2011.03 The Genesis Code

2
Section A 18 MARCH 2011 The Genesis Code P romoters say The Genesis Code is the Christian movie of the year .” Some urge to make amily-riendly movies. Does The Genesis Code measure up? synopsis Kerry is a Christian coed who interviews campus hockey-star Blake or her col- lege newspaper. As their relationship develops, Kerry learns Blake’s mother is in a coma. Blake dismisses Kerry’s prayer suggestions; he “knows” science disproves the Bible, especially Genesis. Suddenly quently she and her physicist brother seek to demonstrate that science and Genesis do not confict. Her brother unveils a “solution” – the Genesis Code – to show that what science teaches and what Genesis records are both true and in agree- ment. (Rating-PG; Length-2:15; Budget-$5 million) Stars in the movie include ormer Senator Fred Thompson as judge, Oscar winners Ernest Borgnine Catherine Hicks (Annie Camden on Seventh Heav- en) as Kerry’s academic advisor. Kerry’s minister-ather is played by Jerry Zan- dstra, a real-lie pastor and economics proessor at Cornerston e University in Grand Rapids. He’s VP o American Epic Entertainment and executive in charge o production or the movie. Industry proessionals and Christian conservatives ormed the company to provide amily-riendly alternatives to Hollywood movies. Filming was in 2009 in Grand Rapids at Calvin College, Patterson Ice Center, Grand Rapids Pub- lic Museum, and in other Michigan cities (Walker, Lowell, and Wyoming). Nationwide release began February 18, 2011. Many good aspects adorn this movie: – Repeated reerences to God’s transcendent wisdom – Frequent Scripture quotations – Meaningul prayers – Eective portrayal o muscular, compassionate, articulate Christianity – Warm amily relationships – Healthy, supportive riendships – Science proessor explains that what makes sense to his scientic mind is the Judeo-Christian God Negatives: – Taking God’s name in vain twice – Student chugs beer pitcher. Show-o bites, chews, spits glass (Main characters don’t partici- pate.) – Male pastor discusses morality o barbaric tribal rite with emale proessor. Although his point hits home, the subject is inappropriate or a amily movie. romanCe Kerry is chaste, and when questioned says she won’t give away something she’s saving or marriage. Clothing is modest; there are no indecent scenes. Treatment o these issues is entertaining and en- gaging. Like Jesus’ stories, lms oten communicate more eectively than abstruse essays. In the classroom Kerry aces all-too-common discrimination against Christian belies. Her aca- Kerry engages her proessor cogently over his description o the “sudden Cambrian ex- plosion o li e with no apparent antecedent.” When he discusses “order emerging rom served emerging rom chaos. Order naturally devolves into disorder. “Doesn’t that indicate the necessity o a Watchmaker?” she asks. Kerry could have been more eective in answering her advisor’s contention that absolute truth does not exist. Instead she seems disconcerted by the proessor’s plea successul. However, her ather shows the proessor that the proessor hersel lives by moral absolutes, despite her claim that there are no certainties in the moral realm. Blake’s mother is comatose and the am- ily argues over terminating lie support. Blake comes to recognize prayer as a primary resource. sCienCe vs. Faith The movie asks, “What i both are right?” O course true science (literally, “knowledge”) and Almighty who created the universe recorded His activity accurately in Genesis. But “Science” usually means “Scientism,” the belie that truth i s determined scientically , with the scientic community the arbi- cannot both be right. Beore viewing the movie, I was concerned about its harmonization o Genesis with science. Would it turn out to be some version o theistic evolution, like most harmonizations? The movie’s harmonization, called the Genesis Code, is not a secret code, but rather a ramework or understanding the passage o time. Its presentation is entertaining, but may conuse people without knowl- edge o Einstein’s relativity theory. The movie uses the physics o time dilation to em- brace a multi-billion-year age or the universe. Time measurement depends on acceleration and mass. For example, an increase in mass or acceleration slows time. Thereo re dierent rames o reerence measure time dierently. The movie suggests that the six days o creation in Genesis are rom God’s “cosm ic” reer- ence point, while the same period viewed rom earth would take 15.75 billion years. The characters state repeatedly, “Genesis says God created in six days.” But their Genesis Code harmo- nization is to interpret “day” as a time-dilated POT (passage o time) lasting rom billions to hundreds o thousands o years. They believe in Six POTs o Cre- ation which ends up being a version o theistic evolu- tion, oten termed progressive creation. During the harmonization portion o the movie, the group marvels that God was able to inspire Scrip- ture in such a way that “mankind had to evolve to its current level in order to understand the story as it was originally written.” I disagree with the movie’s message in this area. Time dilation and the stretching o the abric o space (Isaiah 40:22; 45:12 and seven other verses) do help explain how we could see light rom stars billions o God inspired men to write the Bible to convey man’s rame o reerence to communicate with man. Genesis is written rom the reerence point o earth, not rom a cosmic reerence point somewhere in the heavens that may have a dierent time scale. During the harmonization the pastor says, “Gen- esis is not an easy book to understand.” I disagree. Genesis is straightorward history and is one o the easiest in the Bible to understand. and the Bible is all one-way, and thus undermines literal Bible interpretation. The Genesis Code accepts scientists’ speculations that the universe is 15 billion years old as indisputable act and strives to nd a Early in the movie Blake says that i you can’t believe the beginning o the Bible, why believe the rest o it. This is crucial. I we can’t believe God’s plain words in Genesis, how can we believe other events science disputes – like Noah’s Flood, Jonah’s Rescue, Virgin Birth, and Resurrection? Q  ualiFied thumBs up While disagreeing with a major component, I still ound the movie interesting and enjoyable. I did not all asleep as with some non-Indiana-Jones, Jane- Austen-type movies. The movie doesn’t consider that scientism’s view o the past may be allible. Some people will leave the movie thinking that i science and the Bible dispute the age o the universe, then it’s the literal interpretation o the Bible that must be modied. http://BibleScienc eGuy.wordpr ess.com and follow him WiLLiAM T. PELLETiER PH.d. Treatment o these issues is enter taining and engaging. like jesus’ stories, fms oten communicate more eectivey than abstruse essays. “vote with dollars” to show it's good business – Multiple armations o “absolute Biblical truth” chaos,” she reminds him that order is never ob- that she abandon her Biblical belies to be true Biblical aith are both right and in harmony. The ter o truth. Science in this sense and Biblical aith light-years away , even though the universe is only 6,000 years old. But it ’s not a satisactory explanation or age. way to interpret Genesis to t. The movie does not support creation in six literal days about 6,000 years ago. As I eared, the flm’ s “reconciliation ” o science But the plain meaning of Genesis is God created all in 6 normal earth days 6,000 years ago. Soli Deo Gloria. THE bIbLE AND SCIENCE BY WiLLiAM T. PELLETiER, PH.d. [WOODSIDE NEWS COLUMNIST] E-mail [email protected]. See blog at His truth to mankind. I believe He would have to use Three major issues generate energy throughout the themes Brie kissing occurs once. Two negatives: Christian Kerry should not seek romance with non-Christian proessors challenge Kerry’s aith. Conse- and Louise Fletcher as Blake’s grandparents, and Blake; most initiative is Kerry’s, not Blake’s. movie: Academic discriminatio n against Christians; Sanctity of life; Science vs. Genesis.

Transcript of 2011.03 The Genesis Code

8/7/2019 2011.03 The Genesis Code

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/201103-the-genesis-code 1/1

Section A18 MARCH 2011

The Genesis Code 

Promoters say  The Genesis Code is “the 

Christian movie of the year .” Some urge

to make amily-riendly movies. Does The Genesis Code measure up?

synopsis

Kerry is a Christian coed who interviewscampus hockey-star Blake or her col-lege newspaper. As their relationshipdevelops, Kerry learns Blake’s mother isin a coma. Blake dismisses Kerry’s prayersuggestions; he “knows” science disprovesthe Bible, especially Genesis. Suddenly 

quently she and her physicist brother seek to demonstrate that science and Genesis

do not confict. Her brother unveils a “solution” – theGenesis Code – to show that what science teachesand what Genesis records are both true and in agree-ment. (Rating-PG; Length-2:15; Budget-$5 million)

Stars in the movie include ormer Senator FredThompson as judge, Oscar winners Ernest Borgnine

Catherine Hicks (Annie Camden on Seventh Heav-en) as Kerry’s academic advisor.

Kerry’s minister-ather is played by Jerry Zan-dstra, a real-lie pastor and economics proessor atCornerstone University in Grand Rapids. He’s VP o American Epic Entertainment and executive in chargeo production or the movie. Industry proessionalsand Christian conservatives ormed the company toprovide amily-riendly alternatives to Hollywood

movies.Filming was in 2009 in Grand Rapids at Calvin

College, Patterson Ice Center, Grand Rapids Pub-lic Museum, and in other Michigan cities (Walker,Lowell, and Wyoming). Nationwide release beganFebruary 18, 2011.

Many good aspects adorn this movie:– Repeated reerences to God’s transcendent wisdom

– Frequent Scripture quotations– Meaningul prayers– Eective portrayal o muscular, compassionate,

articulate Christianity – Warm amily relationships– Healthy, supportive riendships– Science proessor explains that what makes sense

to his scientic mind is the Judeo-Christian GodNegatives:– Taking God’s name in vain twice– Student chugs beer pitcher. Show-o bites,

chews, spits glass (Main characters don’t partici-pate.)

– Male pastor discusses morality o barbaric tribalrite with emale proessor. Although his point hitshome, the subject is inappropriate or a amily movie.

romanCe

Kerry is chaste, and when questioned says she won’tgive away something she’s saving or marriage.Clothing is modest; there are no indecent scenes.

Treatment o these issues is entertaining and en-gaging. Like Jesus’ stories, lms oten communicatemore eectively than abstruse essays.

In the classroom Kerry aces all-too-commondiscrimination against Christian belies. Her aca-demic advisor tries to coerce compromise.

Kerry engages her proessor cogently overhis description o the “sudden Cambrian ex-plosion o lie with no apparent antecedent.”When he discusses “order emerging rom

served emerging rom chaos. Order naturally devolves into disorder. “Doesn’t that indicatethe necessity o a Watchmaker?” she asks.

Kerry could have been more eectivein answering her advisor’s contention thatabsolute truth does not exist. Instead sheseems disconcerted by the proessor’s plea

successul. However, her ather shows theproessor that the proessor hersel livesby moral absolutes, despite her claim thatthere are no certainties in the moral realm.

Blake’s mother is comatose and the am-ily argues over terminating lie support.

Blake comes to recognize prayer as a primary resource.

sCienCe vs. Faith

The movie asks, “What i both are right?”O course true science (literally, “knowledge”) and

Almighty who created the universe recorded Hisactivity accurately in Genesis. But “Science” usually means “Scientism,” the belie that truth is determinedscientically, with the scientic community the arbi-

cannot both be right.Beore viewing the movie, I was concerned about

its harmonization o Genesis with science. Would itturn out to be some version o theistic evolution, likemost harmonizations?

The movie’s harmonization, called the GenesisCode, is not a secret code, but rather a ramework orunderstanding the passage o time. Its presentation isentertaining, but may conuse people without knowl-edge o Einstein’s relativity theory.

The movie uses the physics o time dilation to em-

brace a multi-billion-year age or the universe. Timemeasurement depends on acceleration and mass. Forexample, an increase in mass or acceleration slowstime. Thereore dierent rames o reerence measuretime dierently. The movie suggests that the six dayso creation in Genesis are rom God’s “cosmic” reer-ence point, while the same period viewed rom earthwould take 15.75 billion years.

The characters state repeatedly, “Genesis says Godcreated in six days.” But their Genesis Code harmo-nization is to interpret “day” as a time-dilated POT(passage o time) lasting rom billions to hundreds o thousands o years. They believe in Six POTs o Cre-ation which ends up being a version o theistic evolu-tion, oten termed progressive creation.

During the harmonization portion o the movie,the group marvels that God was able to inspire Scrip-ture in such a way that “mankind had to evolve to itscurrent level in order to understand the story as it was

originally written.”I disagree with the movie’s message in this area.Time dilation and the stretching o the abric o space(Isaiah 40:22; 45:12 and seven other verses) do helpexplain how we could see light rom stars billions o 

God inspired men to write the Bible to convey 

man’s rame o reerence to communicate with man.Genesis is written rom the reerence point o earth,not rom a cosmic reerence point somewhere in theheavens that may have a dierent time scale.

During the harmonization the pastor says, “Gen-esis is not an easy book to understand.” I disagree.Genesis is straightorward history and is one o theeasiest in the Bible to understand.

and the Bible is all one-way, and thus underminesliteral Bible interpretation. The Genesis Code  accepts

scientists’ speculations that the universe is 15 billionyears old as indisputable act and strives to nd a

Early in the movie Blake says that i you can’tbelieve the beginning o the Bible, why believe therest o it. This is crucial. I we can’t believe God’splain words in Genesis, how can we believe otherevents science disputes – like Noah’s Flood, Jonah’sRescue, Virgin Birth, and Resurrection?

Q  ualiFied thumBs up

While disagreeing with a major component, I stillound the movie interesting and enjoyable. I did not

all asleep as with some non-Indiana-Jones, Jane-Austen-type movies.The movie doesn’t consider that scientism’s view 

o the past may be allible. Some people will leavethe movie thinking that i science and the Bibledispute the age o the universe, then it’s the literalinterpretation o the Bible that must be modied.

http://BibleScienceGuy.wordpress.com and follow himat http://twitter.com/BibleScienceGuy.

WiLLiAM T. PELLETiER

PH.d.

Treatment o these issues is entertaining and engaging.

like jesus’ stories, fms oten communicate more

eectivey than abstruse essays.

“vote with dollars” to show it's good business

– Multiple armations o “absolute Biblical truth”

chaos,” she reminds him that order is never ob-

that she abandon her Biblical belies to be

true Biblical aith are both right and in harmony. The

ter o truth. Science in this sense and Biblical aith

light-years away, even though the universe is only 

6,000 years old. But it ’s not a satisactory explanationor age.

way to interpret Genesis to t. The movie does notsupport creation in six literal days about 6,000years ago.

As I eared, the flm’s “reconciliation” o science

But the plain meaning of Genesis is God created allin 6 normal earth days 6,000 years ago. Soli Deo Gloria.

THE bIbLE AND SCIENCE BY WiLLiAM T. PELLETiER, PH.d. [WOODSIDE NEWS COLUMNIST]

©©2011 William T. Pelletier 

E-mail [email protected]. See blog at 

His truth to mankind. I believe He would have to use

Three major issues generate energy throughout thethemes

Brie kissing occurs once. Two negatives: Christian

Kerry should not seek romance with non-Christian

proessors challenge Kerry’s aith. Conse-

and Louise Fletcher as Blake’s grandparents, and

Blake; most initiative is Kerry’s, not Blake’s.

movie: Academic discrimination against Christians;Sanctity of life; Science vs. Genesis.