the tindog coffeehouse

Lost fans have been begging for answers and last night’s episode delivered them in spades, although I’m sure it left a lot of folks still scratching their heads. Personally, I thought the spiritual elements were really powerful, and there are so many parallels between it and the Gospel. So instead of my usual bullet-point braindump of random observations, I thought I’d spend a few minutes analyzing the episode from a Christian standpoint.

Major themes.

There are a couple of broad themes that Lost revolves around: (1) good vs. evil and (2) free will vs. determinism. You see these same themes played out in the Bible as well.

Certainly, it’s not hard to equate the battle between Jacob and the Man in Black to the battle between God and Satan. This is an eternal struggle that began long before mankind was created. Essentially, Satan is trying to defeat God, much the same way that MIB is trying to defeat Jacob, and we as humans are caught in the middle of this battle, just as the people on the island are caught in the middle. And as such, we must choose what side we’re on. Ephesians 6:12 says: “For we are not fighting against flesh-and-blood enemies, but against evil rulers and authorities of the unseen world, against mighty powers in this dark world, and against evil spirits in the heavenly places.” We are part of the larger eternal war whether we want to be or not.

Which gets back to the question of free will vs. determinism. MIB tells Sawyer that he has three choices. First, he can ignore Jacob’s invitation (i.e. God’s call to salvation) and see how his life plays out. Of course, the end result is always the same: death, with your name being crossed off the list. (Romans 6:23: “For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life through Christ Jesus our Lord.”) Second, he can accept the invitation. (Romans 10:9-10: “If you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is by believing in your heart that you are made right with God, and it is by confessing with your mouth that you are saved.”) Or third, he can reject it outright. Likewise, we have the same choices, although really the first and the third lead to the same conclusion.

The debate over free will vs. determinism (or predestination) is a pretty big one within the Christian church. Has God already predetermined who will be saved, written their names and numbered them as Jacob did with his chosen “candidates”? Or are we free to choose for ourselves whether we are saved or not? I won’t even try to go into this discussion here, but you can see how this same theme is directly playing out in Lost. And I think the “sideways” storyline will continue to explore it throughout the rest of the season. Are the six chosen — Jack, Locke, Sawyer, Hurley, Sayid, and Kwon (most likely Sun) — predetermined to end up on the island even in this alternate universe, or did “rebooting” time break that cycle?

The Man in Black.

It’s fitting that the MIB has taken the appearance of Locke (the island’s “man of faith”). Satan, too, often appears as men of faith to deceive us. Jesus said in Matthew 7:15-16: “Beware of false prophets who come disguised as harmless sheep but are really vicious wolves. You can identify them by their fruit, that is, by the way they act.” In the same way, Sawyer was able to discern the fake Locke from the real Locke based on the way he acted. (The real Locke, he said, was full of fear.) Jesus also warned in Mark 13:5-6 that in the last days (final season?) “many will come in my name, claiming, ‘I am the Messiah.’ They will deceive many.” Sounds like the Man In Black to me. (Incidentally, it’s interesting to note that “sideways” Locke took a job as a substitute teacher. In other words, he wasn’t a real teacher, he was a false one (i.e. a false prophet).)

It’s also interesting to note Ilana’s statement that MIB is stuck looking like Locke. In Genesis 3, God condemns Satan to crawl on his belly, groveling in the dust as long as he lives. In the same way, MIB is cursed to live out his days on the island, stuck in whatever form he takes. Satan is not all powerful; he must conform to God’s rules and limits. MIB must also play by Jacob’s rules.

The death of Jacob.

The Man in Black thought he had found a loophole to defeating (killing) Jacob. Since he himself can’t kill Jacob, as he was reminded by the blonde-haired boy last night (angel? prophet?), he tried to manipulate Ben into killing him. In the same way, Judas Iscariot was deceived into betraying Jesus, which led to Jesus’ crucifixion. When Jesus died, Satan thought he had won (we saw MIB remove the white rock from the scale and toss it into the ocean). But Jesus’ death was part of God’s greater plan for mankind. His death opened the door for mankind to be saved. Jesus died so that we wouldn’t have to. Likewise, Jacob’s death, I believe, is part of a larger plan that will ultimately lead to the redemption of the island castaways. And just as Jesus rose from the grave on the third day after His death, I wonder if we’ll see Jacob be resurrected on the third day. (Ilana reminded us that Jacob was killed “yesterday”, so we should know soon enough.)

Previously:
Lost thoughts, Feb. 10
Lost thoughts, Feb. 3

The above photo was taken by the Hubble telescope in October (click to enlarge or download the original here).  From NASA:

The festive portrait is the most detailed view of the largest stellar nursery in our local galactic neighborhood. The massive, young stellar grouping, called R136, is only a few million years old and resides in the 30 Doradus Nebula, a turbulent star-birth region in the Large Magellanic Cloud (LMC), a satellite galaxy of our Milky Way. There is no known star-forming region in our galaxy as large or as prolific as 30 Doradus. Many of the diamond-like icy blue stars are among the most massive stars known. Several of them are over 100 times more massive than our Sun. These hefty stars are destined to pop off, like a string of firecrackers, as supernovas in a few million years.

About a week ago I helped direct about 20 third-, fourth-, and fifth-graders in a little Christmas play at church, and I thought about this photo when it got to the part about the Three Wise Men.  According to Matthew 2:1-12, a group of Magi followed a star in the east for as much as two years in search of the prophesied Messiah before finding a very young Jesus in Bethlehem.

The Magi were astrologers, possibly Zoroastrian priests.  As Wikipedia points out, “these priests paid particular attention to the stars, and gained an international reputation for astrology, which was at that time highly regarded as a science.”  Yep, they were scientists.  Much like the modern-day astronomers who produced this amazing photo.

Obviously the Magi of Jesus’ time wouldn’t have seen anything this spectacular, but what they did see was apparently compelling enough to cause them to pursue it for many months, not because of what the star was but because of what it announced.

Like the Magi of 2,000 years ago, I’m in awe of the stars.  I’m captivated by the majestic beauty of the universe and overwhelmed by its near-infinite expanse.  How big and powerful must God be to have created it, to form the stars and planets, create entire galaxies, and set into motion a process that spans billions and billions of years.  And it was those same stars, some millions of years old, that led the “wise men from the east” to the feet of the Creator Himself in the little town of Bethlehem.

What do you see in the stars?  Do you see a random collection of gases, elements, and chemical reactions, the remains of a Big Bang that happened eons ago without reason?  Or do you see a masterpiece, a work of art created by a God that transcends time and space but who “became flesh and made his dwelling among us”?

The Magi understood.  Upon finding Jesus, they fell to their knees and worshiped Him.  And I worship Him today.

Merry Christmas!

A few weeks ago, I wrote about John Chapter 6, about how thousands of people had begun to follow Jesus, not because of who He was or what He had to offer them, but because all they saw was some guy who could heal their diseases and give them food.

Many of those people didn’t hang around for long.

Jesus told the crowd that instead of seeking another meal, which would just leave them hungry again later, they should choose the “bread of life” (v. 35).  He told them to eat His flesh and drink His blood, which would lead to eternal life (vv. 53-58).  Naturally, these cryptic commands only confused His followers, and almost all of them left.

I know how I would’ve felt to see everyone desert me.  I would’ve felt like a complete failure, worthless and rejected.  I would’ve wondered, “What did I do wrong?  How can I get them back?  Maybe give them some more food, heal some more people, do some awesome magic tricks?”  Because that’s our human nature.  We want to be loved, we want to be accepted, we want to be respected and adored.  And had I been Jesus, I would’ve done anything at that moment to keep those people from walking out on me.  Anything.

Thank God I’m not Jesus.

Verse 64 says that Jesus knew from the beginning who would stay and who would go, and it’s pretty obvious that these people were never in it for the long haul.  They didn’t care about who Jesus was.  They didn’t really care whether or not He was the prophesied Messiah, the Son of God, the One who would in a short time willingly give up His life for their sins.  No.  All they cared about was their own immediate needs and wants, and when the food ran out, when the going got tougher, when the cost of following Jesus became greater, they were out of there.

So my question to you is simple: Will you stay, or will you go?  If you’re already a Christian, you’ve already made the decision to give your life to Jesus Christ, and you’ve asked forgiveness for your sins and asked Him to be your Lord and Savior, will you continue to stick with Him, even when it’s tough and even when you don’t know where He’s leading you?

And if you’re not a Christian, if you’re wondering if this Jesus guy is who He says He is, will you keep seeking answers?  Or will you walk away because it just looks too hard?

As I read back over this passage, I wondered whatever happened to the people that left.  Did any of them ever return, or did they walk away from Jesus forever?  I’ll never know.  But I know that at least for me, I can choose to stay.

Previously:
In the beginning…
Who are you following?

I don’t want the Father, I want a vending machine
I don’t want the Father, I want a vending machine
I know what I want if you know what I mean
I don’t want the Father, I want a vending machine

– Derek Webb, “The Spirit Vs. The Kickdrum”

A lot happens between Chapters 5 and 6 of the Gospel of John.  By the time we get to John 6:1, Jesus has attracted a huge following.  At least 5000, and that was likely just counting adult males.  Including women and children, that number could’ve been 10 or 15,000.

Jesus took the time to feed them all, and He didn’t just give them each a small ration of fish and bread.  They had so much food, they couldn’t eat all of it, leaving twelve basketfuls of leftovers.

But that wasn’t enough for them.

John 6:15 says they wanted to force Him to be their king, so He had no choice but to get away.  Eventually, they caught up with him, though, hungry and demanding more food.  Here they were in the presence of the Son of God, and all they could think about was themselves.

Sound familiar?

So who are you following?  And who’s following you?  How many Twitter followers do you have?  How many friends on Facebook?  How many people are subscribing to your blog?  And why are they following you?  Why are you following them?  And while we’re at it, why do you go to the church you go to?

These relationships you surround yourself with, these various communities and social networks, are they there just to serve your own needs, build up your own ego, make you somehow feel all warm and fuzzy?

Because that’s not what Jesus is about.

Yes, Jesus met His followers’ immediate needs by hosting an impromptu fish-fry.  But that’s not why He was there.  He was there to sacrifice Himself, die so that we could have something a lot better.

The crowd didn’t want that, though.  They only cared about what they could get from Him, not about what He had to offer.

Too often, I’m guilty of the same thing.  I go to church only to get something, not to be an integral part of the body of Christ.  I get excited when I have new Twitter followers or new blog readers.  I’m happy when it’s all about me, me, me.  As if I’m anyone important.

I’m not saying we shouldn’t be active online or that it’s wrong to promote your blog or whatever.  But I have to remind myself of what’s really important.  It’s not about some numbers on a web page or how many brownie points I get for having perfect church attendance.  It’s about developing a personal relationship with the Creator of the universe and showing His love to a world that desperately needs it.

Previously:
In the beginning…
A little social network housecleaning

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.  He was with God in the beginning.  Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. …

The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us.  We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.

– John 1:1-3,14 (NIV)

What a revolutionary statement for John to make to his Jewish and Greek readers: that Jesus wasn’t just a guy sent by God but that He was God Himself.  Unlike Matthew and Luke, the Gospel of John doesn’t talk about the virgin birth or about Jesus’ lineage.  Instead, he goes all the way back to before Creation to show that Jesus existed even then.

I’ve read this Gospel numerous times, but I still don’t think I can fully appreciate this idea.  Before humans ever set foot on earth and certainly long before the Fall, Jesus already existed.  Because God knew we would need Him.

If you asked me whether I knew this already, I would’ve of course said yes.  But have I really stopped to think about the implications of it?  Have I really considered how amazing this Jesus person really is, that He was there before the planets, before the stars, before Genesis 1:1, knowing all along that His sole purpose was to be born in order to die, and yet He came willingly, full of love and full of grace for us.  For me.  For you.  For the soldiers who drove the nails into His hands and feet and hung Him on a cross.

So often I paint a picture of Jesus in my head, define Him in human terms, pay more attention to what He said than to who He is and why He ever lived in the first place.  I nod my head in agreement as I read along, filing away His words in my head, rarely stopping to think about who it is that spoke them.  Pretty arrogant, huh?

I need to rethink this Jesus guy.  It’s one thing to say He was born in a manger to a young virgin mother.  But those three words that introduce the Gospel of John literally change everything.

Previously:
¡Viva La Revolución!
‘His purpose in life was to go straight to the cross’

From Searching for God Knows What by Donald Miller:

When the church began to doubt its own integrity after the Darwinian attack on Genesis 1 and 2, we began to answer science, not by appealing to something greater, the realm of beauty and art and spirituality, but by attempting to translate spiritual realities through scientific equations, thus justifying ourselves to culture, as if culture had some kind of authority to redeem us in the first place. …

In fact, much of biblical truth must go out the window when you approach it through the scientific method.  God does not live within the philosophical science He made, any more than He is bound by the natural realities of gravity.  There is moral law, to be sure, but moral law is not our path to heaven; our duty involves knowing and being known by Christ. …

In a culture that worships science, relational propositions will always be left out of arguments attempting to surface truth.  We believe, quite simply, that unless you can chart something, it doesn’t exist.  And you can’t chart relationships.  Furthermore, in our attempts to make relational propositions look like chartable realities, all beauty and mystery is lost.  And so when times get hard, when reality knocks us on our butts, mathematical propositions are unable to comfort our failing hearts.  How many people have walked away from faith because their systematic theology proved unable to answer the deep longings and questions of the soul?  What we need here, truly, is faith in a Being, not a list of ideas.

Previously:
When we worship God

Recently, Christian writer Jason Boyett posted an interview on his blog with an atheist writer who goes by the pseudonym Dromedary Hump.  (Part 1 of the interview here, and Part 2 here.)

As I was reading through the interview, a couple of things stuck out at me.  See if you notice them in this excerpt (Boyett’s question in bold):

I guess the direction I was headed with that question regarded what I see as a potential critique of your business model: that you are making an easy buck by taking advantage of someone’s fears. Yes, this is definitely the life insurance approach, offering peace of mind in hopes that you won’t ever have to execute the agreement. However, the death rate for humans is 100 percent. You calculate the potential for the rapture occurring at a 00.0000001 percent chance. From your perspective, isn’t this sort of like (to pick an off-the-wall, non-religious example) asking an insane person to pay you $110 so you’ll protect him from the flying purple cheese monster? He gets peace of mind because he truly believes the cheese monster exists and is after him, but of course you know otherwise. You just get money for nothing. In my opinion, that conflicts with the Rule of Reciprocity. Your thoughts?

Jason, good challenge. First, I didn’t invent the rapture. It was implied by scripture and then reworked by 19th century Christians. One has the option of accepting those stories in the Book of Daniel and Revelation, and subsequent embellished interpretations of them, as either real things that are bound to happen or the ravings of lunatic cultists. I opt for the latter.

If you are equating believers in the rapture to “insane people” then yes… I would be taking advantage of the mentally incompetent, it would be wrong. But I don’t think you want to make that statement.

[Note from Jason: Well, no, I certainly didn't want to imply that rapture-believers are insane. Just trying to come up with a metaphor unconnected to religion. I'll admit the flying purple cheese monster comparison is a bad one. Anyway...]

Thus your example of the insane person buying protection from a purple monster is not a good one. I view believers of the rapture pretty much like any believers who take things on faith. They aren’t insane; they are usually capable of running their lives, making decisions on their own, dealing with daily trials and tribulations, making judgments, etc. I treat them as adults capable of making their own determinations in life. To that extent I am treating those people exactly how I would like to be treated. That I believe they have been mislead, are naïve about what scripture is and why it was written… that they are pawns of a mind virus that has pervaded men’s minds for thousands of years is 100% true.

But I will not afford them “victim status.” They have choices. They made them. I am servicing their need, a need that has been artificially created by nonsensical ancient writings, that has been fostered by the church for 1700 years. The genesis of any “scam” one may perceive of my service isn’t with my service. It’s with the scam of religious teachings. Religion itself makes my “scam” (if one wishes to define it as such) pale in comparison.

What immediately jumped out at me was Mr. Hump’s mention of the books of Daniel and Revelation from the Bible.  In fact, he mentions earlier in the interview that he has a degree in psychology with a minor in religion and that he has always been a student of religion.  My guess is, he probably knows a lot more about the Bible than most Christians.

The second thing I noticed in this interview was the way Mr. Hump responded.  Very methodical, very intellectual.  You often see this type of debate from atheists because that’s the way they justify not believing in God.  To them, everything is based on logic, intellect, academia, and science.  Thus, any philosophical debate over matters of faith only serves to prove their point (at least from their perspective).  That’s not to say that Christians aren’t intellectual or that the Christian faith is not logical or complementary to science, only that Christians will rarely be able to argue their way to leading a person to Christ.

The interview reminded me of Luke, Chapter 4, in which Jesus is tempted by Satan while fasting in the desert.  In the passage Satan tempts Jesus three times: first to turn stones into bread so that Jesus can eat, second to bow to him so that Jesus will be able to rule over the earth, and third to jump from the top of the Temple so that people will recognize Jesus as the Son of God.  Satan knows exactly which buttons to push and exactly what words to say.  He even quotes Scripture in verses 10 and 11.  In essence, he’s using many of the same tactics that atheists use when debating Christians, knowing that if he can draw Jesus into some kind of philosophical argument, he’ll “win”.  Jesus, of course, doesn’t fall for it, instead responding by quoting Scripture back to Satan and then leaving it at that.

I think it’s good for us as Christians to keep both of these points in mind.  First, we need to really know the Bible.  I admit that I’m really bad about this.  But we need to know what we believe and more importantly why we believe it.  Second, it’s not about arguing our faith; instead, our lives have to reflect it, which comes through letting the Holy Spirit guide us as opposed to our own desires.  When that is the case, debate becomes unnecessary.

This weekend we watched the Liam Neeson movie Taken.  In the movie, Neeson’s estranged daughter (played by Maggie Grace) is kidnapped while vacationing in Paris.  Neeson then spends the remainder of the movie tracking her down before she’s lost forever.

Although the movie isn’t necessarily meant to have a Christian message, I couldn’t help but to think about how it is a perfect analogy for our relationship with God.  We often talk about the need to seek forgiveness for our sins and come back to God, and that’s true.  But we forget that God isn’t just sitting idly by while we wander off.  He’s actively pursuing us, just as Neeson’s character pursued his daughter.

In the parable of the lost sheep (Matthew 18:12-14), Jesus said:

If a man has a hundred sheep and one of them wanders away, what will he do?  Won’t he leave the ninety-nine others on the hills and go out to search for the one that is lost?  And if he finds it, I tell you the truth, he will rejoice over it more than over the ninety-nine that didn’t wander away!  In the same way, it is not my heavenly Father’s will that even one of these little ones should perish.

This isn’t a picture of a callous supernatural being who sits around waiting for his worshippers to return to him.  No, this is a heavenly Father who loves His children and will stop at nothing to get us back.  This is a Father who loved us enough to give Himself up on the cross to pay the penalty for our stupid mistakes, a Father who has declared war on our kidnappers, just as Neeson’s character declared war on his daughter’s.  Titus 3:5 says that God “saved us, not because of the righteous things we had done, but because of His mercy.”

The question, then, isn’t whether we’re too lost to be rescued.  The only question is whether we want to be rescued at all.

The earth moves and you find me
Alive but unworthy
Broken and empty, but you don’t care
‘Cause you are my rapture, you are my savior
When all my hope is gone, I reach for you
You are my rescue

– Seabird, “Rescue”

The past few weeks have been pretty stressful for me.  I won’t go into detail, but suffice it to say, I really needed to read this article that I came across in Relevant Magazine last week:

True freedom is being liberated from our misplaced dependencies for life, love, worth, significance, peace and fulfillment. I’ve discovered my most significant needs in life correspond with a deeper need that only God Himself can satisfy. … Most people want to feel their lives matter and set out to make their mark in the world. But if you look to the world to tell you who you are, you’re in for one wild and painful ride. Do well, and you’re a hero; screw up, and you’re a zero.

Paul’s word content seems a little weak, but it actually describes a very powerful freedom. What if we were content (satisfied and fulfilled) with God’s perfect love and were free to give love, rather than constantly maneuvering to get it? Or what if we were content with our identity in God and were free to serve the world, rather than trying to prove we have a right to exist in it. Geez, all this time I’ve been seeking life, love, worth out there somewhere only to find that the source of all of these was inside me all the time through the risen Christ. No person, endeavor, thrill, formula or achievement is capable of delivering what we all crave deep within. There’s always something that could go better, but the peace and joy God provides go with you … even if life throws you overboard. That’s freedom!

There’s a spot on eastbound I-635 in north Dallas where the outer edge of the right-hand lanes dips suddenly, causing the shoulder to be slightly higher.  If you happen to hit the spot with your right front tire, it can easily cause you to lose control of your car, especially if you hit it at 50 or 60 miles an hour.

I’ve made that mistake a few times on my way to work, and even though I’ve never fully lost control, it’s certainly scared the crap out of me.

It’s a dangerous spot, a defect so small and minor that it’s almost completely unnoticeable but significant enough to cause a major wreck for anyone caught by surprise.  But here’s the thing: While it would be so easy to patch it up, road crews chose instead to simply mark it with a warning sign:

UNEVEN LANES

How many times do we do the same thing in our own lives?  We carry around a small but dangerous defect in our ourselves.  Maybe it’s in our choices, maybe our attitude, maybe it’s the words we use.  It’s barely noticeable — if it’s noticeable at all — but it has the capacity to cause significant damage to ourselves and the people around us.  We’ll go so far as to acknowledge the problem, but ultimately we’re unwilling to do what it takes to actually fix it.

The apostle Paul points out in Galatians 2:16 that no one can ever be made right just by trying to do the right things; it’s only by placing our faith in Jesus Christ that all of our holes, dips, and defects can be fully mended.

What areas of my life are in need of repair today?  What needs to be repaired in yours?

From Matt at The Church of No People:

When Jesus died, his friends thought that was it. A great teacher, a great miracle worker was dead. They had been convinced he was the next big thing. Now they were sure he was was not. He would go down in history as a great man who had been unjustly executed. Perhaps history would not remember him at all.

And then Jesus added something to his resume.

It was only after his earthly life was over that Jesus’ very purpose in life became known. That is something that no one else has ever done – achieved their purpose only in death. No one talks about the death of someone at their funeral – we celebrate their life! Because their death is not who they are, or what they accomplished or what they meant to us.

But that’s exactly what we talk about with Jesus. His life wasn’t about teaching, or healing people, or performing miracles. Even before he was born, his purpose in life was to go straight to the cross. And then he could achieve what he was sent to do.

Blue Like Jazz: Nonreligious Thoughts on Christian Spirituality by Donald Miller is a wonderful book.  Beautifully poetic, humorous, and deeply insightful, it is composed of a series of seemingly random essays about various topics such as love, grace, and community.  Miller’s book challenged me, as it should.  I don’t agree with him on everything, but I followed along his journey anyway, willing to listen to what God had to say to me through it.

So when I heard that they were making a movie version of the book, my curiosity was piqued.  First off, it’s not like this is a novel, but it’s not purely an autobiography either.  Secondly, it’s not structured in such a way that it would easily translate to a screenplay.  So I was excited to see the end result.

But after reading a review of the screenplay on Miller’s blog, my excitement has turned to concern:

Blue Like Jazz portrays a vivid tension between Christianity and the world. I thought it was fantastic. It was hard to swallow some the direct obligations towards Christianity – they are so true though. The times of hope and resolve allowed me to emotionally connect to the character of Don. I laughed out loud and swallowed hard at times when reading through the script. The story touched on every single issue that outsiders have with Christianity (Judgmental, Hypocritical, Antihomosexual, Sheltered, Too Political, and Proselytizing based on the research of unChristian). It’s an emotional ride that brought me to an ending that gave me much hope and confidence in (1) Being Christian (2) The story I am developing with God on a personal level and (3) Jesus.

The Evangelical viewer is going to come face to face with some tough criticisms. However, the honest Christian is going to come away feeling refreshed. The cultural elite are going to laugh at the cynicism and debate that takes place during the Reed College scenes and they will appreciate the genuine tension that Don has with God. Your Juno fans are going to love the the witty dialogue, emotional connection to each character and who they represent. They will also love the scenes dealing with rabbits, the Pope, condoms, college parties, and the journey Don is on. The dialogue comes off as very genuine, even when reading it as opposed to seeing it on screen. Homosexuals who believe in God will love the relationship between Don and Laura. Conservative Christians are going to have the hardest time with it – but it is a necessary affliction they need to feel. The postmodern crowd of Christianity is going to rave about it. Since the story is about a guy who is in college your college students will love it on so many different levels, especially, the character development of Don. I think majority of criticisms will come from your extreme conservative and your extreme liberal – However, majority of the world rides the fence.

I suppose that because I disagree with homosexuality, that puts be into the category of “conservative” Christian rather than “postmodern” Christian.  So it’s probably no surprise that the way homosexuality is apparently portrayed in the movie concerns me a great deal.  Further, the arrogance of the statement that such concern is a “necessary affliction they need to feel” leads me to believe that this is not simply about including a homosexual character in a Christian movie, but that there is an obvious agenda behind it.  That is to say that if I’m a conservative Christian, then I must be wrong, and this movie is supposed to put me in my place.  (It should be noted that in the book, Laura isn’t a homosexual.)

What message is this movie sending not only to the Christian community, but to non-Christians?  From the review it seems to be that true Christianity (the “honest” kind that is not judgmental or “antihomosexual”) is made for the majority of people who “ride the fence” between conservative and liberal.  It’s the kind that doesn’t pick sides or stand for absolutes, but loves the sinner while refusing to hate the sin.

That is not the Christianity of the Gospel, and I don’t believe that was Miller’s intent in the book.

Please understand this is not an indictment of Donald Miller or his book, only a reaction to a review of the screenplay.  I’m still curious about how the movie will turn out.  I just hope the review is way off the mark.

Update, 4/16/09:
Here’s a good interview with Donald Miller and producer Steve Taylor (who was kind enough to respond to my original blog post), discussing how they deal with the controversy surrounding their work:

Doing Daring Things for Good Reasons from MHGS VIDEO on Vimeo.

A few observations about the interview:

1. The interview was conducted at Mars Hill Graduate School in Portland, Oregon.  According to their website, MHGS is an “evangelical and progressive institution. The faculty consciously submits to the authority of Scripture and the model of a hermeneutical framework that interprets the Bible in light of its grammatical, historical, literary, and theological contexts. Relational hermeneutics is a full-bodied, soul-engaged, heart-transforming encounter that involves the subjective worldview of the interpreter as much as the process of interpretation.”  I’m certainly no theologian, but my assumption is that their views on issues like homosexuality are probably more liberal than those of conservative seminaries in the South.
2. Miller contrasts Christians in the Pacific Northwest, who he deems more “balanced” because they didn’t grow up in a religious environment, with Christians in the Southeast, who he characterizes as being more apt to get drunk and sleep with their girlfriends.  I thought this was an interesting statement, if only to demonstrate how he views conservative “red state” Christians.
3. Miller mentions supporting Barack Obama for president.  He doesn’t elaborate why, but he wouldn’t have supported him without having his reasons.  Again, this demonstrates a difference between Miller and conservative “red state” Christians.  For example, as a Christian I disagree with abortion and homosexuality, and therefore will not vote for a pro-choice, pro-gay marriage candidate, regardless of political party.  Miller obviously feels differently if he actively supported someone like Obama.

These observations are important to keep in mind because they show where Miller and Taylor are coming from as they produce this movie, which is to say that their point of view is probably much more liberal than that of conservative Christians like myself.  It will be interesting to see how that point of view affects the message of the movie.

Previously:
¡Viva La Revolución!
What number are you?
When we worship God
‘How Apple Plays Upon Our Insecurities’