Before watching God’s Not Dead, I was a bit apprehensive about how much I would like the movie because I feel that often Christian movies tend to not be the most accurate or even enjoyable movies to watch. However, I decided to watch the movie because I was curious as to what it was all about. God’s Not Dead is a 2014 drama that highlights a Christian college student defying his Atheist philosophy professor’s beliefs. Overall, while the movie was enjoyable, there were certain stereotypes within the film that I think demeaned plot, and I would have found the movie to be more enjoyable without those stereotypes. The movie follows a Christian college freshman, Josh Wheaton. On the first day of his philosophy class, Professor Radisson makes the students write “God is Dead” on a sheet of paper, or else they will fail the class. As a Christian, Josh obviously has a difficult time complying with this request, and as a result his professor gives him an ultimatum. Professor Radisson gives Josh the opportunity to defend God and why he is not …show more content…
dead in front of the class. If the class votes in Josh’s favor, then he passes, but if they vote for Professor Radisson, he fails. When Josh tells his long-term girlfriend, Kara, about what is happening in his philosophy class, she threatens to break up with him, which only adds to the pressure. At the end of the first three classes, Josh is given twenty minutes to argue for the existence of God.
Josh does a lot of knowledge and feels as though he is going to be able to have a solid fight against Professor Radisson, but during the first two lectures the professor has a counterargument for each point. When Josh tells Kara of his struggles to go against his philosophy professor, she breaks up with him because he will not drop the course or just give up in fighting for his belief in God. Finally, in the last debate, Josh asks his professor why he hates God so much, and it is revealed that Professor Radisson's mother died and as a result, he hates God because she died. Josh has a powerful response to Professor Radisson’s reaction, asking “How can you hate someone who does not exist?” At the end of the last lecture, a student stands up and says “God’s Not Dead”, and nearly all of the class joins in, supporting
Josh. Throughout the course of the film, there are various intertwining subplots. Professor Radisson is dating a Christian, Mina, who he often puts down for her faith in front of his colleagues. Mina’s brother, Mark, is an atheist who refuses to visit their mother who is struggling with dementia. Mark has a liberal girlfriend, Amy, who is diagnosed with cancer, and as a result Mark dumps her. One of the more relevant subplots personally is of a Muslim girl named Ayisha, who converts to Christianity by listening to podcasts on her iPod, but when her family finds out, her father beats her. At the end of the movie, Radisson ends up being struck by a car and passing away. However, a Reverend witnesses the accident, and as a result Radisson accepts Christ before he dies. The main protagonist, Josh, is an inspirational character throughout the course of the film. He never gives up for fighting for his faith in God and defending for what he believes in, even when he was in the minority and nobody really believed in him. Even the fact that he decided to keep defending God after his girlfriend broke up with him speaks about the character of him. The main antagonist, Professor Radisson, is at first the exact opposite of Josh. He does not seem to have any love or happiness within his heart. He is quite a somber character, and does not have much regard for the beliefs of others and does not respect other’s opinions. Deeper down, however, Radisson does end up having a caring heart. Overall, while the movie is inspirational and has a good message behind it, I think that it was poorly made and not thought out the best. In God’s Not Dead, all of the protagonists are white characters. However, the black, Chinese, and Muslim characters play smaller parts within the movie. Ayisha, the Muslim character, is beaten by her father in the film. I feel as though this is portraying the Islamic faith as a religion that is inclusive of violence, which is something that should not be displayed within film. Also, Amy, the liberal, is seen as being malicious towards Christianity due to the fact that she is constantly questioning what she sees as Christian’s hypocrisy. I think that the stereotypes that are being shown generalize people who have beliefs different than those from Christians, which is something that is as powerful as this film should not be showing. Even if the directors did not mean for it to be this way, being Muslim does not equate to being violent just as being liberal does not equate to always questioning Christianity. Even though I enjoyed the film, I think it would have been better if those stereotypes would have been removed. Another point that I found to be interesting within the film was the idea that the topics of philosophy and science are strictly atheistic. I do not see this to be true at all. As a matter of a fact, there has actually been science that has been used in order to prove Christianity. I also feel as though just because one studies philosophy does not automatically mean that they are going to be an atheist and not believe in Christianity. There are ways in which both philosophy and science and work hand in hand with Christianity. As a whole, God’s Not Dead is a movie that I personally would not recommend seeing. Even though there is a good message behind all of it, there are certain facets of the movie that make it not worth seeing. For starters, the acting is quite poor within the movie. Also, there are several generalizations within the film of people who come from backgrounds aside from Christianity. Overall, God’s Not Dead is a low budget film that is somewhat interesting, but not really worth one’s time to watch.
Men and women have played gender specific roles, from the earliest sign of civilization to modern society. In the cult classic “Night of the Living Dead”, stereotypical gender role were on display. George A. Romero’s film hinted at subtle references to the role of men and women and depicted the stereotypes America held during the 1960s. Men played the protectors and enforcers, while the women represented the submissive homemakers and caretakers. Romero’s film portrays the sexes, men and women, in their respective stereotypical behaviors. Stereotypes that sets the undertone for the duration of the film.
The culture and society of the American South can be categorized into a variety of groups through stereotypes from outsiders, politicians, music and among other things. To help depict the American South, literature and films that we have watched in class such as Mandingo, Gone with the Wind, To Kill a Mockingbird, Cat on a Hot Tin Roof, The Color Purple, Gods Little Acre, Tomorrow, Jezebel, The Littlest Rebel and with special focus on O Brother Where Art Thou will help capture and reflect southern culture to those not accustomed to the ways of southern society.
Jake does not reject the church as he begins to pursue religion lightly, although he doesn't want to be very close to the church just yet. Although he is not happy for the injury God has given him, he seeks religion as a lifestyle as he seeks for a way to live in a society while he is looked down upon
“God is Dead!” This quote was said by John Proctor a character in The Crucible. John Proctor makes this statement to Gov. Danforth because John didn’t want his name nailed to the church. John Proctor was accused of witchcraft and is also an outcast that had a sinful affair with Abigail Williams. He also tried to save his wife from witchcraft by going to the court and testifying against Abigail Williams. John Proctor and I have a few personality traits that we share in common that we are both hard workers, independent, and sinners.
David Foster Wallace’s “Good People,” is a very touching, powerful story about a young, unwed, Christian couple facing an extremely difficult decision and the moral and religious implications that may result. As the story begins, we are allowed into the head of Lane Dean, a college student, as he sits on a park bench with his girlfriend, Sheri. Lane and Sheri find themselves faced with an unplanned pregnancy, which causes them to battle with several moral and religious dilemmas. Both of them are devout Christians who have built their moral beliefs upon God and their religious upbringing. Although torn Sheri schedules an abortion, which weighs on Lane deeply. Lane, frozen in fear and not having the courage to freely talk to Sheri about the situation, has a conversation with her in his own head which leads him to question love, morals, religion and life. As they face this unwanted pregnancy, Lane, controlled by fear realizes that sometimes in life certain situations are too complicated to solely be answered within the rigidity of religion. People are human and regardless of how strong their faith in religion is, the battle between right and wrong will forever exist. Ultimately, Sheri decides to carry the child, which Lane assumes is a statement of Sheri’s faith in him. Inspired by her leap of faith, Lane decides to break free from the fear, muster up some courage and ultimately makes a leap of faith of his own and decides to give loving her a try. Lane’s epiphany leads to the central idea that sometimes it takes breaking the confines of fear and having faith in love or in another person to win the battle between right and wrong, which Wallace conveys beautifully.
In the end, it takes more than a macho attitude to refute the word of God, or to successfully take on the world of religion and destroy its existence. Bill Maher’s overly inflated ethos, lack of decorum, unconvincing use of logical fallacies, and bad inductive logic are some of the key reasons why this film presented a weak argument. Eternity's a terrible thought. I mean, where's it all going to end? Said Tom Stoppard. Only God knows when and where it will all end neither certainty nor doubt will change that.
For Mr. Jillette, the question of God is critical. His answer gives meaning to every other aspect of his life. What is interesting is that many Christians believe the same thing, but we have a different answer to the question of God. Therefore, Jillette's argument is not the importance of the question. The main point that Jillette is trying to make is that there is enough meaning and purpose in this world without God. He states, "It has to be enough, but it's everything in the world and everything in the world is plenty for me. It seems just rude to beg the invisible for more.” The answer to the question of God quite literally means everything in the world to Jillette. The philosophical question of this case is not the importance of the question of God, but rather how does our answer to this question affect the way we live. The supporting arguments for Jillette are that belief in God ...
Watching God is a narrative about Janie’s quest to free herself from repression and explore
“Bringing Down the House” featuring Steve Martin and Queen Latifah is a clever comedy that creatively showcases the sociolinguistic phenomena covered in this course. The film is about a tax attorney named Peter, played by Martin, who stumbles into an online lawyer chat room and meets Charlene, played by Latifah. The two chat frequently, mostly about court cases, and eventually decide to meet in person. When the day finally comes, Peter is greeted at the door with who he thought would be a middle-aged Caucasian woman, but happened to be Charlene, a black woman who just escaped from prison. Thinking this was a mistake, Peter tries to kick out Charlene but is later convinced she is the one who he was speaking with in the chat room. Charlene was able to successfully impersonate a lawyer through speech, and along with a deceiving picture, able to convince Peter she was a petite blonde. During these chats, the two talked about court cases that happened to relate to Charlene’s predicament with the law. In attempt to clear her name from a crime she did not commit, Charlene researched the judicial system and similar court cases to hers while in prison. Now that she is out, she seeks personal assistance from Peter who has already through the internet, given her support. All throughout the movie the characters contrast in viewpoints, culture, and most importantly for our studies, language. Charlene and Peter represent different language backgrounds which we can analyze as the root of their character development and actions throughout the film.
Assume you’re walking down a street and everywhere you turn you encounter pitch black darkness. You reach a point where you only have two choices; either you go left where there is a group of tattooed muscular black men or you go right where you find a group of well dressed white men. What would you do? Your immediate choice would be to stay clear from the group of black men and that you’d be better off going to the right. What just happened here was that you assumed a certain group of human beings is more likely to cause you harm than the other. From a very young age we start to categorize things in to different groups. We see pencils, pens, erasers and we categorize them in a group and call them ‘stationery’. Similarly we tend to categorize human beings in to different groups and associate certain behaviors or traits with these groups. We have this urge to categorize because it makes us ‘cognitively effective’. When we categorize, we no longer need to consider information about each member of the group; we assume that what holds true for some members must also be true for other members of the group. The act of categorizing human beings is known as stereotyping. The word stereotype has Greek roots; ‘stereos’ meaning firm and ‘typos’ meaning impression hence, ‘Firm Impression’. The word itself implies that we associate certain ‘impressions’ with a group and hold these impressions to be true for most if not each member of the group. Although many leading sociologists and psychologists will have us believe that stereotypes are firmly grounded in reality, the truth is stereotypes exist only because we allow them to; we cause their existence and ultimately perpetuate them because in reality stereotypes are nothing but mere logical fal...
24. How does the schoolboy perceive God? Is this your perception? Why or why not?
Portrayal of Christianity in the Media In this piece of coursework I am going to write an essay about how Christianity is portrayed in the media. I'm going to write about mainstream shows such as Songs of Praise and Paradise found. I am also going to write about how a Christian issue is dealt with on Eastenders which was Euthanasia. Then I am going to write about how Homosexuality is looked upon in the film Philadelphia.
"Where Was God? An Interview with David Bentley Hart." Where Was God? An Interview with David Bentley Hart. N.p., n.d. Web. 02 May 2014.
who runs into some issues and takes the unmoral path, struggles with his idea of god throughout the entire movie. The other poignant character played by Woody Allen, is Cliff Stern whom is an aspiring documentary director making his masterpiece about a philosopher who seems very optimistic about life and acts as a commentator throughout the movie. The final analysis of god comes in the end when these two charters finally meet at a party and discuss Judah difficulties. Though the views of god flip flop throughout the movie at the end it is obvious that Judah has lost all faith in god in this world and Cliff believes in a just universe where wrongs burden the wrongdoers forever. The comments Cliff makes would seem to indicate that god is present in our lives through our conscious; however, Judah has lived through the worst with little consequences and now back to his life implying that god is simply a watcher of this world and doe not interact with it. The movie implies that though are perception of god may shift through life eventually we are left with nothing in term of a diety.
The film begins with a new teacher, Jaime Escalante, arriving to Garfield High School in East Los Angeles. On his first day he comes to find out that the computer science class he thought he was going to teach doesn't exist, because the school has no computers. In turn he is assigned to take over the general algebra class. From the beginning the film portrays the school as one on its downfall, and with students that are facing poverty. The class he receives is full of students who, according to other teachers at the school, are unintelligent and incapable of learning much of the material. Students cannot be expected to learn material when the teachers themselves do not believe in the stude...