About a week ago I read a very sincere blog entry from Tim Challies outlining three reasons why he would not go see Evan Almighty. In my opinion, his third point is the most significant:

But I think my greatest and overarching concern is this: this movie, like the one before it, makes light of our faith. When people walked out of Bruce Almighty I don't think they had a greater and deeper understanding of God. They did not have greater love for and respect for Him. The genre simply could not bring so serious and important and biblical a message. Amidst all of the laughs and vulgarity there would simply not have been opportunity to really help people understand God better, despite the filmmaker's attempts. And when people walk away from Evan Almighty they will not love God more. I don't think they will have a greater understanding of the Bible. In fact, I suspect they'll see the biblical story of the flood as being as fictional as this movie--a quaint plot but completely unrealistic and implausible. Mere fiction. This movie will not and cannot bring anyone closer to God. Rather, it will necessarily project a false image of God, a false understanding of Him. And we're being told to watch this, to enjoy this, and to bring our families to see it so they can laugh with us.

Now I want to say up front that if Tim is convicted that he should not see this movie, he should not go see it. There are certain movies I will never see because there are certain kinds of movies that I cannot see in good conscience. So I understand that. However, I would hate for him--or anyone else--not to see it simply because his concerns are overblown.

Tim speaks of his struggle over whether or not to see the first film, Bruce Almighty, and I have to admit that I had the same reservations although at the insistence of some people I highly respect, I finally got around to watching the movie. Yes, there were some objectionable parts in it, but there were also some very redeemable elements and I don't think that the movie made fun of the Christian faith--in fact, I felt that it was quite respectful of the Christian faith. And the interviews I've read with the director, Tom Shadyac, convince me that although my beliefs might not line up with his 100%, he's still serious about his Christian faith. Nevertheless, there were still some questionable elements of Bruce Almighty, and it's not a movie that I could recommend to just anyone--although I probably could to most.

Thankfully, the sequel, Evan Almighty, is a different issue altogether. I took part in an invitation for "ministry professionals" to view the film about three weeks ago. I went in hopeful but nervous with many of the same concerns and fears that Tim described. And yet, I was pleasantly surprised and even taken aback in a few places at how overt the biblical interactions were in this movie. In fact, the biblical references are so overt, I wonder how much of the movie would go over the head of someone who is completely unchurched.

If you don't know the plot by now, the story involves a recently elected congressman named Evan Baxter (played by Steve Carell) who after moving his family to Virginia (to be near DC) is visited by God, played by Morgan Freeman, reprising his role from the first movie. God wants to take Evan up on his campaign promise to "Change the World." And yet, his command upon Evan is seemingly absurd--he's told to build an ark. Yes, an ark just like in the days of Noah. In fact, over the course of the movie, Evan is transformed into a Noah character right down to physical appearance--kind of like Tim Allen's transformation in The Santa Clause.

Let me tell you some positives of the movie and why I believe it should be supported, especially by Christians.

• Most importantly, this movie does not make fun of the Christian faith. In a refreshingly welcome move, the movie is very much from a Judeo-Christian worldview. In fact, the very flavor of this movie reminds me much more of a movie I'd expect to come from Walden Media as opposed to a studio like Universal, the actual movie company. And for all the complaints about the protagonist of the first movie living with his girlfriend (although he was not a believer), the sequel is squarely family oriented focusing on Evan, his wife and his children.
• God's sovereignty is primary throughout the movie. In an almost Jonah-like fashion, Evan does not want to have anything to do with God's plans for his life. He fights them to his own peril until he finally submits. And it's significant that his submission to God's will is in the context of his not understanding why God is asking him to do these things. He doesn't understand, but he obeys nonetheless.
• The movie focuses on a number of very good themes such as faith, hope, the importance of family, and the reality that God hears us when we pray. Both parents are shown praying during times of difficulty. Evan's prayer may not be as eloquent as his wife's, but it's sincere prayer nonetheless.
• There's also a strong message that if someone really wants to change the world, it's not necessarily going to be done in Washington D.C., but it will have to start at the local level with self, family, and neighborhood.
• Morgan Freeman still puts a good face on God. Freeman who tends to gain roles as the local wise man or the conscience of a film works well in this role. For all those who might have a dim view of God (for whatever reason), it's difficult not to like Freeman (although I would imagine God might have straighter teeth if I ever saw him in a theophany).
• Contrary to concerns I've heard voiced, this movie is not about global warming. The threat imposed in the movie has to do with a greedy politician (John Goodman) who has cut corners in his building projects. And in case you're wondering, the politician's party affiliation is never mentioned.
• There's also no conflict with God's promise in Genesis to never flood the world again. God promised never to flood the entire world again. He never said that local floods would not occur.
• There is almost no language in the film (the worst is seen in the trailer; I personally don't use the slang term for urination, but it is in the KJV, isn't it?) and very little objectionable material. What's there was probably done to keep the movie from having a strictly G rating. The movie is rated PG "for mild rude humor and some peril." This is a movie you can feel comfortable watching with your entire family, church groups, pastor, your mom, etc.

Are there any theological problems with the film? Yes, a few, but I don't believe they have to ruin it. Just keep in mind that Hollywood would never produce a perfectly Christian film. But nevertheless, Evan Almighty goes a long way toward being a responsible Christian film that does not make fun of the faith and suggests that spiritual and ethical issues should be a part of everyday life.

Here's a short list of the theological problems:

• There's a reinterpretation of the Noah story at one point that gives less emphasis to judgment and more on the point of Noah and his family working together. The judgment aspect isn't altogether denied, but it's still a bit squishy in my opinion.
• Evan's guide to building the boat is Ark Building for Dummies, which is authored by God. On the inside of the book, the author's bio mentions that he he is the father of 6 billion people and lives in everyone and everything (or something to that effect). Obviously, this idea of living in everyone and everything sounds a bit pantheistic, but the movie does not portray a pantheistic view of God, so I would suggest this is merely poor wording (although you could always take it in the sense of the nephesh of God that is in every living thing). As for the fatherhood issue, take it along the lines of Acts 17:28-29. Of course on a lighter note, one wonders what it would do to the Canon for God to author an entire book about ark building
• The overarching theological problem with any of these kinds of movies is that the central figure of the Bible, Jesus Christ, is left out. The Old Testament always seems safe to cover, but Christ ever remains the most controversial figure in history and often is too taboo for Hollywood films. Nevertheless, the Bible that Evan reaches for in the movie contains both testaments and allusion is made at one point to "Ask and you will receive" which comes from Matt 7:7 or 21:22.
• And not quite a theological problem, but this movie has been criticized for being highly marketed to the church. But it's a double-edged sword isn't it? We complain when Hollywood ignores us, and then we criticize when they pay us attention. I would suggest simply using discernment toward any kind of marketing from any source period, and be wise in making decisions so that marketing is not always a controlling factor.

Granted, Evan Almighty isn't going to make any of the American Film Institute's top 100 lists. It might not even make the money of its predecessor. But it's a fairly good movie that can be enjoyed with the whole family and lead to spiritual discussions afterwards. Yes, some parts are cheesy, and the movie starts off a bit slow, but it builds along the way. The climax is--dare I say it--breathtaking on the big screen, and when the credits rolled, the audience I saw it with (again, mostly "ministry professionals" and their families) cheered and applauded.

Tim Challies was concerned that this movie would not cause viewer to love God more. Well, I have no way of knowing what kind of reaction it would have on any person. But I do know that I see lots of movies that don't cause me to love God more, but the themes of this movie are positive and come from a biblical (albeit not perfectly biblical) perspective. This would be a great movie for churches to use as discussion starters. If anyone is convicted not to go to this movie, it is between that person and God, and I won't try to circumvent that. But just be sure that any such convictions are based on the facts and not the fears of imagined perceptions.