Patheos

BuddhistCatholicContemplativeEvangelicalGeneral ChristianHinduJewishLatter-day SaintMuslimNew VisionsProgressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Patheos

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos Patheos on Facebook Patheos on YouTube

slacktivist

‘Heaven Is for Real’ is not for real

Last updated on: November 16, 2013 at 8:55 pm   by Fred Clark

‘Heaven Is for Real’ is not for real 2013-11-16T20:55:47-05:00 Fred Clark

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

So here are a couple of new movie trailers for a couple of religiously themed upcoming films.

First, here’s the trailer for Noah — director Darren Aronofsky’s epic version of the biblical story starring Russell Crowe:

And second, the trailer for Heaven Is for Real, Randall Wallace’s adaptation of the (not at all) “true story” from Todd Burpo’s best-seller about a young boy’s supposed visit to the undiscovered country, which inexplicably features Greg Kinnear, Margo Martindale and Thomas Haden Church:

The screwy, backwards thing about these two movies is that white evangelicals are probably going to be upset by the wrong one.

The story of Noah in the book of Genesis is sketched out in very broad strokes in about 2,250 words. To turn that into a feature-length film, then, Aronofsky will need to flesh out lots of details never discussed in Genesis. The movie apparently also incorporates some of the trippier aspects of this story from the apocryphal Book of Enoch — angelic “watchers,” Nephilim, etc. I’m happy about that — Enoch lends itself to the talents of an unwieldy visionary like Aronofsky.

The problem facing Noah, the movie, is that unlike the book of Genesis itself, lots of American Christians treat this story as a historical account. For people who think the story of Noah is “history,” any addition to or deviation from the 2,250 words of the English translation of Genesis will be viewed negatively. That probably won’t be expressed as a mere difference of artistic opinion. The white evangelicals who will be upset by this movie won’t be saying things like, “I didn’t agree with Aronofsky’s decision to explore …” but will likely, rather, be saying things like, “Aronofsky is attacking the Bible because he hates Jesus. We’re being persecuted and oppressed. Religious liberty!”

I will be happy if it turns out I’m wrong about that prediction, but I’ve seen this pattern before and I’d be surprised if it doesn’t repeat itself with Noah.

The Christians who I expect will get upset about Noah ought to be upset by Heaven Is for Real. This is execrable theology. It’s biblically indefensible, inane and heretical.

And yet I suspect that white evangelicals won’t be upset with Heaven Is for Real. I suspect they’ll eat it up.

It’s theology may be horrifically anti-biblical, but it’s got the two essential things that American white evangelicals are looking for: gormless piety and sentimental anti-abortionism.

I don’t mind stories that include fantasy elements that would make for terrible theology if we took them seriously. The angel Clarence in It’s a Wonderful Life and the whole business about him earning his wings is pure pudding. It doesn’t make much sense, but the little sense that can be made of it amounts to awful theology. But that’s not the point of that story, it’s just a device to move the plot forward, and it serves that purpose well enough. Heaven Can Wait is terrific fun, but it would be terrible theology if you treated it as a treatise on the afterlife.

The nasty bit about Heaven Is for Real is that it insists that the fantasy elements of this story are “true” — that this is a story that really happened and that this is “for real,” what “Heaven” is all about.

That means we can’t simply respond to this story as a story. It means we have to respond to this lie as a lie — as a mawkish, melodramatic, manipulative, sappy, shallow, schmaltzy, anti-biblical, anti-rational lie.

Christians who care about Christianity ought to be upset about a lie like that. But they won’t be, because this lie is embedded in a movie festooned with all the tribal signifiers that delight white evangelicals — praying firefighters, miracles that prove scientists are stupid, talking embryos in Heaven, etc. Include enough of the totems and talismans of their tribe, and white evangelicals will embrace this movie as their own.

 

evangelicals

Uncategorized

Noah

tribalism

Previous Post



November 16, 2013

10 years ago: Roy Moore and Nehushtan

Next Post



November 17, 2013 10 years ago: Distinguished alumni


Browse Our Archives

Select a Category class warfare evangelicals Iraq Left Behind Mammon music Uncategorized

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003


Follow Us!

Follow Us on Facebook



TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

True or False: David killed Goliath with a sword.

Select your answer to see how you score.

TRUE FALSE

Related posts from slacktivist

Family

Is this the right room for an argument?

slacktivist

Family

The Amish are not 'Evangelicals.' They're Amish.

slacktivist

Family

The lumpers, the splitters, and me

slacktivist

Family

'Is it right on red or left on...

slacktivist

TRENDING AT PATHEOS Progressive Christian

My Experience with the G20 Interfaith Forum

Last week I spent three days helping coordinate media interviews and meetings...

How Do We See Jesus? Lessons From the...

In John 12;20-21, some Greeks came to Philip and said, "We would...

LBCF: Body and Soul

Jerry B. Jenkins sat at a computer and typed these words: “Let...

Have You Divorced Your Demons Yet?

Have you divorced your demons? Welcome back to our Spooky Judaism series....

Skeletons, Raccoons, and Tall Tales for the Spooky...

  In my book Carry My Tears to Shiloh, I wrote about a playful...

Watch: Forrest Frank ‘Jesus Generation’ Concert Doc Teaser

GRAMMY-nominated singer Forrest Frank has released an official movie teaser for “The...

view all Progressive Christian blogs

Patheos on Facebook Patheos on YouTube

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Copyright 2008-2026, Patheos. All rights reserved.

Subscription Support Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In

Follow Patheos Patheos on Facebook Patheos on YouTube