As the progressive left tunes her trumpets to continue an ever-louder song and seemingly unstoppable march towards complete gender autonomy, her tone-deaf drum major receives an onslaught of vigorous and distracting cries from the Christian right. This scene reached a near fever pitch upon one specific revelation: "the exclusively gay moment in a Disney movie [Beauty and the Beast]."
But, over all the noise the American Christian has lost focus. This can be seen in the near void of Christian criticism on another movie released a day after the boycott- The Shack. We have allowed the threats to our secular freedoms to distract us from our mission to clearly declare and defend the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
When Disney, the American cultural icon, joined the progressive chorus; the Christian right quickly mobilized- led by Franklin Graham. He correctly identified the problem on his Facebook page stating, "They’re trying to push the LGBT agenda into the hearts and minds of your children—watch out!" And, then he called for a response: "Disney has the right to make their cartoons, it’s a free country. But as Christians we also have the right not to support their company. I hope Christians everywhere will say no to Disney." Christians did “say no” with many refusing to attend and select theaters refusing to screen the movie: Situation addressed, Problem solved, Innocence safeguarded. And, in many ways, Franklin Graham’s assessment was spot on and his criticism biblical.
A Double Standard
That was March 2nd. On March 3rd movie theaters across the nation opened to The Shack and Christians filled the seats. Some professed Christians participated in the filming, most notably Tim McGraw. Yet, The Shack embraces and propagates heretical teachings about the Christian God: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Franklin Graham’s Facebook page remained quiet on the matter. Instead, he commended Donald Trump’s speech on March 3rd.
Certainly, some evangelical leaders responded, most helpfully Albert Mohler and Tim Challies, but American Christendom yawned: unaffected by this dangerous and deceptive heresy streaming across the nation into theaters- and soon living rooms- and misleading millions of Christians.
Perhaps, heresy seems too “scholarly” a charge. Some may say: “Well, I simply do not have the time to discern a heresy.” But, we do have the time. Time often spent doing other things. We play the daily news on an endless loop, learning the nuances of every political issue; yet, we rarely investigate our Bibles with such intensity. We have become a nation of Christians more educated with the political process, than the person of Christ.
A Blatant Heresy
The message of The Shack and our open arm embrace of the movie only reveals the depth of our blindness. In Albert Mohler’s thorough article titled The Shack – The Missing Art of Evangelical Discernment, he writes,
The theology of The Shack is not incidental to the story. Indeed, at most points the narrative seems mainly to serve as a structure for the dialogues. And the dialogues reveal a theology that is unconventional at best, and undoubtedly heretical in certain respects.
Mohler shows the theology of The Shack is not a side issue, but a driving force in the storyline. Everything- the theme, narrative, and dialogue- aids in developing the underlying theology of the movie. Next, Mohler comments on the theology, writing,
While the literary device of an unconventional “trinity” of divine persons is itself sub-biblical and dangerous, the theological explanations are worse.
The theology is bad at best: the description of the Trinity is less than biblical and the deeper theological descriptions heretical. Mohler continues,
The relationship of the Father to the Son, revealed in a text like John 17, is rejected in favor of an absolute equality of authority among the persons of the Trinity. “Papa” explains that “we have no concept of final authority among us, only unity.” In one of the most bizarre paragraphs of the book, Jesus tells Mack: “Papa is as much submitted to me as I am to him, or Sarayu to me, or Papa to her. Submission is not about authority and it is not obedience; it is all about relationships of love and respect. In fact, we are submitted to you in the same way [emphasis added].”
The Shack not only rejects the relationship of the Trinity as presented in John 17, but also extends this submission between the persons of the Trinity to human beings. In short, God submits to men. Mohler rightly calls this a “theological innovation of the most extreme and dangerous sort” and further categorizes this submission of the Trinity to humanity as “inescapably idolatrous”. Yet, the most controversial feature of The Shack’s message remains.
At the heart of the Shack pumps the lifeblood of universalism- a complete rejection of the exclusivity of Jesus Christ for salvation as presented in John 14:6. According to Mohler,
The most controversial aspects of The Shack‘s message have revolved around questions of universalism, universal redemption, and ultimate reconciliation. Jesus tells Mack: “Those who love me come from every system that exists. They were Buddhists or Mormons, Baptists or Muslims, Democrats, Republicans and many who don’t vote or are not part of any Sunday morning or religious institutions.” Jesus adds, “I have no desire to make them Christian, but I do want to join them in their transformation into sons and daughters of my Papa, into my brothers and sisters, my Beloved [emphasis added].”
This scene puts words in the mouth of Christ and undermines His Lordship. Every system does not lead to Jesus and eternal life- there is only one path: complete faith and submission to Jesus Christ. Furthermore, Jesus does not join in the transformation as a participant rather He is the transformation. His desire and purpose in life- contrary to the Jesus of The Shack, yet congruent with the Bible- remains to make people Christians by His word and Spirit. How else could one interpret the Great Commission in Matthew [28:16]-20?
A Spineless Church
Franklin Graham’s two different responses perfectly illustrate the depth of the evangelical crisis gripping America and reflect the current maturity of the church. We care more about the Christian lifestyle, than we do Christian theology; we care more about looking like Christ, then knowing Him. This is the genesis of hypocrisy and forecasts a certain downfall for the modern American evangelical church. When we fight tooth-and-nail for legislation supporting Christian beliefs or call for systematic boycotts of organizations disagreeing with our cause, but allow rampant heresy to run wild, we will reap an ignorant church and a hostile world. Even, if we win the battle, what will we return home to?
We end up as pretty faced Christians with rotten teeth: all form and no substance. Both remain critical, and Franklin was right in condemning the sin of homosexuality, but Biblical theology must inform the Christian life. We have no other option. If we battle against the sin of the secular world, without defending the person of Christ within the church, we will find our backbone missing upon our inevitable retreat and a sad loss of the day.
References:
- Interview of Beauty and Beast Director:http://attitude.co.uk/world-
exclusive-beauty-and-the- beast-set-to-make-disney- history-with-gay-character/ - USA Today Reports on First Gay Disney Character: https://www.usatoday.com/
story/life/movies/2017/03/01/ beauty-and-beast-introduce- world-first-gay-disney- character/98593276 - Franklin Graham Calls for Boycott: http://time.com/4691035/frankl
in-graham-beauty-and-the- beast-gay-character/
- I am glad to hear from readers. Write: brendan.flannagan@gmail.com
- Follow regular updates on Twitter at twitter.com/brendnflannagan
- Please subscribe for email updates.