"The Invention of Lying" - A Review

The movie was a gross perversion of many things, but worst of all, the person and work of Jesus Christ.

I am ashamed that I've watched this movie. This post is intended to deter people from watching it, for the sake of the name of Jesus Christ.

Spoiler Alert

The movie starts with a general exposition narrated by the voice of the main character. He explains that the human race had not yet evolved to be able to lie. He noted that his character would be the first in the history of mankind to lie. He is unattractive and would be fired from his job as a "script writer" (i.e. an exact recollection of actual events that had happened in the past). He is fired, is accused of being a homosexual, and must leave his apartment as he lacks $800 rent. His first lie is at the bank teller when asking what to withdraw he tells her $800 knowing that he only has $300. She willingly trusts him, despite the computer in front of her telling something different.

A suicidal neighbor reveals that he lives life in despair. The main character tells him that things will get better and that he shouldn't commit suicide. The neighbor willingly believes him and stops attempting to end his life.

The main character's mother is elderly and lives in "a sad place for hopeless people". She is soon on her deathbed and comments that she is saddened by the nothingness that awaits her in death. He lies by telling her that at death she will be in the happiest place she can imagine and that she will receive her very own mansion. She dies happy, but he is overheard by doctors and nurses who willingly trust him. News spreads and crowds follow him to hear what he "knows" about what happens to people when they die. He writes a list of 10 things and posts them on 2 pizza boxes, because he lacks 2 tablets (of stone). He delivers to the world via international television broadcast that there is a man in the sky who will give everyone mansions provided they don't do 3 bad things (3 strikes and you're out, like baseball). The man in the sky is responsible for everything that happens and cannot be seen. Everyone willingly trusts the main character. Buildings resembling churches are erected as "quiet places to think about the man in the sky". At a wedding ceremony, the officiating minister wears a gold cross, which upon closer inspection is just a gold representation of the main character holding out the two pizza boxes.

The main character becomes incredibly rich by defrauding a bank, casino, and the general populace. He improves his financial situation, but the woman he wants still will not marry (or procreate with) him because he is undesirable for his genetics. He decides not to lie to her about genetics even though he has opportunity to. He becomes depressed and doesn't shave nor cut his hair, and when she later rings his doorbell to invite him to her wedding to a pompous, vain rival, he answers wrapped in a bedsheet wearing sandals, an obvious allusion to stereotypical images of Jesus.

In the end, he gets the girl. Only he and his son can lie. There is no indication that he was punished for gaining money through deception or any of the lies he told. There is not even indication that anyone ever distrusts a single thing he said.

Review

The premise of the movie seemed intriguing. What would happen in a world in which no one lied. What would be inclination of the first person to lie, and what would be the result? For these reasons I was drawn to watch this movie. Nevertheless, the following are contentions I hold with the writers of it:

Contention 1:

The idea of lying being an evolution of man. The writers of this movie reveal that they believe in some sort of evolution, with the general understanding that over time improvements are added to the human race, while disadvantages are discarded. One will notice immediately that lying is an improvement according to their theory. If lying is an improvement, what about distrust? As noted in the synopsis above, no one distrusted anything the liar said. But what is the logical outcome of a person continuously saying things that are not? It is inevitably that people would eventually come to distrust one another. Is this an advancement among members of the human race? I wonder if the writers of this movie consider that what they are marking as evolution is, in fact, degeneration? Perhaps that was their intent.

Contention 2:

A confusion of hope and dishonesty. The liar on several occasions is able to temporarily improve someone's mood who is otherwise depressed or in despair. While the intention may be commendable, the idea of helping someone by lying to them is convoluted. Apparently, the writers believe that it is impossible to have hope without also being liars. It paints a very dreary world, where we see characters who wish to commit suicide because they are unattractive and others are slaves to their own vain desires. What is odd is that by setting a world in which people only speak what is truth is that they deny the possibility that things could change. The writers seem to imply that to expect change for the better is at it's root a lie. How very pessimistic! These writers paint a very depraved view of hope, for they don't portray people as having hope until the lie enters the world. Is hope dependant upon lies by it's nature? I beg to differ. Hope can be based on truth, but not on what is visible. The author of Hebrews tells us:

Hebrews 11:1
11:1 Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.

The writer's definition of a lie comes to mean anything that cannot be seen. They create a world in which having faith itself has to become a lie. They create a world in which believing in the invisible God becomes, itself, a sin.

Contention 3:

The premise of the movie's writers: "god is a lie." In their scenario, the first man to discover lying also invents a god. Everyone in that world believes him because they have no concept of a lie. In effect, the writers are concluding that religion is false. We see this in the movie in that no religious symbols (or even moral labels on behavior) exist in this world where no one lies until the main character begins to tell lies.

I'll note, the religion which the main character creates is one which is very agreeable to his own character. He creates a religion which benefits himself. This is most clearly seen when he says "the man in the sky says that you can't have sex before marriage". This is a lie, of course, as he has made up the man in the sky (per the writer's plot line). The context in which this is that his love interest has mentioned that she will likely have sex with his rival. He creates a religion which is beneficial to his needs at the time. This is, by definition, a man-made religion, which is false. Oddly enough, I do not find this point as disagreeable. If their point is only that man made religion is false, I will not disagree with them. Religion which has it's doctrinal source and object of praise in man and not in God is blasphemy. Sadly, I fear that their point is that all religion is man-made and is therefore false, which I vehemently disagree with. If they've excluded the possibility that God could possibly truly exist and would actually reveal a religion to mankind, they've fallen into serious error with eternal consequences.

Contention 4:

The inventor of lying is compared to Jesus Christ. If you didn't catch that in the synopsis above, let me repeat it: the inventor of lying is compared to Jesus Christ. Does this sound like Jesus to you? Let's compare this with Jesus's own words:

John 8:44
44 You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and has nothing to do with the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies.

Jesus identifies the devil (yes, the devil, himself) as the father of lies. The devil has nothing to do with the truth; there is no truth in him. The bible tells us that lying, deceit, dishonesty, etc. are from the devil. This movie is saying that they are from Jesus. What blasphemy! Consider who Jesus is:

John 14:6
6 Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

Jesus is truth! Not only is he truth, but he is THE truth. Jesus is truth, and in him there is nothing false:

John 7:16-18
16 So Jesus answered them, “My teaching is not mine, but his who sent me. 17 If anyone's will is to do God's [5] will, he will know whether the teaching is from God or whether I am speaking on my own authority. 18 The one who speaks on his own authority seeks his own glory; but the one who seeks the glory of him who sent him is true, and in him there is no falsehood.

I am finding it hard to appropriately express what I feel toward the themes presented in this movie. I cannot find words to express the disconnect between what the writers of this film have presented and what God tells us in His Word. They are liars. The movie is a lie.

Psalm 119:163
163 I hate and abhor falsehood,
but I love your law.

on the label "Apostolic"

I've recited the Nicene Creed before. Many Christians have. In this creed, we affirm the findings of the council of Nicea, mostly which are affirmations of the Triune nature of God. It also affirms that we "believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church." Today, I'd like to focus on the word "Apostolic".

To be Apostolic means to agree with the Apostles. Apostle is from the Greek word, ἀπόστολος, which means "messenger, or one who is sent". The Apostles were sent with the good news of Jesus Christ. To be Apostolic means to accept the Apostle's teaching as sent from Jesus Christ, himself. Some modern Christians may jerk their knees at this. Shouldn't we follow what Jesus said? Well, yes, we should follow what Jesus said, and He said to follow the Apostles:

John 15:
20 Remember the word that I said to you: ‘A servant is not greater than his master.’ If they persecuted me, they will also persecute you. If they kept my word, they will also keep yours.

These last words are very direct. If we keep Jesus' words, we will keep the Apostle's. To be Christian means that we must be Apostolic. We cannot claim to be followers of Jesus Christ if we do not accept those whom He sent. The question then rises, who were the Apostles? The Catholic church would rephrase the questions saying, "who are the Apostles?", and answer that they believe the archbishops and pope are Apostles. Is this accurate? Let's look into this matter:

Following verse 20 of John 15 (cited above) there are the following verses:

26 “But when the Helper comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth, who proceeds from the Father, he will bear witness about me. 27 And you also will bear witness, because you have been with me from the beginning.

Jesus tells the Apostles that the Holy Spirit will bear witness to Jesus first. God himself is the first witness, there is no greater witness than Him. He tells the apostles that they will bear witness with the Holy Spirit because they have been with Him from the beginning. From this, we should take note that the Apostles have had personal encounters with Jesus himself. He is speaking, at this point, to the 12 Apostles, those who shared the last meal with Him in the upper room. Judas was among these 12, but I don't think that we're to listen to Judas, as he was soon to betray Jesus:

John 13:
2 During supper, when the devil had already put it into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon's son, to betray him, ...

So, we're supposed to follow the 11 Apostles, right? Well, no. The 11 soon became 12 again as is recorded in Acts 1:

15 In those days Peter stood up among the brothers (the company of persons was in all about 120) and said, 16 “Brothers, the Scripture had to be fulfilled, which the Holy Spirit spoke beforehand by the mouth of David concerning Judas, who became a guide to those who arrested Jesus. 17 For he was numbered among us and was allotted his share in this ministry.”

Peter suggests the 11 find a 12th from the 120 who followed them. They do so, and the criteria which they used is recorded in the verses that follow:

21 So one of the men who have accompanied us during all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, 22 beginning from the baptism of John until the day when he was taken up from us—one of these men must become with us a witness to his resurrection.”

When the 11 seek to find a 12th, they chose only from someone who had been with Jesus. It is mentioned from when Jesus was baptized by John (Mark 1) until he ascended (Acts 1:6-11). Essentially, they are only choosing among those who have witnessed all of Jesus' public ministry! The passage continues:

23 And they put forward two, Joseph called Barsabbas, who was also called Justus, and Matthias. 24 And they prayed and said, “You, Lord, who know the hearts of all, show which one of these two you have chosen 25 to take the place in this ministry and apostleship from which Judas turned aside to go to his own place.” 26 And they cast lots for them, and the lot fell on Matthias, and he was numbered with the eleven apostles.

After selecting from only those they knew had been with Jesus through it all, they narrowed it down to two, prayed for God to make the final selection, and cast lots (a way of determining God's Will, see Lev 16:8, Prov 16:33). This is recorded openly for us, so they did not make the selection privately. All together, this means that they understood that the selection of Apostles was not an action done by men, but by God. We see this same thinking when Paul speaks of his Apostleship in Galatians 1:

1:1 Paul, an apostle—not from men nor through man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised him from the dead—

Remember that Paul was not one of the 12. How, then, did he become an Apostle? Did the 12 add him to their number the same way Matthias was added? As the first verse in Galatians says (quoted above), Paul is an apostle 'not from men nor through man'. He underscores later in the same chapter that He was directly called by Jesus Christ:

11 For I would have you know, brothers, that the gospel that was preached by me is not man's gospel. [3] 12 For I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ.

Paul became an Apostle because Jesus chose him. The 12 Apostles became Apostles because Jesus chose them. Since Jesus chose them and told us to listen to them, we need to listen to them. How do we do so? Well, the way we hear the Apostle's teaching is by reading what they wrote. The Apostle Paul wrote most of the New Testament. Other parts of the New Testament were written by close followers of the Apostles. We ensure that we are paying heed to the Apostles by hearing and doing what is written in the Bible.

To reject the Apostles' writings is to reject God who ultimately sent them. Jesus speaks to this effect as he sent out the 72 in Luke 10:

16 “The one who hears you hears me, and the one who rejects you rejects me, and the one who rejects me rejects him who sent me.”

Jesus even prays to The Father to for us to believe the Apostles in John 17:

20 “I do not ask for these only, but also for those who will believe in me through their word, 21 that they may all be one, just as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me.

on the label "Trinitarian"

Christians are baptized in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit (Matthew 28:19). They are done so because they are baptized into the name of God. One might ask, then, why they are not baptized into the "names" of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. This observation leads to the doctrine of the Trinity. Christians believe in the doctrine of the Trinity because it is revealed in the bible. Some have noted, however, that the word "Trinity" doesn't occur in the bible. Neither does the word "Sacrament". Words like these are used to describe an idea (indeed, all words follow this pattern). Rather than saying "the things instituted by Christ which are appealing to the 5 senses (taste, touch, sight,...) and communicate spiritual truths" we say the word "Sacrament". Indeed, we could say "The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit" instead of "Trinity"... but why use the definition when the word is more convenient?

The Father is God. Jesus is God. The Holy Spirit is God. These are three persons. These are one God. They are the same in substance (whatever the God part is in each is the same in the other two), equal in power and glory.

What does the doctrine of the Trinity do for us? A pessimistic person would say "it confuses us". It is true that this is a doctrine that is hard to fully understand. In the end, though we should expect doctrines of God to be beyond our full comprehension. After all, God is unlike us and also has attributes like omniscience and omnipresence. The doctrine of the Trinity helps believers to understand some things about God which would otherwise make no sense.

First, since God has always existed in three persons, it sheds some light on why God would have created the world. Some have presumed that God made the world and mankind because he was lonely. The doctrine of the Trinity helps us to see the error of this. God was not lonely, in fact, He has always been in communion: each of the three persons with each other. God the Father has always loved God the Son. The son is eternally begotten of the father and was from eternity past before the face of the Father. The Spirit has always bonded them in their love. Mankind was created to glorify God, yet this was not to give God a glory he was in some way lacking.

John 17:
17:1 When Jesus had spoken these words, he lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, “Father, the hour has come; glorify your Son that the Son may glorify you, ... 5 And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed.

Second, it tells us something of God's character. God exists in relationship within himself. When we think of relationship, like that of a husband to a spouse or a father to a son, we naturally have an emotional imprint of what that relationship means. Consider, though, that our human relationships are but a picture of what a true relationship is. When man was created in God's image, I wonder if it included the way man would have relationship with others of mankind. Perhaps human relationships are a part of being created in the image of God.

Genesis 1:

26 Then God said, “Let us make man [8] in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”

27 So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them.

Third, it tells us something of the unity which is desired among believers. Jesus himself prays for this unity. He does not compare it with a unity among any created thing... but instead he draws attention to the unity which exists within God. Jesus calls this unity as being "perfectly one". As the Father and Son are one, so should Christians seek to be unified. Jesus also prays a reason why such unity is sought. "That they so that the world may know that you sent me and loved them even as you loved me". Unity among Christians is a powerful witness for the gospel. This unity should be most clearly seen in the local body of believers. As a person sees a congregation (as a visitor or as a long time member), they should see the love of God in God's people.

John 17:
11 And I am no longer in the world, but they are in the world, and I am coming to you. Holy Father, keep them in your name, which you have given me, that they may be one, even as we are one. ...
20 “I do not ask for these only, but also for those who will believe in me through their word, 21 that they may all be one, just as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me. 22 The glory that you have given me I have given to them, that they may be one even as we are one, 23 I in them and you in me, that they may become perfectly one, so that the world may know that you sent me and loved them even as you loved me.

My Theology is Trinitarian. It is no small matter that God refers to Himself in the first person plural ("let us make man in our image"). If God so refers to Himself, we should take note. As this is the God whom I serve, it makes a difference in how I see and relate to other Christians. I believe that God the Father chose a people for himself. I believe that Jesus is God who became man to die for men and women whom the Father chose and gave to Him. I believe the Holy Spirit effectually calls men to Jesus as their savior and lord. If these believers are called by the same God I serve, and were made children of God through the same gospel, then I look upon them as brothers. I love God because of the amazing love that He has had within Himself. I marvel at the fact that He has shared this love with mere men, even me. This is the theology that drives me to love my church, which is but a part of Christ's Church universal through time and space.

A Word of Warning

In my Sabbath morning study through the book of James (and the commentary, 24/7 Christian, by Anthony Selvaggio), we covered James 3:1-12. There are words of warning... and as I've recently started this blog, I especially feel their significance.

James 3:

3:1 Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers, for you know that we who teach will be judged with greater strictness. 2 For we all stumble in many ways. And if anyone does not stumble in what he says, he is a perfect man, able also to bridle his whole body. 3 If we put bits into the mouths of horses so that they obey us, we guide their whole bodies as well. 4 Look at the ships also: though they are so large and are driven by strong winds, they are guided by a very small rudder wherever the will of the pilot directs. 5 So also the tongue is a small member, yet it boasts of great things.

How great a forest is set ablaze by such a small fire! 6 And the tongue is a fire, a world of unrighteousness. The tongue is set among our members, staining the whole body, setting on fire the entire course of life, [1] and set on fire by hell. [2]

First, James charges that those who teach will be judged with a more strict judgment. Wow. It is not lightly that I started this blog, yet the magnitude of this is hitting home hard. These are words of warning to me. It is no small thing that God holds those who speak accountable. Consider Jesus' words:

Matthew 12:
36 I tell you, on the day of judgment people will give account for every careless word they speak, 37 for by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.

As I write blog posts (especially considering anyone in the world can read them) I need to be sure that I am speaking the truth. Concerning my readers, if I have any, do you consider my words in light of James 3:1-6? Do I steer the ship or control the horse? Both of these are positive in that they bring a large body under control. The last words are those that I want my readers to take as a warning: I may be the one who sets a forest ablaze.

How do I know if what I am saying is true? How would someone who reads my words know the same? I consider Jesus again:

John 5:

30 I can do nothing on my own. As I hear, I judge, and my judgment is just, because I seek not my own will but the will of him who sent me. 31 If I alone bear witness about myself, my testimony is not deemed true. 32 There is another who bears witness about me, and I know that the testimony that he bears about me is true. ... 36 .... For the works that the Father has given me to accomplish, the very works that I am doing, bear witness about me that the Father has sent me. 37 And the Father who sent me has himself borne witness about me. His voice you have never heard, his form you have never seen, 38 and you do not have his word abiding in you, for you do not believe the one whom he has sent. 39 You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about me, 40 yet you refuse to come to me that you may have life. ... 46 For if you believed Moses, you would believe me; for he wrote of me. 47 But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe my words?

Jesus himself recognizes that his words aren't to be taken on only his own authority. He draws his audience to consider three witnesses: His Works, His Father, and The Scriptures. These three witnesses are connected. His works are those his Father has given Him to do. His Father has borne witness, and has sent the prophets and revealed in the Scriptures that Jesus is the Messiah. The last line is a serious charge to Jesus' audience, the Pharisees: "If you do not believe Moses' writings, how will you believe my words?". We should take seriously that if we do not believe the scriptures, we cannot believe Jesus. If we do not believe Jesus, we should have no hope of eternal life.

This is where I stake my authority: I have none in myself. The only authority I have is the degree to which what I say agrees with scripture. Hold me accountable. Search the scriptures, for these have eternal life as they bear witness to Jesus Christ.

on the label "Evangelical"

Evangelical refers to the Greek word εὐαγγέλιον, which means "good message" or "gospel". Basically, Evangelicals are Christians who believe and proclaim the gospel. Jesus Himself proclaimed the gospel during His life:

Mark 1:14-15
14 Now after John was arrested, Jesus came into Galilee, proclaiming the gospel of God, 15 and saying, "The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel."

So, what is the gospel? As Jesus directed above, it is clear that the gospel is something to be believed. As context for why people should believe the gospel (and repent, or "turn away from their sin") is that the time is fulfilled and the kingdom of God is at hand. These words would sound like, "You're out of time, Judgement awaits!". Belief in the gospel is associated to salvation from such a judgement as Paul notes in Romans:

Justified by Faith
Romans 1:16-17
16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. 17 For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith for faith, as it is written, "The righteous shall live by faith."

Here Paul identifies the key of the salvation is faith. Faith is basically knowledge of a thing, assent that it is true, and trust/assurance that it is true for one's self. So, what is the thing which we must have knowledge of? What is the object of faith? What is it that Christians have faith in?

Faith in God
John 17:
17:1 When Jesus had spoken these words, he lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, “Father, the hour has come; glorify your Son that the Son may glorify you, 2 since you have given him authority over all flesh, to give eternal life to all whom you have given him. 3 And this is eternal life, that they know you the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent.

Jesus, as he prays to God the Father, reveals that eternal life is through knowledge of God and Jesus Christ. Do you "know" Jesus Christ? The question implies relationship. I have already asserted that Christians know Jesus to be their Savior and Lord. Through knowing Jesus, they come to know God as their father, too. (See Matthew 11:27). But how can this happen? How can a sinful person come to be a child of God, who is just?

The Great Exchange
2 Corinthians 5:
21 For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.

In this sentence the key of the gospel is expressed. Jesus was not a sinner (he knew no sin). God the father made him to be sin (imputed the sins of believers on him) so that we might become the righteousness of God (Christ's own righteousness imputed to those who believe). Through faith, all our sins are paid for by Jesus's death. Through faith, God sees us as if we were as righteous as Christ himself. Thus God is perfectly just to accept us, because in His sight, we are His son, thus he accepts us as adopted sons. When we are judged after death, we will be judged righteous and given eternal life through faith.

Evangelicals are very sensitive about the gospel and for good reason. Not only is it the only way to God (Jesus said, no one comes to the Father except through me John 14:6), but great punishment awaits those who would preach a false gospel:

Galatians 1:9
9 As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed.

Applying the Label
I am an evangelical. I love the gospel. I can have hope because of what Christ has done. This is the good news. There is hope. It reminds me of the bumper sticker. It has the phrase: "Know Jesus, Know Peace. No Jesus, No Peace." I think it would also apply to the idea of hope: "Know Jesus, Know Hope. No Jesus, No Hope." Jesus said firmly, "No one comes to the father except through me". It is not a mere dry theology to talk about the gospel. It is the only way to peace with God.