Movie Review: Expelled No Intelligence Allowed

I have been waiting for weeks to hear about an Evangelical upswelling of support for the Ben Stein's new movie about Intelligent Design and Evolution, but haven't encountered too much. So I had a chance the other day to go and view Ben Stein’s new movie Expelled. This pseudo documentary examines the scientific furor between Darwinism and Intelligent Design. Ben Stein (famous for being a gameshow host on Win Ben Stein’s money, being a political activist, working as a speech writer for Nixon and Ford, and of course for a timeless role for in Ferris Bueller’s Day Off) spends the film investigating the increasing animosity in the scientific community for those who would question evolution as a theory and those who support or even consider intelligent design as a scientific theory.

The film is entertaining in the witty sort of way you would expect Ben Stein to make a film. Throughout the film, there are cuts and images shown from Nazi Germany, the Berlin Wall, and other highly evocative scenes. It is obvious from the beginning that Ben is trying to compare the climate in Academia and the scientific community to the stifling intellectual climates of a foregone era. He interviews scientists from universities, the Smithsonian Institute and around the globe, along with educators and journalists about their experience being oppressed, rejected, or ignored because of their beliefs.

The film was entertaining and the most important questions it raised were about the connection between faith and science, and the consequences of absolute devotion to science above all else. Stein goes to Germany and investigates the connection between evolutionary theory and the Holocaust. This was very thought provoking. The major focus of the film, however, was not on any scientific evidence, but on the seeming lack of freedom being allowed to scientists by the scientific community. The dogged arrogance of many within the scientific community has created an environment that does not allow for the very things that makes science effective: namely the ability to follow the evidence where ever it leads and to ask questions of every theory and finding. Stein does a very good job of examining the consequences of the inhibition of real inquiry in science.

What the film did not do well, however, was explain the theory of Intelligent Design. While the holes in evolutionary theory are addressed, Intelligent Design is never really explained in a way as to show why it would offer a viable alternative to evolution or at least offer answers that evolution can not. It also seemed to overplay the negativity towards scientists that offer Intelligent Design as a viable scientific theory. If you read some of the background information about the people who were interviewed, some of their situations were far less onerous than the films leads us to believe. In some ways it seemed Michael Moorish in its presentation of some of the facts. That is not a compliment.

The highlight of the film, however, was Ben Stein’s one on one interview with noted atheist Richard Dawkins. Stein’s manner of questioning, logic, and overall attitude made Dawkins seem a bit cartoonish. He also got Dawkins to show the holes in his own worldview and absolute belief in evolution. This was very impressive. What really showed in this interview, and others, was the zealous devotion that many scientists have to a theory with so many questions and holes. There is no reasonable explanation for the origin of life or matter via evolution. Evolutionist give intimate details of everything they believe to have happened right after the moment of of life being created, but there is absolutely nothing before that moment. Stein did well in even getting Dawkins to agree that this would be the place where Intelligent Design would come into play, if ever.

Overall I would give the film a warm recommendation. It was thought provoking, entertaining, and a great conversation starter. It was not the whole story, unbiased or without flaws, but what is? I give Ben credit for having the courage to make a film that is going to be very unpopular with many scientists, educators, and evolution proponents, but we need more minority voices in the scientific field. Compared to Al Gore’s work with a home video camera and a powerpoint presentation this film was Cannes worthy, but know what it is going in.

"Mad as Hell" Sermon

When I preached this sermon on April 13, I politely named it "Who's Asleep?" But ever since then, people commenting on it have been calling it the "Mad as Hell Sermon."
Here's the basic idea: Jesus was sleeping in the back of the boat during a storm. We often feel like God is sleeping in our world. Actually, though, we - the church, the body of Christ - are the ones sleeping through the storms of our world. God is calling us to wake up - to follow him into the storms and to transform them through the living power of Jesus.
Read the sermon (and watch the embedded videos) here.

The International Church?

Something has bugged me quite a bit in the last few years as it relates to the leadership of our church. I know that the various districts across the world are represented by members from their respective regions at the general assembly. What I find disconcerting is the seeming unwillingness to bolster and move forward in placing international and ethnic minority leaders into the role of general superintendent, and the overwhelming power of the American voting block.

I guess I find having 6 anglo g.s.' a bit colonialist in tone, arrogant, and out of touch with the needs for a more empowered global voice and representation in our denomination. The grip the American block has over the CotN is in my opinion too tight. I think if anything the American block should restrain it's voting power and defer to an equal status in voting with many of our fellow nations.

Something else related to the g.s. role. I would truly love to see a time when each g.s. was from the region they represented... Just a thought.

Now that I stirred the pot a bit. What are your thoughts?

Review of Judas and the Gospel of Jesus by N.T. Wright

Hi folks, I'm a new contributor here. Hopefully, I'll contribute more substantial and personal thoughts later on, but for now I'll just make a post about a good little N.T. Wright book I read a few weeks ago: Judas and the Gospel of Jesus: Have We Missed the Truth about Christianity? To read the full review click here.

Thanks for letting me engage here. As I have been learning more about postmodernism and the emergent church, I have felt the need to become more deeply involved in this conversation.

Emergent Church in the Nazarene Manual

I have been invited to participate along with Jon Middendorf and Tim Keel to construct “a statement” concerning the emergent church that will be submitted to the General Assembly in October of 2008 to be inserted into the Nazarene Manual.

At first I was very surprised and had a hard time imagining how this would work, but apparently what they want is a brief mentioning of the “emergent church” in a new section at the end of our “Historical Statement”. They want just a few sentences about our most recent embracing of the emergent church in a section that looks forward to where we might go as a denomination.

The Historical Statement begins by mentioning the Wesleyan revivals of the 18th century and the Holiness movement of the 19th century. The History continues to include how a group of independent holiness churches got together and how they were eventually united by Phineas F. Bresee and Joseph P. Widney. The history moves on from there to talk about how we became a “global church” with as recent of events being mentioned such as the creation of “a system of world regional areas” that was adopted in 1980.

The idea is to add a paragraph about our most resent developments and to gently hint to where we might be going in a way that would ease some fears and concerns that some may have about the emergent church. An additional paragraph is being developed by another group along the same lines to encourage us in moving toward more international representation in our church government. For us, the idea is to create a few sentences that accurately depict how the emergent church has been embraced so far, such as in our Seminary, M7, and in our local churches, and how Nazarenes are effectively positioning ourselves to take on the challenges in an increasingly post-modern world.

I was told that it would be ideal if we only mention the term “emergent church” once, so that by it being mentioned at all in our manual it would give it legitimacy and act as a “seal of approval” from our denomination. At the same time, we do not want to mention the term more than that and give the wrong impression that the Church of the Nazarene will be taken over by what some still are uncomfortable with. I don’t think this is a problem, and I think we can construct a “historical / looking forward” statement that talks about how Nazarenes are working to make a difference in a growing post-modern culture.

So, I am writing you all today, April 1, 2008, about this to ask for your help in constructing a small paragraph that I could later give to the others working on this. Jon, Tim and I then will combine and refine all our ideas further. To increase the likelihood of the amendment of our Historical Statement being passed at General Assembly it has been decided that General Superintendents Paul Cunningham and Nina Gunter review our statement before we submit it; particularly because it was Dr. Gunter who originally initiated the idea. Dr. Gunter is an often misunderstood supporter of the emergent church and knows well the "challenges" it faces and the difficulty there can be in effectively communicating about it. So, we have our work cut out for us. Your ideas, suggestions and thoughts would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

Peace,

James

UPDATE 5:00pm 4/1/08: I just received word that Nina Gunter has called a special advisory emergent board (S.A.E.B.) that will include such outside experts like Brian McLaren, Doug Pagitt, Leonard Sweet, and Tony Jones. I certainly think they might be able to help us express all that we want to express about the emergent church in our one short paragraph in the manual.