Steve Carell proved not nearly as all-powerful as Jim Carrey. “Evan Almighty,” with Carell taking over for Carrey in a follow-up to the comedy smash “Bruce Almighty,” debuted a solid No. 1 with $32.1 million, though that was less than half the $68 million opening of its predecessor, according to studio estimates Sunday.
Due in theaters on June 22, Evan Almighty is the latest in semi-religious hubbub. All the usual questions are flying: “Isn’t that blasphemous?” “Don’t religious movies have to be serious?” followed closely by all the usual hasty conclusions: “Let’s pretend it isn’t happening,” or “Let’s make tracts to hand out!” or “I’m going down to protest outside the theater.”
All that aside, there is one unique aspect of Evan Almighty that is worth considering:ArkAlmighty. It’s a program coupled with the movie that centers on fulfilling needs. When a church registers, it receives a media kit and a dedicated page on the ArkAlmighty website (e.g., Greenville Community Church). The church can then hand out the provided flyers, which direct their readers to the church’s page. Online, ArkAlmighty has a sort of garage-sale for needs. If a person has a need, he can go to the page and post it. The church then does what it can to meet that need.
The idea is that the publicity already generated by Evan can help churches be more available. The program is designed to be an outreach tool, to bridge gaps between churches and their communities. On the surface, it sounds good. Maybe it’s even good underneath.
Here are a few pros and cons to consider:
Pros (not exhaustive)
Millions will be exposed to a religious message
Needs are being met
Ties to secular communities are being made
Religious movies don’t have to be serious
Excellent selection of teaching points
Cons (not exhaustive)
Possible cheapening of the holy
Possible misrepresentation of biblical ideas/concepts
Does the church need a movie to accomplish God’s purposes?
Association—would Steve Carell ever speak from your pulpit?
Excellent selection of teaching points
Your decision should be made in prayer: whether to see the movie, whether to associate with ArkAlmighty, whether to jump onto the bandwagon or watch it roll by.
In addition, read all you can and be as informed as possible. It should be your goal to provide helpful, insightful advice and answers to your flock.
Mission Network News reports that in just ten days 14,000 from the Idoma people group in Nigeria turned to Christ in response to the JESUS film.
A large people group in Nigeria now has a Christian leader. Brett, from JESUS Film Project, traveled to Nigeria in April where they showed the Idoma people group the JESUS Film. There are approximately 1-million Idoma people.
. . .
And after I shared Christ with him, the chief asked for me to write down the prayer, how to pray to receive Christ. The pastors we were working with were very ecstatic. They had told me that meant that he wanted to go pray to receive Christ, kind of in private,” said Brett. They later got word that he has accepted Christ.
. . .
Besides the chief, 14,000 people accepted Christ in just ten days.
The book traces the development of a baby girl through the sequence of trimesters. Her physical development is breathtaking in its beauty. But the biggest surprise for most readers may well be the revelations about fetal behavior. Babies are learning to sleep, taste, smile, cry, and suck their thumbs—all while in the womb.
. . .
The development of these sophisticated imaging technologies is reshaping the abortion debate. Once these images are seen, they can never be forgotten. For the first time in human history, this generation has been given the gift of seeing inside the womb. Once these images are seen there is no way to deny what we see—the miracle of life.
. . .
In the Womb, the book, is based upon In the Womb, the television documentary. The documentary is also breathtaking, and it offers the additional benefit of seeing these unprecedented images in motion. The book and the DVD together represent a scientific education of sorts. Parents will want to watch the DVD and read the book with their older children.
I would strongly suggest that parents read the book and watch the DVD, and then share these with their children, allowing for generous discussion and parental instruction. These images and photographs hold the promise of helping children and youth to understand the miracle of life in a whole new way. That is exactly what the pro-abortion movement should fear.
I don’t agree with everything Frame says, but he tackles some important questions that are especially relevant for today. Anyone wrestling through issues relating to cultural awareness and relevance would profit from Frame’s work.
Lillian Kwon at The Christian Post discusses the trend of churches using movies in their services.
The growing phenomenon of “theater churches” and movie-like screens at the pulpits has more churches talking relevance in the 21st century.
The latest survey by the Leadership Network, which fosters church innovation, revealed at least 250 churches are meeting in theaters in at least 36 states. These theater churches are one of the latest popularized trends integrating culture and the gospel message to bring in the unchurched.
. . .
The majority of Americans are already talking about the content of movies or television programs—the most popular topic of conversation, Barna reported in 2003. And WingClips notes that most people can recount scenes from favorite films but only a few can recall the central theme of last week’s sermon.
“Let’s face it, movies are our modern-day parables.”
Andreas Köstenberger does a good job picking it apart and showing the unaddressed problems and gaps in logic.
James White shares some thoughts and tells how he plans to write a book in response.
As most of you know, today I launch into a high-speed book writing project to attempt to collect, collate, and present in a clear and understandable fashion the main arguments and facts regarding the Talpiot Tomb, DNA, patina, statistics, gnostic writings and the like. But at best, that book will not be out until Easter. So how about today? Rather than hope no one will ask you what you think, I believe we should be on the offensive—without being offensive. As I suggested with The Passion and with The Da Vinci Code, let’s use this situation to God’s glory and for the proclamation of the truth.
Ben Witherington has quoted some correspondence he had recently with leading archaeologist Joe Zias, who was part of the original discovery of the Talpiot tomb back in 1980. His testimony makes it “crystal clear that the tenth ossuary was blank [and] certainly was not the James ossuary at all despite the assertions of those involved in making the Discovery Channel special.” Another piece of the The Lost Tomb of Jesus and The Jesus Family Tombtheory crumbles.
My friend Ben Witherington is at the head of the pack in confidently telling his readers at his Blog and elsewhere of the errors being made by those of us who have worked on this project now for over two years. The problem is he does not have the most basic facts straight. Below I list his ten reasons the case for the Talpiot tomb being that of Jesus of Nazareth are “bogus” that are making their way all over the Internet today. Almost all of them are incorrect. I offer here just a few brief comments but urge those interested in this topic to read the book just published which addresses almost all of these. It seems to me that it is a waste of time to be discussing things back and forth when the very content of the evidence is not clear to those who are making these assertions.
. . .
My own view is that with or without the James ossuary included, the cluster of names is quite striking and significant, but with the James ossuary included there can be little doubt that in March of 1980 a bulldozer accidently uncovered the Jesus Family tomb.
What bothers me most about the approach of Witherington, Bock, and others is their beginning assumption that this can not be the tomb of Jesus of Nazareth. In other words, their approach is not an open quest for evidence but an apologetic effort to save the faith. The conclusions one draws then are determined without even looking at the evidence. The only task is to refute and charge others with “bogus” ideas, not to examine and consider what we can know. I think there is a better way.
My Way News reports:
.
Mission Network News 
Liberal theologian 
