Recently, I caught the latest Jack Neo film, Ah Boys to Men. This film mainly covers the experiences of Ken Chow (Joshua Tan) as he is conscripted into the army as part of the National Service policy of Singapore. Having hating the idea of enlisting in the first place, Ken soon finds every day spent in the military is a waste of time.
Theology of Ken
In this post I want to focus on Ken's ultimate aim in life, as portrayed by the film. Without spoiling too much, Ken's aim was to reconcile with his girlfriend, even at the cost of his own health.
To Ken, his relationship with his girlfriend was the most important thing in his life. Thus, it is little wonder why he views army as a bane, as it keeps him away from his girlfriend. As part of his basic military training, he has to be kept on Pulau Tekong (the military training camp) for two weeks. However due to a mistake, he has to stay in the camp for a further one week, causing him to be hate the military even more.
As we can see in film, what we make as our most important thing in our lives can affect how we treat other things. Following what I mentioned above Ken's almost divine view of his girlfriend results in his self-destructive behaviour.
So forgive me if I twitch a little everytime someone suggests we leave religion at the backdoor. The question "Who is God?" is the most vital question that we can ever ask Because what we treat as the "god" or the most important thing in our lives affects how we treat everything else. If we get this question wrong, then we get everything in our lives wrong.
Ken's theology was lacking because his view of "god" was unrealistic (his girlfriend was unable to satisfy his need for identity) and unsatisfactory (his girlfriend was not as faithful as he expected). That should serve as a warning to all of us.
I guess that's why I'm thankful as a Christian. This God is not only loving, faithful, but also true. This God is more than an opinion. So why not explore this God, come and see?
Overall
I enjoyed the movie. The way the actors communicated sounded genuinely Singaporean and the 1970s flashbacks were accurate and enjoyable. I also loved the way the supporting cast argue over the relevance and contributions of National Service in the context of Singapore as it expresses the concerns of Singaporeans reliably.
Nevertheless, there were some flaws. I did not like the unrealistic combat scenes in the opening minutes (how can an armoured vehicle shoot down a helicopter so easily?). I also felt cheated as the context behind the opening action was revealed.
I give the film a 70/100.
Further reading
Bethinking on identity
defensedefumer's apologetic site. Happiness, there's grace! Not just for us but the whole human race!
Saturday, November 10, 2012
Tuesday, November 06, 2012
Alternative Culture: The Third Jesus Review
One of the most intriguing things about Jesus is that he attracts so many people to him. One of the latest views about him was highlighted in this book, The Third Jesus.
The premise
Deepak Chopra, as the title states presents us with his view of Jesus, the third Jesus. The first, historical Jesus is apparently unknowable and lost to history.
The second Jesus is the one the church presents. Deepak Chopra asserts that this Jesus had been hijacked by the church who wanted an "abstract, theological creation".
Here Deepak Chopra presents the third Jesus-- a Jesus who suits his worldview. This includes a Jesus who accepts the reality of karma, encourages a joining to the world-consciousness and attained enlightenment.
My gripes
Let me be fair to the author-- this book is not an apologetic. Deepak does not defend any of his views, and just states how his view of Jesus was useful to his life.
However, as a Christian who has a commitment to truth, I am not merely interested in what is useful; I am more interested in what is true. There are many issues I take issue with, but I real highlight a few.
1) We cannot know who the real, historical Jesus
I cringed as I read his assertion that we cannot know Jesus. There is an overwhelming evidence that attests to Jesus of the Bible. Even if he were to disregard the gospels, he has to consider extra-biblical sources such as Tacitus, Josephus and Pliny the Younger.
2) Pot calling kettle black
Even if Deepak Chopra is correct in claiming that the church manipulated Jesus to fit their views, the author fails to realise he is doing the exact the same thing. The author portrays Jesus to fit his own karmic and universal-consciousness worldview.
For instance, he claims that Jesus usage of the world "light" (based on John 14:6) refer to enlightenment-- if we are thinking about going to movie, this was a thought that "came from the light". Even a cursory read of John 14:6 reveals that Jesus was saying that he was the way to God, not some inner light.
Conclusion
It is a real pity-- Deepak Chopra is a fluent writer, and I enjoyed his writing style. However his nonchalant approach to something as important as the divinity of Christ was utterly disappointing. I wished he was more academic in his book.
References
Chopra, D. (2009). The Third Jesus
The premise
Deepak Chopra, as the title states presents us with his view of Jesus, the third Jesus. The first, historical Jesus is apparently unknowable and lost to history.
The second Jesus is the one the church presents. Deepak Chopra asserts that this Jesus had been hijacked by the church who wanted an "abstract, theological creation".
Here Deepak Chopra presents the third Jesus-- a Jesus who suits his worldview. This includes a Jesus who accepts the reality of karma, encourages a joining to the world-consciousness and attained enlightenment.
My gripes
Let me be fair to the author-- this book is not an apologetic. Deepak does not defend any of his views, and just states how his view of Jesus was useful to his life.
However, as a Christian who has a commitment to truth, I am not merely interested in what is useful; I am more interested in what is true. There are many issues I take issue with, but I real highlight a few.
1) We cannot know who the real, historical Jesus
I cringed as I read his assertion that we cannot know Jesus. There is an overwhelming evidence that attests to Jesus of the Bible. Even if he were to disregard the gospels, he has to consider extra-biblical sources such as Tacitus, Josephus and Pliny the Younger.
2) Pot calling kettle black
Even if Deepak Chopra is correct in claiming that the church manipulated Jesus to fit their views, the author fails to realise he is doing the exact the same thing. The author portrays Jesus to fit his own karmic and universal-consciousness worldview.
For instance, he claims that Jesus usage of the world "light" (based on John 14:6) refer to enlightenment-- if we are thinking about going to movie, this was a thought that "came from the light". Even a cursory read of John 14:6 reveals that Jesus was saying that he was the way to God, not some inner light.
Conclusion
It is a real pity-- Deepak Chopra is a fluent writer, and I enjoyed his writing style. However his nonchalant approach to something as important as the divinity of Christ was utterly disappointing. I wished he was more academic in his book.
References
Chopra, D. (2009). The Third Jesus
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)