate degree in accounting or go to law school, as much of my mother’s family had done—and was expected of me.           

And, like Evan, it was not something that I desired to be “called.”  It was the furthest thing from my mind!  Also like Evan, I initially ran from it, until God knocked me flat on my back and I couldn’t run any more (in the infirmary at Mississippi Sate University, where I finally said “Uncle!” and gave in to God’s will for my life).           

Second, “Evan Almighty” did effectively visualize the kind of ridiculing unbelief that God’s spokespersons have often been greeted with by their hearers.  In spite of much evidence that Evan was a kind of a prophet from God, nobody beyond Evan’s family believed what God was saying through Evan was going to happen.  That was exactly what happened with Noah and his family (see Genesis 6-7): Nobody listened… and then, the Flood, when, sadly, it was too late.           

Third, “Evan Almighty” did accurately use a biblical term that needs to be heard in our day almost as much as Noah’s: Repent!  It even occurred at a key point in the plot: when a Congressional leader was being exposed in regard to massive corruption.  However, the full biblical significance of the term “repent” was not explained—meaning that the average viewer would have only taken it to mean “be sorry for what you’ve done,” if they thought about it at all. 

Here’s where it comes in handy to have written the “Repentance” entry for the Anchor Bible Dictionary, 6 Volumes (Doubleday, 1992).   “Repent” is a rich biblical word, which, literally, means “to change the mind.”  At the human level, it always refers to changing your thinking in regard to sin.  In the New Testament, “repentance” is sometimes a capsule of the gospel message, including faith in Jesus Christ (e.g., Acts 2:38; 2 Peter 3:9).  At the very least, it is the first side of the coin of how a person becomes a Christian—repent of your sinful state—with the other side of the coin being faith in Jesus Christ.

Bottom line: “Evan Almighty” opened the door by asserting that mankind needs to repent toward God of our sins.  However, “Evan Almighty” did not walk through that door by defining what repent implies: that every one of us is dead spiritually (and, thus, lost forever; Romans 6:23) outside of faith in Jesus (John 3:16).           

Coming Attractions:

1. If I have not heard anything back from Tim Guthrie by early this evening, I will assume that he is not interested in participating in the dicussion I have called “An Interchange with Tim Guthrie within BFM2000: Cavernous Caveats, Three Tiers or a ‘Canon within the Canon?’”  However, I am going to pursue the topic anyway, just without Tim’s direct input (although he may still participate as a commenter, as long as he observes my two stated standards of decorum [please see 'About This Blog']: 1) Have a balanced take; and 2) Don’t sin).  So, if nothing from Tim is forthcoming while I’m out of the office on business this afternoon, I will post my first installment in that series later this evening, which I would call “What Showeth the Scriptures.”

2. On Monday afternoon (or evening, depending on time constraints), I will begin a series of posts I’m calling “The Holy Spirit and the Southern Baptist Convention Today.”  No, it will not just be in regard to the current burning issues related to the cessationism vs. continuationism face-off (which now must be updated and realistically adjusted in the light of the Lifeway survey), though that will come up late in the series.  You see, there is a great deal more about the Holy Spirit that everybody in the SBC needs to think about, even if the spiritual gifts issues are never mentioned–though they will in due time.

What to Expect Method/Level-wise:

Both sets of studies will be:

- Selective: I am only going to treat a few key examples at any point along the way–just enough to get across the point.  Only if the majority of commenters ask for more discussion in an area, will I stack up the examples.  After all, this is a blog, not a doctoral seminar (or even a formal semester course at a Bible college).  My natural style is more rather than less (in case you haven’t noticed!).  So, this is more of a limit on me than anything else.  I don’t want anyone to feel like they are running a marathon just to get through an installment I’ve written.

- Simple: In the comment stream of a recent guest essay I did for SBC Outpost, I got chided by a student named Hiram and it was essentially because of what I’ve heard called “theological shorthand” (i.e., technical theological terminology) in regard to the Baptist Faith and Message 2000.  He was right and I apologized.  So, I will attempt to use the K.I.S.S. method in these studies.  (By the way, I do not mean “Keep it simple, Stupid” in this case.  I’m going with “Keep it simple for students (at whatever level).”

- Specific, that is, to the current Southern Baptist context.  Even if it may seem I’m off on a “rabbit trail” at certain points in these studies, I will work hard to draw them back in to this context, showing the helpfulness of why I discussed what I did the way I did.

Blessings, Boyd