Mr. Smith Goes to Washington (#26 Greatest American Movie of All Time) - Review

We scored a free copy of Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, the 1939 Frank Capra classic staring a very young Jimmy Stewart.  This film has been called one of the greatest whistleblower films in American history.
Due to the sudden death of a sitting senator, the state's corrupt governor appoints political novice Jefferson Smith to fill the role - expecting that he can be easily manipulated.  Smith stumbles into disrupting a plan for graft, and his lonely, innocent patriotism faces the Goliath of a well-oiled system of corruption and intimidation.
Smith's idol and senior senator from his state demonstrates the bargain that many politicians make.  Compromise your values for the sake of political productivity.  He finally admits to Smith that he has cooperated with corruption for the sake of the greater good.  Smith holds to his ideals and reminds us that some things are too sacred for compromise. 
Apparently, this movie was intended to highlight the reality of corruption in Washington, and it garnered quite a bit of criticism in the process.  Unfortunately, its naive characters and simple dialog sound overwhelmingly cheesy to 21st century ears. 
Some classics stand the test of time in terms of entertainment and maintaining interest.  We often found ourselves drifting away into conversation or out of the room for snacks or not particularly caring when the kids came chattering into the room.  Unfortunately, however meaningful this Mr. Smith was in its own time, and however important its message is for our time, its weak plot and dialog leave it a little lost in our time.
Sadly, the Josh rating is less than it could be: JJJ.

The Runaway Jury - Review

Every vacation, I read at least one John Grisham book.  This year it was The Runaway Jury.  Once again, it was hard to put down.  There was more mystery than usual for the first half of the book.
The story begins with the selection of the jury for a huge tobacco lawsuit.  A widow of a man who died of cancer after smoking three packs a day for thirty years is suing the maker of his cigarets.  Drama and mystery swirl around the whole process, especially around one juror who seems to be willing to sell his vote and influence on the jury.
The ending is exciting, even if predictable.  I don't read Grisham to surprise me.  I read Grisham for the fun of the story.  However, I have to admit that after several years of vacationing with Grisham, I'm starting to wish he would shake things up a bit more.
The Josh rating: JJJ.

Love Wins - Review

I read Rob Bell's controversial Love Wins yesterday - as in I started at 8:30 and was done by 3:30.  Granted, I'm preaching on heaven and hell this week, so I figured I should at least read the most debated book on the topic in recent memory.
If you missed the controversy, let me just say it was messy and ugly, and I was only viewing the remnants and echos from the other side of the world.  For a not-so-brief summary of the controversy, check out this article.  For a beautiful interview with Rob Bell about how he has handled all this controversy, click here.  For a look at what this conversation means for the current state of North American Christianity - especially evangelicalism, read this excellent article by theologian Scott McKnight. 
Essentially, the controversy is all about two long debated points within Christian theology.
1. What does it take to be saved (to go to heaven and to avoid hell)?  (Specifically, can people who have never heard about Jesus be saved?)
2. Is hell a place of eternal, conscious punishment from which there is no escape - ever?
Both of these questions have been asked by theologians almost since the time of Christ, and for almost that long, our best Christian thinkers have come up with a variety of answers.  There is no Christian consensus on these two points.  Neither of these two points are critical questions of Christian orthodoxy.  Therefore, throughout history, most Christians have afforded each other the freedom to disagree.  Rob Bell's answers to both questions fall well within the scope of the varied Christian opinion throughout history.
So what does Bell actually say?  Although he says it very well, in his wonderful way of putting very complex ideas in simple and beautiful words, he actually only makes a few specific points.

Regarding heaven, Bell clarifies the use of the word heaven in the Bible.  In the New Testament, the word "heaven" is used in three different ways: (a) as a reference to God (e.g. "Kingdom of Heaven"), (b) the place/time of total restoration in the future, (c) the invasion of that future reality into our present reality ("Your will be done on earth as it is in heaven" - type of thinking).  Basically, heaven is something we can experience in part now. (Remember all your pastors talking about starting the "eternal life" now.  This is what Bell is talking about.)  But one day, this foretaste will become the real deal, explosively joyful, unfiltered presence of God among the loving community of God's people.  So far, Bell is right in line with all good theologians.

Regarding hell, Bell unpacks almost every Biblical reference to hell.  And then he slowly works to prove that it is at least possible that a person's experience of hell might not be forever.  The fires of hell might be for the sake of purification rather than eternal punishment.  There might be a second (or third) opportunity to repent and to return to God's grace even after death.  It is possible that God might eventually empty hell and reclaim every lost child.  This may sound strange to people who have grown up with the concept of hell as a place of eternal, conscious, permanent punishment.  However, as Bell points out, good Christian theologians ranging from Justin Martyr to Origen to Luther have said exactly this.

Regarding salvation, Bell makes three basic points.  (1) God is everywhere.  (2) God is always trying to woo people to him and his ways of love.  (3) We will be judged on how we respond to God's wooing - however or wherever we find it.  Although he puts the argument in more beautiful and more controversial tones, this is the essential point, and this is nothing new to Christianity.  Everywhere there have been Christian missionaries and thinkers, people have wondered about this, and many of them have said exactly the same thing.

So here's my conclusion.  Rob Bell didn't say anything new or unorthodox or unChristian, but he said it really, really well.  Honestly, I'm not sure he's right, but I think it's possible.  And I think it's important that we talk about hell and who may or may not go there with a little more humility and uncertainty.  (The Bible seems to be intentionally unclear on that point.)  And I am sure that Bell (or anyone else) can believe everything in this book and be authentically Christian.

The Josh rating: JJJJ.

(Coming soon, my sermon on Heaven and Hell.)