My wife and I rented Knowing, a newly released (on DVD) movie with Nicolas Cage in it. I have to admit I love end-of-the-world, science fiction movies. Some of my favorites are Deep Impact, Independence Day and Core.
There is a scene in Knowing, where the professor character that Cage plays, explains two competing views of the universe: determinism and randomness. Determinism says everything happens for a reason, and is bolstered by the understanding of how small the probabilities are that life on Earth could just accidentally happen. The opposite view claims that in fact everything is an accident, a freak of randomness and chance. Life has no meaning.
By the end of the movie, we are left to side with determinism, but in a very meaningless way. <spoiler alert> The world will end and we glimpse the awe-inspiring (at least for the main character in the movie) truth about our existence — aliens protected us, and evidently seeded our planet. </spoiler alert>
What amazes me is how rational and realistic all of this seems from a secular, scientific viewpoint. Real scientists propose mainstream, class-room theories about all of life possibly having evolved on a different planet. Aliens brought the beginnings of life to our planet. In the movie Expelled, with Ben Stein, Richard Dawkins posits that in the face of evidence for intelligent design, a plausible theory is just this: life came here from another world.
Anyone intrigued by UFOs have seen how Biblical accounts such as Ezekiel’s vision of the presence of God among the wheels, are turned into ancient evidence for the existence of UFOs. While to a certain extent, science laughs off UFO claims; nevertheless, the search for extraterrestrial life continues in the most respected institutions.
All of this seems absurd. Aliens who bring life to earth in a spaceship; UFOs behind Biblical visions and indeed all the religions on earth (think Stargate); even the Big Bang itself — all of this is flat out crazy. If you take a step back, these theories are preposterous and absurd — beyond belief. But major motion pictures and scientific documentaries are endlessly preaching this dogma.
Now we come to my ironic point. In a world where science lets us dream of intelligent life all throughout the universe, why is the scholarly consensus so dead set against any notion of the Christian faith? Why is it that Christians are laughed to scorn for believing in a God who created life, and will one day bring all people to a moral accounting? Why is that unbelievable and absurd, whereas aliens, UFOs, paranormal experiences and the like aren’t?
Could it be that we deify man and his pursuits in understanding the universe (science)? At the end of the day, atheists refuse to believe Christianity’s worldview, because they cannot tolerate it. They don’t want to believe.
Could it be due to a combination of 1) all the bad science used in the name of defending a six 24 hour day creation model? and 2) unwillingness to face God and repent?
‘the facts of nature will never contradict the words of the Bible when both are properly interpreted.’ – reasons.org
Leon, you have a good point. I agree there is bad science in the mix with all of this. Still there is a hesitancy to admit God period, let alone repent. And this really is a denial of science’s goal of allowing the evidence to speak no matter what. Not that there is tons of evidence scientifically for God, I think there is evidence for design, but… The conclusion: “God exists” is left out of the realm of viable possibilities.
At the end of the day, no one can perfectly prove their faith. It can’t be quantified in this way. We can be given evidences but ultimately we have to accept or reject God’s revelation.
The word absurdity is certainly fitting. It is a huge double standard on the part of the unbeliever, and I think, if anything, it reveals the hatred they have in their hearts for God. Romans 3 is becoming more and more evident.
Hey Bob. I think maybe you’d treating the movie a bit harshly. Yes, the scene were Cage’s character “explains” determinism and randomness had me ranting to my friends about incompetent Hollywood writers (especially when such an amazing bungle job is presented as being a heavy and intelligent discussion). But the movie itself is plainly a Christian allegory. The original screenplay was written by a Roman Catholic, and there was at least one Christian writer involved in the production of the movie. That’s probably why it has received such poor reviews—most secular reviewers just don’t understand it, or its literary allusions.
It seems to me that the whole movie is very heavily based on Ezekiel. There are angels (aliens) watching over the elect (the chosen); some of the elect have the gift of prophecy; there are chariots with wheels within wheels (the space-ships); there is the earth being dissolved in fire; there is a the new earth with the tree of life (the alien planet).
You might find http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2009/07/knowing.html interesting for a fuller review, but my point, briefly stated, is that I think you’re looking at this the wrong way around. This isn’t a secular movie which tries to explain away biblical events with a “scientific” gloss. It’s a Christian (or ostensibly Christian) movie which sets biblical events in a modern context. A secular writer would say, “Angels are actually just aliens.” But this movie appears, quite obviously, to be saying, “Aliens are actually angels.”
Regards,
Bnonn
Bnonn,
You make some good points, as does the triablogue post. To me the boy and girl at the end seemed a new Adam and Eve. I didn’t miss the Ezekiel comparison with the wheels, nor the Tree of Life scene. I still think my basic point stands, and this film reminded me of that point. It could be an attempt to think Christianly, but it also could be a borrowing of Christian thought for use in the Sci Fi realm.
It seems rather bleak, and if it is a Christian picture there doesn’t seem to be much hope in the film. You are correct though that the film is not overtly trying to promote the mentality I am labeling absurd here. The main character (Cage) does have a conversion experience too.
Thanks for weighing in.
Blessings in Christ,
Bob
Hey Bob. Yeah, I’d agree that the film is a bit bleak. On the other hand, as a film pitched to a secular audience, doesn’t that seem appropriate? The gospel is more than bleak for those who refuse to believe.
On the other hand, the film has some very unfortunate concessions to secular audiences—such as the barfable “It’s okay, we’ll meet again” lines. I found it interesting that Cage’s character had a conversion experience, since it was hard to know how to interpret this. On the one hand, it felt like he should have been taken with the children (God will never turn away those who come to him in faith). But on the other hand, it’s very conceivable that many people on the day of judgment will act like that, when they see that all this Christian nonsense is real. But it will be too late—their confessions will not be of faith, but of sight.
In any case, whether the film is a secular film borrowing Christian metaphors, or a Christian film borrowing secular metaphors, probably isn’t that important. In fact, it’s very likely (I say, based on my own experience in writing “Christian” literature) that the producers of the film wanted it to be possible to interpret it either way. And I’d also say that you shouldn’t hold ostensibly Christian films to very rigid standards in terms of their use of metaphor and analogy. If you flip through my novella, The Ash and the Air, you might be hard pressed to find an obvious Christian metaphor in it. But the whole thing is based on Genesis 3. The metaphors are there if you’re willing to dig deep enough. Christian art doesn’t have to be obvious to be good Christian art (:
Regards,
Bnonn
Thanks for the interplay here Bnonn. I have to admit as a Christian, I came away from the film thinking of Ezekiel 1 quite clearly. You make some good points. We can hope for more Christian artistic attempts to arrest our secular culture with the truth.
Blessings,
Bob
Sounds like the spoiler was lifted directly from L. Ron Hubbard. Wonder if Scientology will sue? ROTFL!