Plenty of reviews of monumental have been posted. I ended up writing a friend an email about the movie and wanted to simply post my thoughts for the entire internet and the 15 people who read my blog (my wife promises me she doesn’t just click 15 times). There is more than just a review. The conversation started with me telling my friend it was “disappointing” and I sent him a link to a friend’s blog which explained many of my thoughts. Read it here.
My friend wrote me back:
From what your friend stated he was disappointed, but, he had several witnessing opportunities, what can be disappointing about that?
Here is my response with some editing:
Brother – there is nothing disappointing about witnessing opportunities. But that does not justify the means that provided the opportunity. Abortion centers provide witnessing opportunities; so does teenage pregnancy, death of loved ones and car accidents. Witnessing opportunities are what we make of them. I’ve witnessed at the same movie theater after other movies as well. So yes, I praise God Almighty that Fred Triplett as well as John Chizam preached the Word after this movie and someone I don’t know named Lance. I am glad I was able to give out tracts. But that has no bearing on the movie itself.
Now as far as the movie goes:
- It was a movie about Christianity, but it was missing the gospel of Jesus Christ.
- Many well known people were portrayed as “partners” with Kirk in this endeavor. In all cases, they are simply portrayed as Christians. This list includes:
a. Alveda King – who may or may not be a Christian, but she partners with Catholics in the pro-life cause.
b. David Barton – I don’t know who he is, but everything I found quickly wasn’t flattering.
c. Glenn Beck – a well known denier of the one true God, Jesus Christ. Probably biblically qualified to be considered a wolf in sheep’s clothing.
I do not think that as Christians we should partner with those who are not Christian, particularly on such a spiritual endeavor. Kirk Cameron, whether wittingly or not, lended credibility to Glenn Beck last night. The Bible says to not even greet someone like that. 2 John 1:10
3. There was a sublte but clear postmillenial slant. As members of Berean Baptist Church, we have affirmed a premillenial view of the Bible and eschatology. Many of the positive reviews I read celebrate the postmillenial slant that Kirk is now putting on things. This is actually a turnoff for me, but even if it had a premillenial slant, my other points would still apply.
4. There was a touch of pragmatism involved, although Kirk tried to stem this off at times (by talking about the necessary heart change). The following concept or idea was implied:
if we use God and His bible –>> Then we can get what we want (whether that is freedom, prosperity, whatever, often a very good thing could be the result).
First of all, God is worthy of our praise, worship and OBEDIENCE regardless of whether we think it will achieve for us our desired effect. As well…many of the people who need the gospel will be turned off by this message. They (unregenerate, unrepentant sinners) do not desire the freedom offered by the gospel…they desire their sin. Promising a homosexual or an abortion doctor or a prostitute or a hardened criminal that a return to biblical roots will offer them freedom and help our country is asinine. They do not have any desire for the freedom offered by the gospel.
What they need is to be told of God’s righteous judgment which is immminent, that His wrath is currently abiding on them, and the escape offered by grace through faith alone in the resurrected Son of God, Jesus Christ who became sin on behalf of His people. They need to know that Jesus Christ is their Lord, whether they acknowledge it or not. Attempts to convincing them that biblical basis for laws without a regenerated heart will not only be unfruitful, but somewhat insulting. You may as well tell a leopard to change his spots or an ethiopian to change his skin color…Jeremiah 13:23. You could make the argument that the country could be made better using these principles, even if people don’t believe them. That even false converts and members of apostate christian churches and groups could embrace the morality and promote it, but who cares? I’m not trying to make the world a better place from where people can go to hell. I praise God so many unbelievers still have a conscience, but their end is the same as the most violent criminal apart from faith alone in Christ alone.
Was there a lot of good in the movie? Yes, just like October Baby (which I do not recommend because of the universalist/ecumenical slant and no gospel), there were some good messages; Christian morality was exhibited and extolled. At one point, it was pointed out that not all churchgoers are Christian, and Kirk even mentioned that not all the founding fathers were Christian, yet they still saw the value in the Bible as a source of truth for governance. There was a ton of historical information which was offered (with little attribution to the source) which can pump people up for our nation. David Barton mocked secular historians for their lack of footnotes…yet this movie itself cited no source for its data either.
It was entertaining and somewhat inspiring.
But how does it inspire?
- Did it inspire me to buy Kirk’s Monumental Homeschool curriculum? No.
- Did it inspire me to buy Kirk’s Family Home Devotional? No.
- Did it inspire me to encourage my friends to go, or my unsaved family? No. (In fact, I hope my unsaved family misses it because I’m afraid it will allow them to feel comfortable in their sin because many of them are on the right side of the morality fence.)
- Did it inspire me to visit or demand others visit the demand this movie website? No.
It inspired me to do exactly what the movie itself needed to do. It inspired me to follow the Bible in my home, attempt to influence people in the same fashion, and hope that through the preaching of the gospel, the Lord will grant repentance and faith to lost souls and that the Holy Spirit will then guide their lives and we will being to live in a country that is actually converted.
Here is another review which I thought was fair by Jon Speed. You will notice the postmillenial praise (which I would expect from a postmiller) as well as a lot of very well-reasoned comments on the movie.
Anyway – I love you brother, and I’m not trying to argue. Go ahead and go see it if you want. Personally, with my budget and the abundance of gospel preaching missionaries and evangelists I know I’d have preferred to give the ticket and popcorn price to one of them, or just spent it all myself on tracts I could carry. Like I said, I love Kirk, but I think he made a mistake, and it happens to be a very public one, which requires public repentance, in my opinion.
I could be wrong about some of these things. I do believe the movie was “good.” But a missed opportunity and potentially a display of a direction that I hope Kirk isn’t headed into partnership with nonbelievers.