Join our evangelism team!

evangelismguys Uncategorized

Spreading the gospel is very important for EVERY Christian. We’d like to extend to you an invitation to join us in public evangelism. We talk one-on-one with people we meet in public, and share with them the life-changing news of Jesus Christ. We try to make our evangelism days every other Saturday, but sometimes we do go more often or less often (as the circumstances allow). We’re in the Pittsburgh, PA area. For more information, or to join us, get in touch via our Facebook page: http://www.facebook.com/evangelismguys

A Poem by Elijah Newton

evangelismguys Uncategorized

10714149_280886342122611_7406470751271423580_oI know of a love so scandalous
a life changing act so precious
a cost that I’m forever in debt with
an idea so powerful I’m helpless
but to fall in the arms of my savior Jesus
He was born for your sins can’t you see this
He healed the sick
gave sight to the blind
and life to the dead
more importantly your sins to erase
my friend this is powerful grace
He came in your place
instead of you on that cross
Jesus the everlasting rock
has corrected the book
down to the very last dot
your sins are no more
looking ahead to see what’s in store
see this love so scandalous
a love so precious
comes straight from our savior Jesus

A Biblical Perspective on Tongues

evangelismguys Spiritual Growth

by Joe Jewart

Tongues might be one of the most discussed topics in Christian circles, after eschatology or predestination, and freewill. There are many different theological views on tongues by many good theologians, pastors, and scholars. Some believe tongues to be the gift of speaking a foreign human language, some believe this gift includes special prayer languages or even angelic languages. Others believe that this gift, along with the prophetic and healing gifts, have ceased with the apostles. So what does the Bible say about this gift, and is this gift available for us today?
Tongues are seen and discussed in three books of the Bible; Mark, Acts, and 1 Corinthians.(1) There is only one place in Scripture where we see tongues at work in detail, the rest is either a statement like, “they spoke in tongues,” or instruction on how to properly use the gift.(2) The place where we see the gift at work in detail is in Acts chapter two on the day of Pentecost. So what is the clear use of tongues in Acts chapter two?
The Spirit of God came upon the disciples like tongues of fire, and Acts 2:4 explains the result, “And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance.” Now the Greek word for tongues is γλώσσαις which literally means languages. To confirm that this is the gift of speaking human languages Luke uses the Greek word διαλέκτῳ in verse 6 which we get the word dialect. It literally says that the Jewish men, who came to celebrate Pentecost, from every nation were bewildered, because each one was hearing them speak in his own dialect.(3) To make it even clearer Luke then lists the different regions that heard the disciples speak in their own languages.(4) The miracle that was so astonishing to the Jews who came from every nation is that a bunch of uneducated Galileans could speak fluently in a multitude of dialects.(5) This shows us without a doubt that the gift of tongues, according to Acts 2, is the supernatural ability to speak a foreign language without ever learning it. As the church father Gregory Nazianzen said, “They spoke with strange tongues, and not those of their native land; and the wonder was great, a language spoken by those who had not
learnt it.”(6) At the Tower of Babel, God confused the languages of the world as judgement for their sin. At Pentecost the judgement was reversed, showing that the Gospel of Jesus Christ is to go out to all nations, and that people from every language will worship God.(7) This is the view of John Chrysostom,
“And as in the time of building the tower the one tongue was divided into many;
so then the many tongues frequently met in one man, and the same person used to
discourse both in the Persian, and the Roman, and the Indian, and many other
tongues, the Spirit sounding within him: and the gift was called the gift of tongues
because he could all at once speak divers languages.”(8)

The view of the early church fathers were that this gift is the gift of speaking actual human languages. The question is, “is this the only use of this gift or is there also a prayer language or angelic language that is unintelligible?
Many people claim to have a gift of tongues that is different than the gift of speaking an actual human language. For example, R. T. Kendall, while driving with a couple of friends, said this,
“I felt a stirring in my inner being. It seemed to be in my stomach like
a well that wanted to spring forth. The only way I could let it out was
to utter what I can only call unintelligible sounds.”(9)

Wayne Grudem, an orthodox theologian, would say that this experience could be very likely. He states,
“At times speaking in tongues may involve speech in actual human languages,
sometimes even languages that are understood by some of those who hear. But at
other times and Paul assumes that this will ordinarily be the case the
speech will be in a language that ‘no one  understands’ (1 Cor. 14:2).”(10)

Is this really what 1 Corinthians 14:2 is getting at? I do not think that is what this verse is saying. Here is the verse in context,
“Pursue love, and earnestly desire the spiritual gifts, especially that you may
prophesy. For one who speaks in a tongue speaks not to men but to God; for no
one understands him, but he utters mysteries in the Spirit. On the other hand, the
one who prophesies speaks to people for their upbuilding and encouragement and
consolation.” (11)

Paul, in these verses, is not praising the use of tongues but is showing why it is inferior to the gift of prophecy. Everyone benefits from prophecy. The gift of prophecy does not need an interpreter in order for the body to be built up. If there is no interpretation to go with the gift of speaking different languages, then “no one understands him” except God. This would be useless because the gifts are for the edification and upbuilding of the Church, not for the upbuilding of self.(12) This
is the reason Paul put such an emphasis on interpretation.(13)
Those who believe the gift of tongues can be unintelligible praises to God often turn to Acts 10:46 which tells us what happened to Cornelius and the Gentiles when they received the gift of the Holy Spirit. It says, “For they were hearing them speaking in tongues and extolling God.” Peter explains the outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon the Gentiles in Acts 11:15-17
by saying, “The Holy Spirit fell on them just as on us at the beginning.” When did the Holy Spirit fall on the apostles? Acts chapter 2. Peter said that the experience at Pentecost was the same experience that the Gentiles received. Plus, the text in Acts 10:46 says that they were extolling God. How would they know that the Gentiles were extolling God unless it was an actual translatable language? For Paul set a way to discern if someone was speaking in the Spirit or not in 1 Corinthians 12:3, “Therefore I want you to understand that no one speaking in the Spirit of God ever says “Jesus is accursed!” and no one can say “Jesus is Lord” except in the Holy Spirit.” How would anybody be able to discern this if the one speaking cannot be understood?
Others have also often used 1 Corinthians 13:1 to say that tongues can be the language of angels to validate unintelligible languages. The verse says, “If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal.” They miss Paul’s main point. This verse is not focusing in on the gift of tongues, but on love. The next verses, 2 and 3, indicate Paul was using extreme illustrations and hyperbolic language to emphasize the value of
love.(14) It is a hypothetical situation. Paul is saying that if somebody could speak in such a way without love, then they are just empty noise. It is the same literary style Jesus uses in Matthew 17:20, “If you have faith like a grain of mustard seed, you will say to this mountain, ‘Move from here to there,’ and it will move.” Jesus is not saying that we should be going around literally moving mountains. He is showing us that even someone with little faith in Him can do great things according to His will. Paul even uses the same imagery in 1 Corinthians 13:2, “If I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing.” “Of course, even if someone insists on taking the phrase ‘tongues of angels’ literally, it is helpful to note that every time angels spoke in the Bible, they did so in a real language that was understandable to those to whom they spoke.”(15) I think Norman Geisler puts the claim of the modern usage of tongues in the proper perspective,
“Even those who believe in [modern tongues] acknowledge that unsaved people
have tongues experiences. There is nothing supernatural about them. But there is
something unique about speaking complete and meaningful sentences and
discourses in a knowable language to which one has never been exposed. This is
what the real New Testament gift of tongues entailed. Anything short of this, as
‘private tongues’ are, should not be considered the biblical gift of tongues.”(16)

Geisler’s comment about unbelievers having experiences of tongues is interesting. Joseph Smith, the founder of Mormonism, would encourage his followers to speak in tongues in this way, “Rise upon your feet, speak or make some sound and continue to make sounds of some kind and the Lord will make a tongue or language of it.”(17) This kind of instruction sounds like modern instructions for those who believe the gift of unintelligible languages, yet these instructions are the instructions of Joseph Smith who did not believe the true God of the Bible. It is alarming when a great scholar like John Piper tried this very thing. He said in an interview about the gift of tongues,
“I used to sit in the car outside church singing in tongues, but I knew I wasn’t. I
was just making it up. And I said this isn’t it. I know this isn’t it. But this is what
they try to get you to do if you’re in that certain group. And I just, I did
everything to try to open myself to this, and the Lord has always said to me
without words, “No.” “No”. . . (18)

This is a gospel-centered theologian who was trying similar instructions that Joseph Smith’s followers would have followed. This should alarm us. I believe those who practice this kind of thing need to reconsider what the Bible says about tongues, and look at church history for the errors concerning some of the views of tongues. “During the first four or five hundred years of the church, the only people reported to have spoken in ‘tongues’ were followers of Montanus who was branded a heretic and his disciple Tertullian.”(19) Another group who claimed tongues was The Cevenol Priests in France during the 17th Century. They were considered heretics because their prophecies went unfulfilled and they were very militant.(20) In 1731 a Roman Catholic group known as the Jansenists were reported to be holding meetings in their leader’s tomb and supposedly ecstatic languages occurred.(21) Then there were the Shakers, followers of Mother Ann Lee, who lived from 1736 to 1784. They not only claimed tongues, but Mother Ann Lee claimed to be the female equivalent of Jesus Christ.(22) She also believed that sex, even within marriage, was evil. She taught her followers to resist lustful temptation by having men and women dance together in the nude while speaking in tongues.(23) Then in 1830 there were the Irvingites whose leader was Edward Irving. They had revelation that contradicted Scripture, their prophecies went unfulfilled, and their supposed healings were followed by death. They also claimed to speak in tongues.(24) Why would God want us to practice the same exact thing that heretics and unbelievers practice? As the quote above from Norman Geisler says, “There is
nothing supernatural about them.”
Now, we do have to consider the event that was at the root of the modern tongues movement. It took place on New Year’s Day in 1901 at a small Bible school in Topeka, Kansas. The school gathered for a prayer service, after studying the book of Acts, expecting the Holy Spirit to fall upon them as in the days of Pentecost. Their teacher, a Methodist holiness minister
named Charles Fox Parham, encouraged the students to seek the gift of tongues and the baptism of the Holy Spirit. During the early morning hours, a young women named Agnes Ozman asked her teacher to lay hands on her and pray that she would receive the Holy Spirit.(25) This event would change the world of Christianity. Parham recounts the story,
“I laid my hands upon her and prayed. I had scarcely completed three dozen
sentences when a glory fell upon her, a halo seemed to surround her head and
face, and she began speaking the Chinese language and was unable to speak
English for three days. When she tried to write in English to tell us of her
experience she wrote the Chinese.”(26)

When this happened, the belief was that God gifted people with the gift to speak human languages for the evangelization of the world.(27) They started to send missionaries out without studying the languages. Was this the gift of tongues that the New Testament described? It is hard to say yes, because the missionary work failed miserably when they learned that they were not actually speaking a human language. Charismatic authors Jack Hayford and David Moore acknowledged this failure, “Sadly, the idea of xenoglossalalic tongues (foreign languages) would later prove an embarrassing failure as Pentecostal workers went off to mission fields with their gift of tongues and found their hearers did not understand them.”(28) So instead of criticizing their experience under the authority of Scripture, they twisted the true meaning of Scripture to validate their experience saying that the gift is an unintelligible language like a personal private prayer language or an angelic language.
So even in the beginnings of the Pentecostal movement they understood, by reading Acts, that the gift is an actual human language. Then, they claimed to have that experience of speaking different languages. Yet when they went to the mission field, they could not actually speak in an authentic language like they had hoped. So they changed their theology. What do we do with all this information? The evidence of Scripture tells us that the gift of tongues is the gift of speaking in an understandable, translatable, and meaningful human language. The evidence of Church history tells us the same thing.
This question still remains, “are we to seek this gift as the apostle Paul commanded in 1 Corinthians 12:31, ‘But earnestly desire the higher gifts?’” This verse is used by Charismatics often to convict those who believe God is not using this gift in His agenda today. They say things like, “you are not willingly open to receive God’s gifts.” We must ask what Paul is truly saying in context of the whole passage. Here is the verse in its entirety, “But earnestly desire the higher gifts. And I will show you a still more excellent way.” Paul is not commending their desire for the higher gifts in this verse, but he is saying that as you continue to desire these higher gifts for your selfish reasons let me show you a more excellent way which is love. We can see this come out more in the Greek text. Instead of this verse being an imperative, the verb desire can grammatically be rendered as an indicative or a statement of fact.(29) This would also make more sense in light of the context. So it would read like this, “Because you are zealous for the best gifts, I will show you a more excellent way.”(30) The Spirit of God gives gifts as He wills for the edification and upbuilding of the church.(31) So it would contradict Paul’s entire point in 1 Corinthians chapter 12 if he was commanding the Corinthian church to desire the greater gifts. For each person is to be thankful for the gift God has given them, and they are to use their gift or gifts to lovingly minister to others. This makes complete sense because after Paul says, “I will show you a still more excellent way” he goes right into chapter 13 which is known as the love
chapter.
This brings us to our final question, “is the authentic gift of tongues and the other apostolic gifts still on God’s agenda today?” It is difficult to say that these gifts are still active on God’s agenda today. One reason is the combination of 1 Corinthians 13:8 with the modern tongues movement. 1 Corinthians 13:8 says, “Love never ends. As for prophecies, they will pass away; as for tongues, they will cease; as for knowledge, it will pass away.” Again, Paul’s focus is on the importance of love. He is saying to the Corinthian church to pursue love because love never ends. As for the gifts, they will end. First, we must realize that Paul is not trying to tell us that the gifts will cease in a future time of history. It was written for the Corinthian church. Paul was saying to them that when the perfect comes there would be no need for the gifts(32). The perfect would come when the Corinthian believers would see Christ face to face. This would happen either by their death or by Christ’s second coming. At the same time, it is interesting that the word cease in Greek is παύσονται which means to cease permanently. So when this verse says that tongues will cease, it means they will cease permanently. For classic Pentecostals, this causes serious problems, because they teach that the miraculous gifts ceased in church history but argue they returned in 1901. I do not believe 1 Corinthians 13:8-10 is the strongest argument for the cessation of the gifts, but I believe it is a strong clue when comparing all the other evidence in Scripture about the true gifts with those who claim the modern gifts. It is also interesting to note that many theologians have interpreted 1 Corinthians 13:8-10 differently, yet agree that the gifts have ceased. As John MacArthur notes,
“F. F. Bruce suggests that the perfect is love itself; B. B. Warfield contends it is
the completed canon of Scripture (cf. James 1:25); Robert Thomas argues it is the
mature church (cf. Eph. 4:11-13); Richard Gaffin asserts it is the return of Christ;
and Thomas Edger concludes it is the individual believer’s entrance into heavenly
glory (cf. 2 Cor. 5:8). Significantly, though these scholars disagree on the
identification of the ‘perfect,’ they all reach the same conclusion. . . that the
miraculous and revelatory gifts have ceased.”(33)

My conclusion is that the false gift should be easily picked out by one who knows Scripture. For the true gift of tongues is an actual language that can be translated. It is not an angelic language or private prayer language. If you compare the biblical definition of the gifts to the modern practice of the gifts, one will see that the modern practice is lacking in biblical standards. Also, verses like Ephesians 2:20 is helpful in the discussion. The apostolic gifts were meant for building the foundation. Once the foundation was built the miraculous gifts were no longer needed. This does not mean that God no longer works miracles for we still pray for healing (James 5:13-16). It only means that the apostolic gifts are not on God’s agenda for today, and that the Scriptures are sufficient (2 Timothy 3:16-17). Therefore, I am confident that the apostolic gifts are not available for the church today.

SOURCES:

1 Mark chap.16; Acts Chaps. 2, 10, 19; 1 Corinthians chaps. 12-14.

2 “They will speak in new tongues” (Mark 16:17). “They were hearing them speaking in tongues and
extolling God” (Acts 10:46). “they began speaking in tongues and prophesying” (Acts 19:6).1 Corinthians 12-14
are the instructions on the proper use of the gifts.

3 Acts 2:6. The NASB has a translation note that says it can be translated languages or dialect.

4 Acts 2:9-11.

5 Acts 2:7-8.

6 Philip Schaff, Nicene and Post Nicene Fathers Series Ii, Volume 7 (Grands Rapids, Michigan: WM. B.
Eerdmans Publishing Company), 384, accessed May 2, 2015, http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf207/Page_384.html

7 Genesis 11:7; Revelation 7:9-10.

8 Philip Schaff, Saint Chrysostom: Homilies On the Epistles of Corinthians (Grand Rapids, MI: WM. B.
Eerdmans publishing company,), 209, accessed May 2, 2015, http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf112/Page_209.html

9 R.T. Kendall, Holy Fire: a Balanced, Biblical Look at the Holy Spirit’s Work in Our Lives (Luke Mary,
Florida: Charisma House, 2014), 100.

10 Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology: an Introduction to Biblical Doctrine (Leicester, England.:
Zondervan, 1994), 1.

11 1 Corinthians 14:13.

12 1 Corinthians 12; 1 Corinthians 14:26.

13 1 Corinthians 14:13, 27.

14 John F. MacArthur, Strange Fire: the Danger of Offending the Holy Spirit with Counterfeit Worship
(TN: Thomas Nelson, 2013), 147.

15 MacArthur, 148.

16 Norman L. Geisler, Signs and Wonders (Wheaton Il: Tyndale, 1998), 167.

17 William J Samarin, Tongues of Men and Angels;: the Religious Language of Pentecostalism, ( New
York:: Macmillan Co, 1972), 53.

18 You can check this interview out here, http://www.desiringgod.org/articles/piperonprophecyandtongues.

19 John F. MacArthur Jr, The Charismatics: a Doctrinal Perspective (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Pub.
House, 1978), 169.

20 MacArthur,The Charismatics, 169.

21 MacArthur,The Charismatics, 169.

22 MacArthur,The Charismatics, 170.

23 Robert Glenn Gromacki, The Modern Tongues Movement (Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed Pub.
Co, 1967), 522.

24 MacArthur,The Charismatics, 170.

25 Ralph W. Hood, Jr., and W. Paul Williamson, Them That Believe: the Power and Meaning of the
Christian Serpent Handling Tradition (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2008), 1819.

26 MacArthur, 20.

27 Vinson Synan, “The Origins of the Pentecostal Movement,” http://www.oru.edu, April 17, 2006,
accessed May 3, 2015,http://www.oru.edu/library/special_collections/holy_spirit_research_center/pentecostal_history.php.

28 Jack W. Hayford and S. David Moore, The Charismatic Century: the Enduring Impact of the Azusa
Street Revival(New York: FaithWords, 2006), 42.

29 MacArthur, 146.

30 The Syriac New Testament renders the verse in that way, and God’s Word Translation puts it this way,
“You [only] want the better gifts, but I will show you the best thing to do.”

31 1 Corinthians 12:7-11, 18, 28, 14-27; 14:26

32 1 Corinthians 13:10.

33 MacArthur, 148.

Movie Review: Fury

evangelismguys Entertainment

fury-header

by Ray DeLancey

Review for ‘Fury’

Directed by David Ayer

Starring Brad Pitt, Logan Lerman, and Shia LaBeouf

Run time: 134 minutes

Rated R for strong sequences of war violence, some grisly images, and language throughout.

Fury is a film about a small crew of soldiers who operate a tank named Fury during the last month of World War II as the Allies push into Germany. The crew is led by hardened Sgt. Don “Wardaddy” Collier. The Allies may be winning, but there is an overwhelming sense of weariness among the soldiers as they advance through Europe. New, inexperienced soldier Norman Ellison joins Collier’s crew as a gunner/assistant driver. Norman’s naivety and innocence is almost blinding against the background of his war-hardened crew mates. After Norman makes the mistake of not firing at a group of Hitler Youth for sneak attacking another tank, Collier forces Norman to shoot a captive SS officer in hopes of breaking him of his innocence. The rest of the movie shows grisly details of the seemingly never-ending war, and the effects on the soldiers.

When it comes to war movies, Fury is bound to go down in cinema history as one of the best of them. Its accurate and blunt portrayal of life in the war is stunning and at times unsettling. Believe me when I say this film holds nothing back. I’ve sometimes wondered (and I’m sure I’m not the only one) how much fighting in a war would change me by the end. We get a chance to see that in the character of Norman. Norman joins Collier’s teams after only having been in the army for eight weeks…as an office clerk. Almost immediately he is made to face the horrors of war violence, and he’s not sure he can deal with it. He gets sick a few times, and refuses to kill an unarmed German hostage. That’s when Collier puts the gun in Norman’s hand and forces him to pull the trigger. From there, we slowly see Norman become just as embittered as his fellow crewmen to the point where he almost enjoys slaughtering Nazis. Logan Lerman’s performance as Norman is terrific, and is, in my opinion, the best performance in the film.

Surprisingly, I also enjoyed Shia LaBeouf’s performance. This film is proof that his not just a screaming wuss like he plays in the Transformers movies. LaBeouf plays Boyd Swan, known by his fellow crewmen as “Bible” for his Christian beliefs. He tries to be the moral center of the group, but is often teased or overlooked by them. From a Biblical perspective, he seems to be a poor Christian. He takes many Bible verses out of context, argues that Hitler is saved because he claimed to have been baptized, and often gives in to lewd and crude conversation with the other soldiers. He does portray a brave and admirable soldier, though.

Make no mistake, Fury tells a dark tale showing many of the horrors of war many don’t see. There are glimpses of some brutal deaths, a shot of a tank rolling over a dead body in the mud, innocent women being bombed just for being in the wrong place at the wrong time, a woman in a wedding dress marching through the mud with a group of refugees…I could go on. You will likely leave this film feeling depressed. Other than the violence and other disturbing images, the only other real deterrent is that there is a LOT of offensive language all throughout the film. At the end of it all, I give this film a 7.5/10.

Movie Review: The Judge

evangelismguys Entertainment

The-Judge-Robert-Downey-Jr.-and-Robert-Duvall-Wallpaper

by Ray DeLancey

Review for “The Judge”
Directed by David Dobkin
Starring Robert Downey, Jr., Robert Duvall, Vera Farmiga, and Vincent D’Onofrio
Run time: 142 minutes
Rated R for language including some sexual references.

Hank Palmer (Downey, Jr.) is a hot shot lawyer in Chicago. While in the middle of a trial, he gets a phone call telling him that his mother has passed away. Reluctantly, Hank travels to his boyhood home in Indiana to a family he hasn’t seen in 20 years. Hank’s father is the very strict Judge Jospeh Palmer (Duvall) who, though he puts up a tough front, is having a tough time with the loss of his wife. Not only that, but it seems like he’s having memory problems as well. After the funeral, Hank can’t wait to get out of his home town away from the family he can’t get along with, but the local sheriff comes calling to tell him that there’s been a hit and run…and Judge Palmer is the main suspect. Judge Palmer can’t remember all the events of the night in question. After failing to find suitable legal representation, Hank decides to defend his father in court.

I was pretty excited to see this movie from the first time I saw the trailer. It looked like a good story, and it had great actors. A lot of reviews I read have said this movie is just a pile of old cliches. While some elements of the story have certainly been seen before (such as the father and son who hate each other, or the guy who finds out his old girlfriend never told him they had a child), I thought this movie was very fresh. One thing this movie really had going for it was that you get to know these characters pretty well, which many films today seem to gloss over. Technically speaking, this is a well-made film. Great editing and camera-work. There were certain camera angles that were used at various points in the film that seemed to say a lot more than the dialogue. I’m a big fan of courtroom dramas, and the trial in the movie was very interesting to watch (though I won’t talk details as I don’t want to give anything away). This movie had everything it needed to be a great piece of cinematic-history, but in my eyes it failed.

Most of what I’m about to say is from a Christian perspective, so I can’t expect you to agree 100% with me if you do not share my worldview. Firstly, the extreme amount of cussing in this movie really takes away from it. It’s on the same level of annoying as having a loud fly buzzing around your head for the duration of the film. Second, just about every character in the movie had incredibly loose morals that made it hard for me to give their respective situations sympathy. Even the Judge, who has a strong love for justice and truth, cusses worse than a sailor and is immoral in other ways. As you can imagine, Hank and his father start to reconcile their differences, but ultimately there’s no redemption for any of the characters. Hank, who is a work-obsessed egomaniac about to get a divorce, doesn’t change by the end of the movie (except in regards to his relationship with his dad). One thing that really disappointed me was a scene where Hank and his father are having a serious discussion about the illness. When asked if he believes in God, Hank’s father gives a response that…well, let’s just say it’s saddening and unsettling for a Christian.

To be honest, I left this movie sad. Not because of the sad content, but because it was a hopelessly worldly film that didn’t offer much positive resolution. As I said above, this had everything it needed to be a superb movie, but really fell short. I give this movie a 4/10.

Movie Review: Left Behind (2014)

evangelismguys Uncategorized

left-behind-movie-starring-nicolas-cage

by Ray DeLancey

I’ve been curious about this movie ever since the announcement was made that a mainstream adaptation was in the works. I thoroughly enjoy the books. The first attempt at making Left Behind into a film roughly 15 years ago was a good effort, but left something to be desired. Certainly, no one felt that a more mainstream approach would be any better. Hollywood is notorious for taking Christian beliefs and turning them inside out (I’m looking at YOU, Noah). Still, for whatever reason, there was a tiny glimmer of hope inside of me that thought there might be a chance this would be something good. That hope was dashed.

Here’s the plot of the movie. If you have read the book(s) you will notice some pretty significant differences. The movie starts out at JFK airport in New York. College student Chloe Steele has just arrived in the hopes of surprising her dad Ray for his birthday. However, a phone call from her mom, Irene, reveals that Ray has been called in to work. Irene is a recent convert to Christianity, and it seems that this has put a strain on the family. Chloe and Ray seem to be of the opinion that Irene has become a religious nut. Chloe suspects that Ray’s being called into work has something to do with his distaste for his wife’s faith. Ray, who is an airline pilot, bumps into Chloe at the airport. Chloe has seen him being extremely flirty with an attractive flight attendant, and notices he has taken off his wedding ring. Upset she heads home to see her mom and brother. Ray is piloting a flight to London, and on the flight is famous investigative journalist Cameron Williams. While Chloe and her little brother Raymie are at the mall, the Rapture occurs and takes all the Christians to heaven. Raymie disappears while in Chloe’s arms. She begins searching for him, but widespread pandemonium has broken out. The same is occurring on Ray’s plane. People disappear and panic ensues.

WARNING: The next part of this review may contain some heavy spoilers.

This movie was trash. I’m convinced that no serious Christian could have been involved in the making of this movie, furthermore, no one who really appreciates the books could have been involved in making this movie. I am usually not this upset with a movie. I usually try to find some silver lining, but there is none to be found here. What are the problems, you ask?

1) Most importantly, there is NO presentation of the gospel! This is supposed to be a movie about CHRISTIAN end times events. This is not about some secular theory of the end of the world, this is supposed to be based on the book of Revelation which was inspired directly by the Holy Spirit. There have been so many people endorsing this film leading up to the release date. Author Jerry Jenkins (who did a phenomenal job with the books, and also included a clear gospel presentation in each one), has been saying how excited he was for this movie because it presents his book the way he supposedly envisioned it. Willie Robertson of Duck Dynasty fame has said that this was an important film because it will force viewers to contemplate the importance of trusting God and His Word. As my friend Joe was so kind to point out to me after the movie, Jesus Christ was only mentioned ONE TIME in the entire movie, and it was in a derogatory nature! There’s a scene near the end where Chloe apparently starts to believe that these things may actually be from God, so she starts to pray…to her raptured mother! There’s a scene where Ray starts to realize on the plane that the disappearances are a result of the Rapture that his wife apparently told him about. He calls his flight attendant into the cockpit to tell her. Just as he’s about to explain what the Bible says about the end times it cuts to another scene! When it cuts back, Ray has finished telling the account to his flight attendant. WHY?!

2) The differences between the book and movie were pretty stinkin’ huge. I’m realistic. I know that that NO movie can be made identically to the book, but so many liberties were taken with this movie that I feel like it’s a violation. The filmmakers had the complete wrong direction for this movie. This is not an action film! The danger that the airplane experiences in the movie is completely ridiculous! Ray and Cameron’s story line takes place on the plane during the whole movie! In the book, the action on the plane only takes up about the first two chapters! In the book, the plane itself was in no danger. It lands safely. In the movie, an in-air collision was added, Ray’s plane catches on fire at one point, and they have to make a crash landing on an abandoned street.

3) There wasn’t much character development at all in the movie, and the “spiritual” changes in the characters are VERY superficial. All Christian characters in the movie, both before and after the Rapture, are portrayed as being stupid, wackos. Bruce Barnes, Irene’s pastor, is supposed to be an integral part of the story, but in this movie he is seen for a total of maybe five minutes, and he is made out to be a jerk-face hypocrite. At the end of the movie, we’re supposed to believe that Ray, Chloe, and Cameron have become believers, but there is absolutely nothing that happens during the movie that portrays them as having submitted themselves to the lordship of Christ. To anyone reading this who may not be a Christian, it is not just a knowledge of the Bible that saves you, it’s your complete submission to Christ. You must acknowledge your sinful state, and cry out to Jesus as the only One who can save you.

The writing in general seemed to suffer in this movie. It had potential, but blew its chance. This movie crash lands just like the airplane it’s about. I give it a measly 1 out of 10.

A Brief Lesson on Lying

evangelismguys Spiritual Growth

It’s almost crazy when you think about it, but lying has become a cultural norm to us these days. It’s like sin has programmed us to say whatever is necessary so that things will go our way. For some of us, it becomes so much a part of our lives that we don’t realize we do it. Some of us may be so in love with ourselves that we will blatantly lie so that we can get what we want and/or keep ourselves from getting into trouble (or getting caught for trouble we have already caused). Let’s face it, inherently we are lying, thieving, blasphemous, greedy jerkwads. To give you an example, check out this clip from Star Trek: The Next Generation (even if you don’t care for Star Trek):

“You told the truth up to a point, but a lie of omission is still a lie.”

Ever done one of those and convinced yourself it wasn’t a lie? Who hasn’t? We need to stop our incessant habit of lying. Not only is it one of the Ten Commandments, but it really hinders our walk with Christ. In the video, Captain Picard saw Wesley as having great potential…until the big lie. Picard’s view of Wesley changed. Wesley was now seen as untrustworthy, and selfish trying to save his own reputation. But lying can get us into bigger trouble.

Acts 5:1-11:
But a certain man named Ananias, with Sapphira his wife, sold a possession. And he kept back part of the proceeds, his wife also being aware of it, and brought a certain part and laid it at the apostles’ feet. But Peter said, “Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit and keep back part of the price of the land for yourself? While it remained, was it not your own? And after it was sold, was it not in your own control? Why have you conceived this thing in your heart? You have not lied to men but to God.” Then Ananias, hearing these words, fell down and breathed his last. So great fear came upon all those who heard these things. And the young men arose and wrapped him up, carried him out, and buried him. Now it was about three hours later when his wife came in, not knowing what had happened. And Peter answered her, “Tell me whether you sold the land for so much?” She said, “Yes, for so much.” Then Peter said to her, “How is it that you have agreed together to test the Spirit of the Lord? Look, the feet of those who have buried your husband are at the door, and they will carry you out.” Then immediately she fell down at his feet and breathed her last. And the young men came in and found her dead, and carrying her out, buried her by her husband. So great fear came upon all the church and upon all who heard these things.

Sin, including lying on any level, is not to be tolerated within the church (and by “the church” I mean the body of Christ, not a building). We must be striving to be like Christ. We must set ourselves aside in order to be more like Him. John 3:30 says, “He must increase, but I must decrease.”

If you think you might have a problem telling lies, pray that God would help you to stop. Read His Word every day, and make a conscious effort to be completely truthful.