Come Sunday

I suspect that most people will evaluate this movie based on their personal belief systems. Fundamentalist Christians will hate it because it portrays a high profile Christian leader moving away from fundamentalism and into a universalist theological perspective. More progressive types will likely rate it higher for that same reason. The theology contained within it (such as Hollywood can really portray theology) is interesting. Certainly, the point gets made that the Bible can be used to defend either a fundamentalist (salvation through Jesus alone) perspective or a universalist (God saves everyone regardless of what they believe) perspective. I'll choose not to wade into the theological debate. Suffice to say that as a pastor I am neither fundamentalist nor universalist; I believe both perspectives (which make determinations about a person's eternal destiny) defy Jesus' instructions not to judge. I believe the gospel is intended to provide assurance in Christ without judgement on those outside Christ. I'll leave it at that.

As for the movie itself, it's the story of the faith journey of Carlton Pearson (played by Chiwetel Ejiofor.) A protege of Oral Roberts (Martin Sheen), Pearson was ordained by the Church of God in Christ (a fundamentalist, pentecostal-type denomination) and eventually became pastor of a mega-church of more than 5000 members in Tulsa, Oklahoma. But over the course of his ministry there, his theology began to change and he started to struggle with the concept of hell and divine punishment, eventually becoming a believer in universalism (or, universal reconciliation.) That led to a major split in his church and ultimately his being declared a heretic by the Joint College of African American Pentecostal Bishops.

I disagree with where Pearson's theology took him, but I can nevertheless admire his willingness to stand for what he believed in the face of the incredible pressure that was brought to bear on him to recant. It certainly showed how difficult both theologically and personally it would be for a pastor to radically change his or her views. It not only caused problems within the church and had repercussions for Pearson's career, it also ended relationships and turned friends into enemies. It's interesting to trace Pearson's theological journey, but there's no real "excitement" to the story. It's simply biographical. If I were to hazard a guess I would say that the perspective of those who made the movie (it's a Netflix production) is sympathetic to Pearson, although the portrayal of Oral Roberts was, I thought fair and balanced.

This will probably be of most interest to those who have a theological interest in universalism. (6/10)

A well crafted film, I was interested how they were going to approach the controversial topic of religion and its doctrine Hell. I was excited to see this film because, I don't believe in hell or the trinity. The low rating must be from those who believe in hell, but a good film should make you think about your core beliefs and maybe make you a little mad. Then the actors did their job, the bishop was believable and outstanding, the calm of the movie was real. Growing up in bible study I can see this happening this way. I've learned something interesting about Isaac Newton who is considered one of the smartest man who ever lived he didn't believe in the trinity but kept his findings in his journals because he said the leaders weren't ready for a change, I wonder what he would say about hell? This movie didn't offend me because through research I've already known hell is a made up teaching, you can find things in the Bible to support hell and the trinity but were these teachings come from would amaze some if they diged for the truth. This movie is an awakening for those who question the status quo.

Based on a true story, this intriguing drama follows the self-discovery of an Evangelical preacher, played by Chiwetel Ejiofor. I'd never seen a movie of his before, and I was extremely impressed by his performance. What an actor! I believed every single word he said, and his emotions were so personal, it was as if he didn't even know a camera was filming him. While he did give broad "performance" preaches, he also had some very private scenes.

When the movie starts out, he's a prominent member of the church and beloved by all. He has a little strain in his marriage, but that's to be expected when he's traveling all over the country to different churches, and when he's home he's pulled in different directions by his best friend and business manager, Jason Segal. When Chiwetel visits his uncle (Danny Glover) in prison, he's brokenhearted that the sinner refuses to repent. Shortly after, he receives the news that his uncle has killed himself. Because he's wracked with guilt, disappointment, and despair that his relative is burning in the fires of Hell, he turns to his family, friends, mentor (Martin Sheen plays Oral Roberts), and God for help. (There's also a little scene where he watches the genocide in Rwanda on television, and he feels terrible that all the innocent souls weren't saved and were therefore sent to Hell.) God finally tells him that there's no need for despair; everyone's soul has already been saved and therefore no one is going to Hell.

You can imagine the uproar Chiwetel receives when he preaches the news. Everyone turns on him! His friends, his family, his congregation, his mentor, the other preachers throughout the country. . . It's a huge backlash, and he gets intense pressure to publicly change his story. The rest of the film shows his enormous struggle, within himself and within the community.

I found this movie fascinating, and Chiwetel's performance was a tour-de-force. I'm not sure how regular churchgoers felt about the film and the message, because in real life (and as portrayed in the film) it was very controversial. Since it is a touchy subject, there are those who might not want to watch it. But for those who appreciate fine acting, I would absolutely recommend this movie.

DLM Warning: If you suffer from vertigo or dizzy spells, like my mom does, this movie might not be your friend. There is quite a bit of handheld camerawork throughout the film, and it will make you sick. In other words, "Don't Look, Mom!"

Yes you've got it, I don't believe in any of it. But the film was a decent portrayal of someone who does, but then asks questions of their own belief, that's true enlightenment. As Voltaire very cleverly put it, " if God didn't exist, man would have to create him ". Make no mistake there has to be a creative power, I just happen to be one of those who thinks we don't and never have been able to comprehend it. All of human history has had a Heaven, be it Valhalla or Nirvana, basically a fear of mortality. Hell in the modern sense was a late arrival, if you crossed the river Styx, it was just the dead underworld. Hell and demons take centre stage with the advent of Christianity or specifically Catholicism. All pagan gods now become the hierarchy of demonology. All heretics are doomed to hell, salvation must be sought or bought. Christ threw out money lenders, so Christians could be millionaires. If I lie, strike me down now, Aaaaarrrrrgghh.

This is a biopic film that tells the story of a Pentecostal preacher who came to the conclusion that all humans and their sins are atoned for by the Cross of Christ, regardless of whether one has a relationship with Christ or not.

The film displays good acting and production value, but the script only skims the surface of the internal and intellectual shift Pearson embraced that took him into heresy and heterodoxy. As a Pentecostal and Evangelical, he believed in Calvin's doctrines of Total Depravity and Penal Substitution Atonement. Pearson finally admitted these doctrines make God look like a monster and threw them out. He reached for an extravagant love beyond what humans are capable of and concluded that God loves the world so much that he would not send people to hell, having previously concluded that God does send people to hell - as Pearson is depicted in this film, if not in reality. However, he consulted on the film.

Pearson and his detractors also assume to have the authority to interpret Scripture and are obsessed with "knowing" whether every person goes to heaven or hell after death. These assumptions go unchallenged in the script, but along with Calvanist doctrines are the underlying causes of the whole story.

The film is thought-provoking and worth watching. It displays the biggest problems with Protestant fundamentalism from the inside, but could have done so much better.