As many people are already aware, a movie called God's Not Dead came out in movie theaters. It's about a college student who gets put into a philosophy class where the atheist professor demands that all of his students write that God is dead. It culminates in a debate between the student and the professor, in which the student wins and successfully defends God. The movie grossed around 53 million in the box office on a 2 million dollar budget and was thus quite successful.
When I first heard about the movie I rolled my eyes. I haven't seen the movie myself (although I sort of want to) but from the trailer the characters appear quite stereotypical and the arguments could have been pulled straight from the Theism vs Atheism thread here on ArmorGames for their originality. They even bring in people from Duck Dynasty in the movie as a minor role it seems. The atheist professor especially plays exactly to a caricature of a "militant atheist" and the exact plot is a little ... disturbing. I'll link to the wiki that gives a full synopsis here. It strikes me as revenge-y and angry towards atheists and comes across like a huge pat on the back to Christians.
Now there's another movie coming out called A Matter of Faith which is about a college student (female this time) who goes into a biology course, where the teacher is *GASP* an "Evolutionist." Following the exact same plot line as in God's Not Dead, the atheist/non-Christian teacher engages in a public debate with a Christian defending Creationism/God after protesting that Creationism is not even mentioned as a valid alternative theory in the course. The biology professor presumably "loses" due to the superiority of the Christian's arguments (in this case, the girl's father).
Is this just trying to interest Christians? Or is it intended to be persuasive and to make a point? I'm curious to hear what everyone thinks about these. Are there any other movies that have been made in recent years that follow this same plot device, or is this a new trend?
Don't forget Heaven Is For Real, about the young son of a pastor who supposedly had a near-death experience and, among other things, saw Jesus riding a rainbow horse.
I didn't really have any interest in seeing this movie in the first place, sounded like a dull super-inspirational movie that always end up kinda boring (need moar atcion Kappa).
But, really? A rainbow horse? I have little love for equines but I would see a picture of this.
Dont bash any religion and learn to be Nice even though you dont share their view's.
Assuming it is true, which I wouldn't be surprised it is, stating a fact is in no way bashing unless it is stated in such a way as to be deliberately harmful and with malice, Palpatine lacked both.
Here's what I have to say about the movie after seeing it.
Pros: Camera work and lighting was well done throughout most of the movie, even surprisingly so compared to other recent movies I enjoy. The intended character of Professor Radison was overacted to some degree but mostly well played by the actor, and Josh Wheaton (Shane Harper) wasn't half bad either.
Cons: Every other actor was complete horse****. The characters were all written like they were insane. Professor Radison is one of those atheists who really believes in God but hates him because his mother died of cancer. Dean Cane plays a heartless maniac, and the reporter girl, after finding out she has cancer, goes from being angrily liberal to open-minded about God to close-minded about not being a Christian by the end of the movie. Josh gets the professor to admit in front of the whole class that he hates God, and then goes "How do you hate someone who doesn't exist?" Professor Radison gets hit by a car and dies, but not before converting back to Christianity. In short, the characters are horrendously written. Josh Wheaton was the kind-hearted Christian surrounded by evil atheists, they juggled too many random *** storylines, and this was pure preaching to the crowd.
As far as the arguments go, were they the worst things I'd ever heard in defense of Christianity? Not really, they could've been a lot worse. They were mostly copied out of John Lenox's playbook, where they literally only used atheist arguments that John Lenox had responded to, sometimes incorrectly. A list of Josh Wheaton's arguments from what I remember:
1. The Big Bang proves the Bible because Genesis says "God said Let there be light" and that sounds like it could fit the Big Bang. 2. Kalam Cosmological argument, met with little resistance except "Who created the creator" to which he quoted out of John Lenox's playbook "We don't believe in a created creator, problem solved!" 3. Some variance of Paschal's Wager, but it at least didn't presume that you can change your beliefs on a whim to fool God. 4. Where does absolute morality come from without God (really, an atheist philosophy professor can't answer a softball question on secular morality)? 5. Why do you hate God?
It was entertaining because of how bad it was, but this is not the type of movie that will challenge atheists to think differently about their beliefs. If anything, I'd say it was hard not to become close-mindedly atheistic after watching the movie. Will rational believers think the arguments were presented well? Maybe, but if they've thought about the issue at all the movie isn't bringing anything new. My guess is that the movie's intended purpose was to rally the Christian base and make them willing to feel comfortable enough to ignore atheistic criticisms. I'm not, by the way, accusing Christians of actually responding to the movie this way, but the movie gave me the impression that this was its intended goal: preventing the base from shrinking more than it already has. In other words, the idea that people are going to turn away from religion because they don't understand their point of view (my turning away from Christianity was the result of understanding the Christian perspective better).
Anyway, that's my two cents. It was mediocre and kind of funny, but mostly unimpressive and written by people who think the only reason their college kids are coming home atheist is because they were bullied by their philosophy professor.
1. The Big Bang proves the Bible because Genesis says "God said Let there be light" and that sounds like it could fit the Big Bang.
The latest "Science in the Bible" is that the newest model for the formation of the solar system included liquid water on earth before the sun formed, mirroring Genesis 1:2. Then comes the "Light", then came the "lights" (sun, moon+stars) to differentiate day from night. The earth/water wasn't there before the big bang.
1. unrealistic plot. first, A Teacher of any kind, even a professor can't just force someone to change anyone beliefs. it's not even allowed in the first place.
Uh....Yeah it is realistic. It doesn't tell you about the students beliefs except the main character, and some people I know had similar things happen to them. God's NOT Dead is a great movie that is good for all Christians like myself, and other people who have the potential of being converted.
Uh....Yeah it is realistic. It doesn't tell you about the students beliefs except the main character, and some people I know had similar things happen to them. God's NOT Dead is a great movie that is good for all Christians like myself, and other people who have the potential of being converted.
It's not realistic dude, forcing someone's religion or beliefs into any person IS a breach of human rights. It also breach the secularity principle of your nation, so if someone does that in your country, i don't think he can become a teacher, let alone a professor. Also, i don't recall your country allowed forced evangelist actions against anyone. the facts combine to make it a not really good movie for others to watch, not even christians such as me, as it promotes the sense of infidelity against other beliefs and intolerance.
It's not realistic dude, forcing someone's religion or beliefs into any person IS a breach of human rights. It also breach the secularity principle of your nation, so if someone does that in your country, i don't think he can become a teacher, let alone a professor. Also, i don't recall your country allowed forced evangelist actions against anyone. the facts combine to make it a not really good movie for others to watch, not even christians such as me, as it promotes the sense of infidelity against other beliefs and intolerance.
I'm not saying it's a good thing, and i'm not saying it's not a breach of human rights! All I am saying is that things like this do happen and they aren't as unrealistic as you guys think.
Welp, as long as the thread's back on the front page, may as well chime in.
God's Not Dead was absolute rubbish. I expected the movie to primarily revolve around the debate between the student and the teacher. Surprisingly, there was VERY little debating in the movie! Instead, it focused more on a bunch of sub-plots where it tried to tie everything together in the end.
I thought this movie was going to try and prove God logically. Nope. The movie *******izes atheists by misrepresenting them with incredibly false stereotypes.
Possible Spoiler; I haven't seen it personally but from what I hear the teacher get's hit by a car at the end, repents and dies.
It's worse than that! After the professor is hit by the car, two preachers rush by his side to help him accept Jesus right before he dies. As he's dying, there's a Christian concert going on in which the band on stage tells everyone to text each and every person on their contacts list "God's not dead."
The two preachers receive the text and one of them looks up and says, "What happened here tonight is a cause for celebration." The man just watches someone die after getting hit by a bloody car!
BigP08 does a wonderful job going over the arguments used in the video.
I'm not saying it's a good thing, and i'm not saying it's not a breach of human rights! All I am saying is that things like this do happen and they aren't as unrealistic as you guys think.
Very rarely do these things happen, and NEVER to the extent as shown in the movie.
When some lunatics tries to force their twisted beliefs by manipulating naive people, it's plain criminal! >:O
Force their beliefs? What? It's not like you HAVE to see the movie. If you don't want to watch it, don't watch it. If others want to watch it, that's their right, no? Can't call it forcing just because they make a movie, that's not fair to Christians, and it's a bit of a put down.
As ridiculous and stupid as that was, I think it's a pretty real fear for a lot of Christians. They think that they're going to be attacked or something because they admit to being a Christian/believing in a god. The entire movie is that way from what I can tell - stereotypes and misconceptions of atheists
No offense intended in the least, but... Isn't the reaction from the atheists here on AG rather enforcing these fears? Seems to me if you don't want to be viewed that way, you wouldn't act that way. But that's none of my business.
Crucial point in the movie: The professor believed in God as a child. When he was still a kid, his mother was dying and he prayed to God to save her. When his mother died, he blamed God and carried that with him his entire life, and it eventually turned to hatred. If you carefully observe the movie, the point is clear. He didn't ask "Do you hate God?" until after this part of the movie. Get it? The guy was still hurt from his Mothers death and God not answering his prayer the way he wanted. This happens frequently in life, but it's by no means a stereotype in my opinion.
While I'm most positive everyone will have the right answer on how wrong I am, so fire away.
No offense intended in the least, but... Isn't the reaction from the atheists here on AG rather enforcing these fears?
We're not attacking them, only their expressed beliefs. This distinction can be difficult at times because the beliefs are held so strongly, integrated with their morality, daily life, social activities, etc. But there is no reason why a willingly expressed idea should be eternally sheltered from criticism.
This happens frequently in life, but it's by no means a stereotype in my opinion.
At the least, it's a misconception. It's creating a strawman to set up the argument of "See, that guy really believed God existed all along, just like every other so-called atheist."
No offense intended in the least, but... Isn't the reaction from the atheists here on AG rather enforcing these fears? Seems to me if you don't want to be viewed that way, you wouldn't act that way. But that's none of my business.
That's harsh. I have personally never attacked someone here on AG, or elsewhere, simply because they expressed their belief in God. I do like to discuss about more specific beliefs, and I see no problem with that, especially in a forum.
Also, please keep in mind it's a movie. Don't analyse the behaviour of a character and think this is real life.
[quote]When some lunatics tries to force their twisted beliefs by manipulating naive people, it's plain criminal! >:O
Force their beliefs? What? It's not like you HAVE to see the movie. If you don't want to watch it, don't watch it. If others want to watch it, that's their right, no? Can't call it forcing just because they make a movie, that's not fair to Christians, and it's a bit of a put down.[/quote]
Where is this quote coming from Xeano? I'm curious about the context because something smells fishy but I can't find who you're responding to.
Isn't the reaction from the atheists here on AG rather enforcing these fears?
There's a big difference between bringing your ideas to a public debate forum and having your argument criticized/rejected than being attacked for holding a certain belief. A BIG, extreme difference.
God's Not Dead is basically a movie that feeds off of the persecution complex many Christians have because they think not being able to smear their beliefs in everyone else's faces without total acceptance and the response they get when they try is unjustified.
This happens frequently in life, but it's by no means a stereotype in my opinion.
The atheist professor character is the definition of a stereotype that many Christians believe about atheists, namely, that they aren't actually atheists.
God's Not Dead is basically a movie that feeds off of the persecution complex many Christians have because they think not being able to smear their beliefs in everyone else's faces without total acceptance and the response they get when they try is unjustified.
That was the same attitude the pilgrim fathers had in the seventeenth(?) century, so no change there then.
