I Don't Know How She Does It

On Monday I was hard at work when I received a text from my sweet wife.  She suggested lunch and a movie.  I can't pass those opportunities up, so I agreed.  I had never heard of the movie she wanted to see, but it didn't matter, I just like hanging out with her. Then I watched the trailer: httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GSi3LdUrq18 I immediately began to fear that 90 minutes, I mean this really looked like a serious chick flick. Afterwards though, I was amazed at the interesting social critique that I had just witnessed.  I am of the age where many films from my youth were about dads and kids (think Hook and the like).  These films all had a common theme: Dad was a workaholic and sacrificed his family for a ride up the corporate ladder.  However, in each film something happens where Dad changes course and becomes a family man to save his marriage and family. I Don't Know How She Does It was the complete opposite. This time it is Mom who is rising the corporate ladder and sacrificing her family and marriage. It struck me that this is new.  The film doesn't bash on working moms, quite the contrary.  But, it does ask the pointed question to these moms, "what's most important?" I find it fascinating that the Dad is now seen as the steady, supportive, rational, and faithful spouse.  The Mom is the self-centered, irrational, and nearly un-faithful spouse. The roles have been reversed. I think that we need to be aware of what is going on here.  Pop culture is crying out for Moms.  As much teasing as June Cleaver has taken since the feminist revolution, there is a hunger for what only a mother can provide.  Men took the heat and from what I can tell, in my peer group, are engaging with their families.  Pop culture is now looking at the Mom and asking, "where are you?" I suppose when it comes down to it we must realize this one thing: We need both.  Moms and Dads. We need them working as teams juggling the complexities of life together.  We need the pendulum to find its equilibrium on this one.

Garden State: Good or Bad?

In our second to last post exploring how to engage with culture we will be evaluating the film Garden State
Media_httpwwwassocama_dubxc
. Remember the four key questions that we use in our evaluation:
  1. What does this tell us  about God?
  2. What does this tell us about man?
  3. What does this tell us about man's greatest problem?
  4. What does this propose for the solution to man's greatest problem?
From here we would then compare those answers to the Biblical worldview.  Let's dive in... What does Garden State tell us about God? Not much.  God does not make an appearance in the film.  It would seem that there is no sense of a divine presence.  The characters in the film are apparently on their own to figure out the world. What does Garden State tell us about people? It has much to say here.  Zach Braff paints for us a crystal clear image of the fallenness of humanity. All of the characters are deeply flawed. One is a liar, one a thief, and the other on a quest to finally enter into reality.  We see the darkest realms of humanity through the quest of the characters.  The low point of the film is a journey through the heart of a hotel where you can see people behind closed doors, we witness the depths of depravity. We also learn that humanity is capable of great love. What does Garden State offer as man's greatest problem? Quite simply the problem is humanity itself. We find that those who are rich are just as awful as those who are poor.  We find that those who are loved well are just as broken as those who are unloved.  Humanity itself, Garden State proposes, is its own problem. What is the solution to man's greatest problem? The film offers the solution of forgiveness and sacrificial love. The turning point in the film is when the three main characters arrive at "The Ark" and meet the caretakers of the "Abyss".  They find that they are content, happy, and satisfied because they love one another self-sacrificially.  It is here that the characters come to a turning point and are radically changed in their quest. The film ends by the thief sacrificing his ill gotten gains, the liar speaking truth, and the one looking for reality finally dying to self on behalf of another. All this is in the context of forgiveness given and received amongst the three and others. There are many more themes and threads and similarly to our review of the Lion King (see Rob's comment there) this barely scratches the surface (there are many connections to the Illiad, many sub themes, etc...). Are there any bridges or connections to the gospel? I think there are many. This film is a great portrayal of original sin and the need for love and forgiveness.  It is imperfect in communicating these things, yet, it provides a grid for some very real and clear conversation regarding these themes.  There is not a single perfect character and every character needs love and forgiveness.  I would suggest that this film provides a fantastic jumping off point for conversation and discussion of the gospel. There are some thematic elements (drug usage, alcohol abuse, sexual situations) that are inappropriate for young viewers and should be discerned.  However, as a presenting worldview it is significantly less harmful and may even be helpful as compared to the Lion King. That discussion is for next week.

The Lion King: A Wolf

In my previous post I suggested a method for evaluating culture. We are going to begin with an evaluation of the beloved Disney film, The Lion King
Media_httpwwwassocama_pekjq
. Evaluation The first question is, "What does this communicate about God?" The Lion King communicates very little about God. Actually, there is no sense of the divine. New Age philosophy is rampant where the created order is governed by the "circle of life". As beings pass from life to death they become disembodied spirits and act as overseers. There is a mystical Ape shaman who provides insight for Simba throughout his adventure. The second question is, "What does this communicate about man?" The Lion King communicates much about man. It presents a picture of humanity as having little meaning or purpose. The main characters go through life seeking to find their actualized potential. This is done through their good deeds or works. But, there is no overarching purpose, for at the end of the day they will be claimed by the "circle of life". The Lion King also implicitly teaches a Hindu caste system. Where those born to significance and power retain that role based on birth. One cannot escape his caste. Finally, there is a clear and overriding fatalism that pervades the film's characters. The third question, "What does this communicate about man’s greatest problem?" Man's greatest problem in the Lion Kings is other men. The lead characters must fight against the antagonists. Why? Because the antagonists are trying to escape their caste and live above themselves. The antagonists are lower level beasts seeking to rise above their place. The fourth question, "What is the proposed solution for man’s greatest problem?" The proposed solution is works. Simba and the rest of his protagonist friends must do good to overcome their enemies and put down their attempt to leave their caste. The other side of the coin is that Simba must give in to fate and embrace his place in the highest caste, thus perpetuating the "circle of life". This "circle of life" can apparently be shut down by those in the lower caste rising above themselves. Summary As you can see there are great problems with this film. It misses the mark regarding God and the divine. God is a personal and engaged being who sacrificially loves. Man is created in the divine image and their future is not sealed by caste or fate; but by their choices and responsiveness to their Creator. Each man will eventually receive exactly what they want. Man's greatest problem is not other men, but sin. The broken relationship between themselves and their God. This cannot be solved or repaired by man's good works but by the sacrificial working of God alone. The solution to man's problem is monergistic and is accomplished by the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus. Are there any redemptive aspects to this film? Yes, one. The key one being the role that community plays. It is through community and relationship that Simba is able to "overcome". Conclusion The Lion King is a film that is deeply embedded with a faulty worldview. It embraces new age and Hindu philosophy. I would consider this film to be one that, while, whimsical, fun, musically good, and entertaining communicates a very dangerous worldview. The messages communicated will require a good follow up conversation with your children if they watch it.

The Most Demonic Movie EVER! Really?

Media_httpdanielmrose_uyiyz
When I opened up my RSS reader yesterday and saw Out of Ur's article on Pastor Mark Driscoll's comments on Avatar, I was intrigued.  I clicked. I watched. I was amazed. I was sitting with my wife and my jaw dropped and she began wondering if I had lock jaw on the off chance that I did not get my tetanus updates. The reality is that I was surprised by comments like this coming from a person who holds tightly to a Reformed perspective of doctrine (which I am coming to learn does not equate to a Reformed worldview, I am so naïve!) First, let me say a few things to set the stage for my concerns.
  1. I enjoy Pastor Mark and am thankful for the role he plays in the Christian world.
  2. I agree with Pastor Mark's assessment that Na'avi of Avatar practice pantheism.
  3. I agree with Pastor Mark's assessment that pantheism is an incorrect worldview.
  4. I agree with Pastor Mark that the film is promoting a worldview that does not jive with the Biblical worldview.
  5. I agree with Pastor Mark that the film does not portray an exact representation of Jesus.
  6. My guess is that Pastor Mark went down a rabbit trail in his sermon on this one and did not think it through.
I want to make it clear: I agree with much of what Pastor Mark says in the clip. However, I do struggle with some of Pastor Mark's comments.  I will briefly outline them here. First, I struggle with the way that Pastor Mark has chosen to set Christ against culture, the Reformed position is Christ transforms culture.  I think that he has made an inappropriate good/bad split.  Avatar in his mind is "all bad".  I am not sure that this is true.  There are some helpful metaphors in the film.  One example is the character of Grace Augustine.  She promotes a gracious approach to the "fearsome" Na'avi as opposed to a law driven approach.  This seems awfully familiar to the grace that Augustine espoused. Coincidence? Maybe. A second example is one of the things that Pastor Mark argues against as a "false incarnation". I thought the film did a nice job representing the incarnation.  Here we have an incarnated being learning and becoming part of a culture and community that is not his own after leaving the relative ease of his previous life. Is it perfect or ideal? No. It is not written from a Biblical worldview.  Is it a bridge to the subversive and radical life of Jesus? Yes. I also struggle with the way that Pastor Mark portrays Genesis 1:27-28.  He says that the Biblical teaching is "progress" and that we are not to remain "primitive".  The problem is that this is not nuanced enough.  The Biblical mandate requires us to steward, tend , and care for the creation of the Creator.  This means that we are not to support strip mining, clear cutting, and the destruction of the creation.  We are to care for it and tend it.  Are we to create culture and progress? Yes.  However, we are to do so in such a way that honors God's creation which he deemed good as opposed to seeing the creation as a hindrance or an inconvenience to our way of life. Jumping off this point, is another one.  Pastor Mark says that humanity does not have the "divine spark".  That's simply not true. We are created in the image of God.  All of us are image bearers.  We are radically and completely corrupted by sin from the start. None of us are innocent.  None of us are able to save ourselves. We need our sovereign God to graciously redeem us according to his plan. Yet every person in Hell is still a human created in the image of God. At the beginning of the clip Pastor Mark is talking about consumerism and the world system. The funny thing is that Avatar agrees with him.  Consumerism is the driving force behind the humans destroying the Na'avi.  The consumerism drives them to destroy the creation and the culture of these beings. I am concerned that Pastor Mark is burning bridges to the gospel as opposed to building them. Another struggle I have with Pastor Mark's assessment is that he seems to be communicating from his politics as opposed to the Bible.  The charges that he levies against Avatar could be very easily levied against The Chronicles of Narnia or The Lord of the Rings.  But, we "know" that these author's were Christians and so we are OK with their metaphors.  I mean seriously, Jesus is represented by a lion who lives out a false resurrection and a false incarnation. Narnia has witches and talking beasts.  But, we all know that these are metaphors, illustrations of something else.  Can we not build a bridge from the metaphors present in Avatar? I think we can and I think we should. Avatar is not the most demonic movie ever (I would say the Exorcist is).  It is an opportunity for the Christian world to speak to a world that desperately needs Jesus with metaphors and images that will make sense to them.