Category Archives: God

Religion should look like and act like religion — or why bother?

There’s nothing like trying to find a good synagogue to teach you that, when religion seeks meaning in pop culture not God, it no longer serves mankind.

Would any of you argue with me if I opened this post by saying that traditional religion is under attack in the West? No, I didn’t think so. Some religions, though, or at least some branches of the Judeo-Christian faiths, didn’t wait to be attacked. They just surrendered. They thought that, by surrendering, they’d stay alive, but they merely hastened their deaths. I have a few examples, and then I’ll see if I can use those examples to help prove my point.

On April 19, 2019, just as the sun is setting, Jews around the world will begin to celebrate Passover. According to tradition, Jews have been celebrating the Exodus story, and their escape from slavery, for more than 3,300 years. Even if one doubts tradition, it’s certain that they have been celebrating it for over 2,500 years.

As with all serious rituals, Passover follows a strict form. For thousands of years, in Israel itself, in Europe, in the Americas, in Asia, in Africa, and in the Middle East, in Australia and New Zealand, in whichever part of the world Jews have settled, they have taken seriously the admonition that they must commemorate the Exodus story. It’s a story that began when Moses, on behalf of an enslaved people, faced down the most powerful monarch in the world, a feat he accomplished because God was at his side and had his back. In different countries, there will be differences in food, language, clothes, furnishings, and music, but the core ceremony is always the same. Whether I go to a traditional seder in England or Argentina or Israel, I will feel at home.

Regular readings know that I grew up in a non-religious, yet highly Jewish, household. My father grew up in an orthodox German orphanage and then, having escaped the Nazis, spent the next two decades in British Mandate Palestine/Israel. My mother grew up the child of a mixed marriage, but from the age of 13, interrupted only by her years in a Japanese concentration camp, lived in British Mandate Palestine/Israel. For both, Jewish education and observance went without saying.

When my parents moved to America, though, they still thought that “being Jewish” went without saying. They were wrong. In America, if you want your kids to know Judaism, you must belong to a synagogue. It never occurred to them, though, to join one and, given my Dad’s long-standing communist tendencies, he would have resisted if my Mom had suggested they join. Moreover, given that my Mom’s favorite holiday was Christmas (remember that mixed marriage, right?), a wholly Jewish lifestyle wasn’t going to happen.

Nevertheless, in an interesting way, my childhood still managed to be wholly Jewish. Despite my Mom’s mixed DNA, she identified 100% as Jewish, as did my Dad. Having both been in the Israeli military during the Israeli War of Independence, they identified 100% as supporters of the world’s only Jewish state. With only one or two exceptions, all their friends were Jewish. My parents were steeped in Jewish history, values, and culture, which inevitably found its way into my psyche. Even in silly ways, we knew we were Jews. As kids, my sister and I could identify every old-time Hollywood star who was secretly Jewish (Leslie Howard, Lauren Bacall, June Allyson, John Gilbert, Edward G. Robinson, Theda Bara…. I can still list most of them).

Most importantly, although we did not observe the High Holidays (that would have involved paying to belong to a synagogue, plus Mom would never fast because, as she said, “I have low blood sugar”), we did celebrate Passover. Oy, did we celebrate it!

Given that my parents were bilingual in Hebrew and English (they were, in fact, multilingual, but that’s another story), we did the whole service in both Hebrew and English. Also, we sang all the songs twice. Why twice? Because my parents grew up knowing different versions. They always fought over which was the “correct” version, so we always did both versions.

In my memory, the Passover dinner lasted eight or ten hours, but I think, more accurately, from the moment we sat down until we kids went hunting for the afikoman, the meal ran about three hours. Still, though it was long, I loved certain parts of it. I loved the four questions, I loved placing drops of hyper-sweet, purple-red Magen David wine on the plate to commemorate the ten plagues, I loved singing the songs (both versions), and I loved, really loved, the haroset, which is a wonderful blend of chopped apples and walnuts, flavored with honey, cinnamon, and a dash of lemon (or sweet wine). The haroset more than made up for having to take (tiny) bites of maror, the bitter herb to remind us of the pain of slavery. (Our maror was horseradish from the local grocery.)

Every year, Passover was a ritual observance. Every year, we children were reminded of the Passover story and the glories of individual liberty. Year after year, Passover carved out a very specific place in my memory, the only place in my childhood deliberately reserved for God.

My seders stopped when I ceased to be a child in my parents’ house. I had almost no Jewish friends and it never occurred to me to take the lead in my own Jewishness. Eventually, I married a man who had been raised in a house even less religious than mine and he viewed Passover as anathema because he believes it celebrates of mass murder. (His views, along with the views of other Jews hostile to Passover, became the genesis for my annual Passover post.) I decided that it was better to raise my children Passover-free rather than have an annual fight over whether Passover is a good thing or a bad one.

However, in the interval between leaving my parents’ home and having my own, I attended two memorable Passover dinners, courtesy of Jewish friends. Both seders departed from tradition in significant ways, and both made me wonder why, if you take traditional values out of religion, including God, you should even bother with the pretense of being religious.

The first memorable seder occurred when a college friend invited me to share her Passover. Because the family attended a southern conservative synagogue, I was worried that their seder would be even longer and more religious than the ones from my childhood. I need not have worried.

Although my friend’s family could not have been more welcoming (I still consider my friend and her family among the best and nicest people I’ve ever had the pleasure of knowing), their approach to Passover dismayed me. They rushed through every prayer, skipped the songs, and wouldn’t stop talking about everything but Passover through the entire, very abbreviated ceremony. That was when I — the most non-religious person in the world and, at that time, an avowed atheist — concluded that, if you’re going to do religion, do it right. Otherwise, why bother? This ceremony was just a long dinner. It had no greater meaning.

Around five years later, I was working in San Francisco, so at least 1/5 of my friends and colleagues were gay. One of those gay colleagues very kindly invited me to his Passover celebration. I was the only straight person there. To be clear, the host and his other guests made me feel incredibly welcome and the food was traditional and delicious (more traditional, in fact, than my mother’s would have been). Moreover, unlike the seder with my southern friends, this seder followed closely the framework of a traditional Passover service.

What made the whole thing peculiar, though, and left me feeling very distant both from my childhood Passovers and from the Book of Exodus itself, was the fact that the attendees recast the ceremony entirely. It was not about God freeing the Jewish slaves and preparing them for the Land of Israel. Instead, it was all about the gay struggle to come out of the closet. God really had no place in this service. I left well fed and having had a good time, but believe me when I say that “Nearer my God to thee” was not the refrain playing in my head. The louder song was probably “YMCA.”

Not long after that second Passover seder, I attended two weddings within two weeks. One couple belonged to a deeply conservative Christian faith and participated in the most traditional service I’ve ever attended; the other couple had one of their friend gets a mail-order New Age ministry certificate in order to perform their “joining ceremony.” In the first ceremony, the couple made a series of covenants to each other, each of which had God as the central figure in the covenant. In the second ceremony, the couple said they liked each other and vowed to hang out together as long as they continued to like each other. I was pretty certain that the first marriage would last. I knew, however, that the second wouldn’t last and, indeed, it was over less than a year later.

All of which brings me to today, when I had three reminders that one should look to religion for one’s values, as opposed to demanding that one’s religion look to pop culture for its values. The first reminder came about when I went looking online for a synagogue. It’s been a long time since I’ve attended a regular sabbath service and, for varying reasons, I decided now was the time.

Based upon my “If I’m doing religion, I’m going to do the real thing,” I looked for a conservative synagogue. As far as I’m concerned, based upon attending innumerable bar and bat mitzvahs over the years, reform synagogues are way too kumbaya for me. There’s lots of hand holding, clapping, and navel gazing, but a peculiar absence of religious rigor. I therefore searched for a “conservative synagogue” in my area.

The top hit billed itself as a “conservative synagogue.” Nevertheless, I felt a little worried when I saw it boasting that it is “egalitarian” and conducts an “alternative” service, whatever the heck is. The website didn’t explain either of those terms, but they sound suspiciously like virtue signaling to me.

I thought that I might learn something by reading the rabbi’s bio. The rabbi turned out to be Harvard-educated, which is already a clue that this synagogue probably has a non-traditional edge. Sorry, but I’m biased.

Reading further did not change my instinctive take about the rabbi. Before becoming a rabbi, he worked trying to push a two-state solution for Israelis and Palestinians. Hmmm. Harvard he may be, but that position doesn’t argue well for his intelligence. While Leftists relentlessly push for a two-state solution, Palestinians are very clear that they want a one-state solution: their state, built on the bloodied bodies of dead Jews. As far as I’m concerned, those who keep insisting that Israel “negotiate” with people who openly want Israelis dead are not very bright.

But you know what killed it for me? And I mean absolutely killed it: At the end, of the rabbi’s little bio, the bearded man (there was a photo) who boasted about his lovely wife and children, included his pronouns. Given that the congregation is allegedly conservative, I should have been grateful that his pronouns were “He/ his/ him” but I wasn’t grateful. I was disgusted.

Just yesterday, a tweet reminded me that the Old Testament is old-fashioned in that it posits a binary world:

While God may have a male and female element (since both men and women were created in his image), we’re not supposed to. We’re not gods. We’re just created in his image, with God having separated his male and female identities into two distinct parts. Thus, as with so many things in the Old Testament, the world is clearly divided: Clean and unclean, holy and profane, man and woman. A manifestly male rabbi in a conservative synagogue should not be suggesting otherwise. (I have since decided that I’ll go to the local Chabad house.)

And then, just to round out today’s thoughts about religion functioning as religion, rather than as a soothing gloss on top of pop culture, I saw a post at PJ Media: Nuns Should Look Like Nuns, not Real Estate CEOs with Dolled up Hair and Hoop Earrings. The author, Thom Nickels, writes about a parochial school childhood in which nuns dressed like nuns, complete with traditional habits. He then describes his experience a few years ago, when he found himself in conversation with a nun:

Several years ago I had the privilege of talking to a modern St. Joe’s nun when I went to a friend’s Vesper memorial service at Rosemont College.

At the reception, I sat beside a neatly coiffed woman whom I assumed was a college administrator or bank executive. She wore an emerald broach, amber earrings, a silk scarf, as well as a perfume I’ve often smelled while walking through the women’s department in Macy’s.

While slicing into a lamb chop, I asked the woman, “What do you do for a living?” When she told me that she was a St. Joe’s nun I thought of the old nuns in my parochial school with their towering headgear and veils. What a difference forty years makes.

“You’re really a nun?” I said. In my own way, I was showing her that I disapproved of her lay clothing.

I looked in vain for a microscopic lapel cross pin that might indicate Sisterhood, but instead found the broach that indicated Macy’s.

Nichols was dismayed and, in writing about that dismay, he makes a very important point:

While many Catholic women’s religious orders ditched the habit after Vatican II, many orders did not. It’s also true that some religious orders have returned to the traditional habit. It may seem odd, but surveys indicate that “secular dress” orders like the St. Joe’s nuns are experiencing a decline in membership, whereas convents where the traditional habit is worn are experiencing huge membership booms.

I’ve always believed that visual symbols are powerful because they relay a message.

[snip]

At my parish church, St. Michael Archangel Orthodox church in Northern Liberties, I had my first interaction with an Orthodox nun from the famous St. Martyr Princess Elisabeth Monastery founded in 1999 in the Minsk region of Russia. This particular sister was touring the States to give a lecture on the work of her convent and school, a boarding home for children and adults with special needs, and a homecare facility for mentally challenged children.

The sister in question wore a full, traditional habit, standard operating procedure for nuns in the Eastern Church.

The same might be said of the Dali Lama, who travels the world dressed as a Buddhist monk, and who has never gone to Brooks Brothers or Macy’s in order to be outfitted in secular clothing or jewelry of any kind so that he can “fit in” and disappear.

When you have a message to deliver, it pays to stand out.

It’s not just that it pays to stand out, of course. If you’re neither willing to walk the walk nor talk the talk (nor dress the dress), you don’t seem to believe in your own message. And if you don’t believe in your message, why should I? Instead, you’ve just got a job like any other job and why in the world should I care.

It’s no surprise that religious institutions that pander to pop culture are failing, while those that don’t have continuing vitality. Religion, by standing apart from other institutions, serves vital functions: Most importantly (to my mind), it reminds us that we are not animals. Sure, we’re mammals, and we share DNA with monkeys and worms, but the fact is that we are very, very special animals because we have cognitive abilities and existential awareness that other animals lack.

No matter how clever or smart animals are, no matter their extraordinary skills, no matter their ability to feel love, joy, hate, and fear, I will stake my life on the fact that no animal asks “Why am I here?” or makes the philosophical statement “I think, therefore I am.”

As I told my son when he was a very little boy, lions are not “bad” because they kill. They kill because that’s how they eat. They don’t have the cognitive ability to reshape alternative food sources to satisfy their nutritional needs nor can they question the righteousness of what they do. They just do.

(In the same way, as an aside, all those Marvel superheroes are boring, because their super powers mandate success and make courage meaningless. A man throwing himself onto a bomb to save his comrades, knowing he will die, is brave. A superhero doing his/her superhero thing is as mindless, in a way, as that lion.)

The moral component of religion is incredibly important, and this is where the pop culture pandering is such a problem. Religion creates standards.

A healthy religion is predicated on recognizing every individual’s divine spark. Based upon that premise, it sets out rules for living that optimize healthy relationships at both the broadest and smallest reaches of society. In that regard, I highly recommend Dennis Prager’s 10 Commandments videos, for they explain how the Commandments are just irritating prohibitions against letting people “be free,” but are, instead, the surest pathway to a free, safe, and successful society. The Ten Commandments set out abstract principles that, once properly understood, can and should apply to all people regardless of race, color, country of national original, sex, sexual orientation, etc. Once a society catches on to this, you will not find a better place or time on earth to live.

In the same way, an unhealthy religion, rather than recognizing that we are all God’s creatures, instead creates unhealthy hierarchies that confer special status upon the few and then allows those few to do whatever they need in order to bring the rest of humankind to heel. Morality isn’t based upon abstract ideals that guide all people. Instead unhealthy religions have myriad, often constantly mutating, rules that enforce the hierarchy, that are often random in application, and that can be incredibly cruel (and equally random) in effect.

Leftism is one of those unhealthy religions. And Islam, if practiced in perfect accordance with Mohamed’s teachings, is unhealthy as well.

Healthy religions can become unhealthy if those in charge decide that, to remain “relevant,” they must abandon their larger, traditional principles and, instead, look to pop culture and Leftism for guidance.

Matthew writes that Jesus warned against the folly of building a house on sand:

Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock:

And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock.

And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand:

And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it. (Matthew 7:24-27)

Those faiths that choose pop culture as their moral guide (i.e., He / him / his), aren’t building their house on sand, they’re building it on sewage. When the rains come and those houses collapse, they won’t just be washed away, they will be drowned in a cesspit of ideas drawn from a grotesque amalgam of Hollywood and Leftism.

I understand that religions grow and change with the times. (For example, while I find this wedding tradition fascinating and rather beautiful, especially considering that it probably hasn’t changed in 250 years, it would not be for me and I’m grateful that there are less intensive alternatives.) Reform can be a wonderful and, in same cases, a necessary thing.

But if that reform takes you away from central principles and even away from God himself, I ask again: Why bother? You don’t want religion; you just want to force a traditional institution to make you feel good about yourself. Worse, you’re willing to destroy the institution — and the benefits that accrue to society if the institution is an inherently healthy one — to reach that end.

The post Religion should look like and act like religion — or why bother? appeared first on Watcher of Weasels.

I Simply Don’t Understand How Christians Can Be #NeverTrump

Here is what I don’t get about the #NeverTrump people. We know that they are pretty much exclusively Cruz supporters who have an almost cult-like attraction for him. They believe that it was God’s plan that Cruz be the next president, perhaps that he was even anointed to be the king of the world. And they still believe this in spite of the reality of this election. And they blame the voters of Indiana and the Trump supporters whom they call every name in the book for denying God’s will. They are some of the most judgemental people I have ever known.

But my belief in God tells me that if something were truly God’s will, it will happen.

A Cruz presidency did not happen, and is highly unlikely to happen in 2016. So did the people who voted for Trump thwart the will of God? Or is it more likely that a Cruz presidency was NOT the will of God, but rather the will of Cruz’ supporters who somehow assumed it was God’s will that Cruz be president?

And if God actually has a preference for America’s next president, can any Christian believe His will will not be done?

And to take it a step further, why would God actually decide who America should have as president, as opposed to simply bending whoever happens to be president to His will, should He want to do so?

I always look twice at people who claim something they really want is God’s will. By definition, we can’t know God’s plan for anything. We can assume. We can hope. We can pray for an outcome we desire. But we simply do not know what God has planned.

If anything.

Watching sporting events I am frequently astonished at the hubris of people who pray for one team to win over another. And then they give thanks and “glory” to God for winning a game? Is it even appropriate to pray for the outcome of a game? “Please let this field goal be good!

And is politics any different?

If you believe God is omnipotent, and that God even cares about this country that has turned it’s back on Him, what possible difference could it make to God if the next president is Donald Trump, Ted Cruz or Hillary? If it is God’s will that an event happen, why would you think He needs a specific human to make it so?

Now I don’t pretend to know God’s will. But I believe in Him and his omnipotence. I pray for guidance. But I also believe in free will. And I know our desires and hopes sometimes interfere with our ability to listen to what God is telling us. And our own hubris makes for bad reception.

But if you believe that God has a plan. And if you believe that God’s plan extends to the person that will be the next president, how can you not also believe that His will is not playing out according to His plan?

The 2016 American presidential election is either playing out according to God’s will or He has no interest in this election at all.

IF God has a plan for the next president, is He not powerful enough to have anyone, even Donald Trump follow his plan? Donald Trump is the Republican Nominee for President. If this were not God’s will, then how could it happen?

So are the #NeverTrump people who profess to be Christians and believe that God has a plan as to who our next president will be actually the ones going against God’s will? (I have no idea, for the record.)

Donald Trump has faced an uphill battle, has been attacked by 16 candidates, the press, and nearly everyone who does not support him. He has been outspent by massive amounts and is the last candidate standing. He has faced the longest of odds from the beginning. And one by one his challengers, many of whom were heavy favorites to win, have fallen.

Trump is a man with many faults, with so many positions on issues and so many people who absolutely hate him. Yet, against all odds he has prevailed and won the nomination.

Impossible! Some would even call it a miracle.

We can’t know what God has planned. And I have absolutely no idea if Donald Trump is involved in God’s plan.

But I do know when I see something miraculous. And Donald Trump reaching the nomination is extraordinary.

#NeverTrump at your own risk. And pray.


Article written by: Tom White

Champion Material Part II: My Endorsement of Ted Cruz by Craig Johnson

By Craig Johnson

“Moreover, thou shalt choose able men, such as fear God, Men of truth, hating covetousness; and place such over them.” – Exodus 18:21

My last article, TRUMP, CARSON, CRUZ: CHAMPION MATERIAL? , was a character analysis of the top three outsider Presidential Candidates. It was also an explanation of why, during our “Crisis” eras, Americans turn to men with the qualities that each one of them possesses. We have arrived here again.

The harshness of the times makes all of the Establishment Candidates look like “Low-Fat Republicans.”

While Dr. Carson is not a member of the “Low-Fat” gang, his inability to sufficiently project his strength in a manner demanded by the times, has caused most of his many, many, admirers, to seek a candidate with similar traits of high moral character, but with more bite; more attitude.

That leaves Trump and Cruz. An honest analysis – personal likes and dislikes aside – reveals much when the yardstick is taken from the above quoted, ancient words of Jethro, to his son-in-law, Moses.  (Exodus 18:21)

  • Are they able?
  • Do they fear God?
  • Are they men of truth?
  • Do they hate covetousness?

Both men obviously have abilities. Trump grew his multi-million dollar inheritance to between $3B

(Bloomberg’s estimate), and $10B (Trump’s assertion). Various finance experts say an unmanaged S&P 500 Index Fund would have yielded between 8 and 20 Billion Dollars. As for Trump’s branding ability, he is so able, that one must consider him to be a master. Where Trump’s gambling and hotels have been average; his airline, vodka, and apparel have failed; but his “reality TV” shows have been hugely successful. His ability to manipulate the media (playing out again as I write, with Trump “saying” he will skip the Iowa Debate); has him atop most polls.

Cruz, was said by Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz, to be “the smartest student I ever taught.” Cruz’s nine appearances before the Supreme Court are more than anyone in Texas history, and more than any current member of Congress.

Those appearances resulted in Ted Cruz protecting:

  • US. sovereignty against the UN and the World Court in Medellin v. Texas;
  • Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms;
  • constitutionality of the Texas Ten Commandments monument
  • constitutionality of the words “under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance;
  • constitutionality of the Texas Sexually Violent Predator Civil Commitment law; and
  • the Texas congressional redistricting plan.

Cruz is also able to articulate to the grass roots, as well as to new Conservatives, the meaning and significance of conservative values, which is tougher than apologizing and capitulating the way the “Grand Old Republicans” seem to prefer. As for being “able,” and the relative value of the abilities of each man — advantage: Cruz.

Are They God Fearing?

As for fearing God, it seems that, as off the chart brilliant that Cruz is, he still humbles himself before the Almighty. With Trump’s declaration, “I don’t need to ask God for forgiveness,” this one is less close than the question of being able. Furthermore, Cruz is so much loved by Christians, that Trump’s statement that Cruz engenders hatred, would be laughable if it were not such a pernicious lie.

The only people who hate Cruz are those who benefit from overgrown and unnecessary government. Not just the recipients, but the implementers – contractors, grant recipients, and unnecessary bureaucrats. Cruz represents the type of necessary pruning that will restore fiscal sanity and end the gravy train. Cruz’s support for life, marriage, school choice, religious freedom, no cronyism, and the entire faith community agenda is almost the polar opposite of Trump.

Men of Truth?

Are they men of truth? Cruz has been the exact type of Senator that he promised he would be. This gives his followers faith that finally, finally, we will have real follow-through on campaign promises.

Trump has been on both sides of every major issue.

Even his boast of being an “outsider,” and not being “in politics” is untrue. The very reason that citizens distrust politicians to do the right thing, is that they believe the politicians are more likely to do the will of big donors, rather than little voters. Then obviously, the “big donors,” who give the money, and the “politicians,” who receive the money are both “in politics.” Trump has donated to all of the major players, with an edge to the Democrats. Trump is not new to the game. He’s an old, experienced player. He’s just on the opposite side of the table for a change. He’s eliminating the middleman.

Do They Hate Covetousness?

Lastly, do they hate covetousness? There is a reason that the Tenth Commandment states: “Thou shalt not covet.” One who covets another’s spouse, may fall into the temptation of adultery.  One who covets another’s property may be inclined to commit theft; or may donate money to a “politician” and have him or her commit the theft via eminent domain or some other pernicious government scheme.

Cruz demonstrates his hatred of covetousness and his knowledge of how to lessen it by his steadfast desire to prune the government leviathan. When asked why he robbed banks; Willie Sutton said,   “Because that’s where the money is.” Similarly, crony capitalists, like Trump, love bigger and bigger government for the very same reason. Advantage: Cruz.

So, there it is.  Cruz by a mile.  But, I would be remiss if I didn’t mention one other factor with this “Bible-based” endorsement.  Many preachers across the land, some more prominent than others, and most with far more biblical knowledge than I; have endorsed Trump. It’s understandable how nominal Christians can be taken in by this showman.  But, alleged “watchmen on the wall” should really be ashamed of themselves.  This is not even close.  A first year Christian, or a high school student could look at Exodus 18:21, or many other biblical commands on how to choose leaders with Godly characteristics and get this one right.

A man who cannot quote a single Bible verse and miss states the one verse that was written down and given to him( “Two” Corinthians ), and who viciously lied on Evangelist Bob Vander Platts, should not be endorsed by men in Christian leadership.

If you are like me, and many others who make up the Christian, Conservative, Constitutional, Coalition; and you want integrity and consistency in leadership, then Ted Cruz is your man.

Craig Johnson is a news analyst and commentator, speaker, and president of The First Amendment, Inc., (www.thefirstamendmentinc.com). He is also host of The REALLY, Real, Deal with Brother Craig the Hatchet Man, (www.blogtalkradio.com/the-hatchet-man, returning soon to 820AM WNTW (www.820theanswer.com), and School Choice Advocate & Board Member for the Virginia Christian Alliance. For interviews and speaking engagements contact Kimberly@agencyforthearts.com.  


Article written by: Tom White

War Room: The Most Powerful Christian Film I’ve Ever Seen

I typically don’t intermingle my religion and my entertainment dollars, but War Room isn’t just a movie with a great Christian Message. It’s a revolutionary and biblical call to action. This is a movie sincere and powerful enough to change the lives of believers and non-believers alike, as many believers find themselves lost in a desperate attempt to control the world around them in what is, inevitably, a losing battle. How often have we read that, as Christians, we are to put our struggles, our fears, our suffering, and our hopes at the foot of God through prayer? How often do we actually do that?

Philippians 4:4-7 “Rejoice in the Lord always. I will say it again: Rejoice! Let your gentleness be evident to all. The Lord is near. Do not be anxious about anything, but in everything, by prayer and petition, with thanksgiving, present your requests to God. And the peace of God, which transcends all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus”.

War Room gives us a peak into what this would mean for us as individuals and as families were we to actually put this into practice in our daily lives.

War Room is not a movie to watch without Kleenex (for the Ladies) or a long sleeve shirt (for the men, who are too manly to dry our eyes with Kleenex, let’s be honest). The moments of humor were brilliantly executed. The moments of real, day to day human experience and human struggles were written and performed perfectly. There was never a moment during the storyline where I thought to myself, “Oh Come On! That couldn’t happen”.

Not only does this film touch on questions about the power of prayer, but also questions about what it means to be a husband, to be a wife, and to be a friend; and what it means to truly allow a God believers call Lord to actually have some Lordship in their lives.

I usually see one or two movies in the theater a year and I am thankful that this year War Room was one of them. This is not a movie you will regret seeing for movie theater prices. It’s worth every penny. I’ll probably never write another article recommending a movie to our Virginia Right audience, since that’s not really what we do here; but I just want others to experience the same joy and excitement I experienced yesterday.

warroom_movieposter_01

 


Article written by: Steven Brodie Tucker