My Confession: My reflection on Job 11

 

I continue my reflections on Job.

Zophar's retort
Zophar, Job's friend, simply state that Job deserves much worse than what Job was facing now. Bear in mind that Job has lost his children and wealth, and was suffering from sores.

For you say, ‘My doctrine is pure,
    and I am clean in God's eyes.’
 But oh, that God would speak
    and open his lips to you,
 and that he would tell you the secrets of wisdom!
    For he is manifold in understanding.
Know then that God exacts of you less than your guilt deserves. -- Job 11: 4-6

He continues, stating that God's reasoning is higher than Job's.

Can you find out the deep things of God?
    Can you find out the limit of the Almighty?
 It is higher than heaven —what can you do?
    Deeper than Sheol—what can you know? -- Job 11: 7-8

His solution for Job was to therefore turn to God and confess his sins.

If you prepare your heart,
    you will stretch out your hands toward him.
If iniquity is in your hand, put it far away,
    and let not injustice dwell in your tents.
 Surely then you will lift up your face without blemish;
    you will be secure and will not fear.  -- Job 11: 13-15

Zophar's theology assumes the guilt of Job
What is worrying is that we can fall into the trap of fallacy of correlation thinking. If Job is suffering, he must have committed some great sin. In fact, Job deserves much worse in Zophar's eyes. If only Job would confess admit his guilt, then God would restore Job.

However, at no point of time has Job's guilt been clearly pointed out. Zophar just assumes and asserts it. While Zophar is mainly correct in the nature of God (his omniscience, omnipotence and omnibenevolence), he was too hasty in condemning Job.

What I can learn from Job 11
Often, I too can commit the errors of Zophar by assuming someone's guilt before I even have the details. 

In the words of the Apostle James,

Know this, my beloved brothers: let every person be quick to hear, slow to speak, slow to anger; for the anger of man does not produce the righteousness of God. -- James 1: 19 -20

Alternative Culture: A theological view of recent moral scandals of Singapore politicians

 

According to Arthurian legends, the illicit affair between Lancelot and Queen Guinevere led to fall of Camelot and King Arthur. This screenshot is from the game Pendragon.

Recently, my country Singapore has been hit by a wave of scandals. These incidents involved Transport Minister S Iswaran, Speaker of House Tan Chuan-Jin, Member of Parliament Cheng Li Hui, Member of Parliament Leon Perera, and senior member of the Workers' Party, Nicole Seah. 

The purpose of this post is to provide a theological view of the incidents. I am not here to give a political analysis or probe into their personal lives. I will also not be speculating on the character of those involved. For a factual view, I attached links from Channel News Asia in the first paragraph.

Here are my theological reflections:

These incidents are not unique or as rare as we think
This is definitely not the first time such scandals had arose from positions of power. In 2012, Speaker of the House Michael Palmer was also caught in an affair and resigned his post. American President Bill Clinton used his position of influence to have an sexual relationship with Monica Lewinsky. Even in Biblical times, King David (paragon of faith) had an affair with a married woman.

One evening David got up from his bed and walked around on the roof of the palace. From the roof he saw a woman bathing. The woman was very beautiful, and David sent someone to find out about her. The man said, “She is Bathsheba, the daughter of Eliam and the wife of Uriah the Hittite.” Then David sent messengers to get her. She came to him, and he slept with her. (Now she was purifying herself from her monthly uncleanness.) Then she went back home. The woman conceived and sent word to David, saying, “I am pregnant.” - 2 Samuel 11: 2-5

As Canadian businessman Stewart Butterfield noted "It [Power] makes you more than who you already were.". In other words, being in positions of power increases the resources and opportunities to sin. Power amplifies our flaws.

A common theme in the Soul Calibur fighting game series is the corrupting influence of power.

We should use such incidents to reflect and repent of our own sins

Jesus answered, “Do you think that these Galileans were worse sinners than all the other Galileans because they suffered this way? I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all perish."
- Luke 13:2-3

While it is tempting to join the bandwagon and condemned moral failures, we must be on guard for our own potential failures. If we are being honest with ourselves, we all are 2-3 small mistakes from our moral atrocities made public.

Prior to controversy, Tan Chuan Jin claimed that he had to be even more vigilant as a Christian in public office because his "own vanity, ego, social pressures and expectations" are now in the open. This is echoed in the Casting Crown song, Slow Fade, warning on how easy it is to slip into sin if we are not careful.

For the Christian, these incidents are reminder to remember how much we need Jesus.

Alternative Culture: Guardians of the Galaxy Holiday Special Theological Review

 

Mantis and Drax search Hollywood for Kevin Bacon

After the debacle that is Marvel Phase 4, I finally mustered the courage to catch Guardians of Galaxy Holiday Special. I am glad (and relieved) to say that it is one of the better shows of the Marvel Phase 4 (other than Spider-Man: No Way Home). 

In this post, I want to focus on the theological aspect of the movie, rather than just a review. There might be spoilers, so this is your spoiler-warning.

Values are not universal or self-evident
Right of the bat, the movie goes on to show that the values of the aliens (even within the Guardians) differ from each other. For instance, Drax howled with laughter when Peter's sad Christmas memory was shared, much to Mantis's disgust.

Another example is clearly shown later in the movie when the aliens were obviously fine with human trafficking while Peter (who is a half-human) was morally outraged.

This values dissonance is actually draws in attention how much of our modern day morals are drawn from the experiences of our ancestors. In other words, moral values are neither self-evident or empirical. Atheist philosopher John Gray rightly pointed out in his book Straw Dogs (2003) that our values of human rights and individualism come from Christianity, or specifically that we humans all are equal and valuable before the divine.

For instance, modern slavery is not seen with the same outrage in countries which experienced more levels of Western influence (and hence Christianity). In another example, the historic movement to disband slavery globally (within the British Empire) was also Christian-led (by William Wilberforce).

The distortion of Santa Claus and the Christmas message

Another interesting thing that the movie shows is how easily Christmas lore can be distorted. Near the start of the movie, an alien band sang about how Santa Claus "shoots missiles at your toes" and is a "burglar". To us, it is an obvious misunderstanding of "mistletoe" and Santa entering houses at night.

This is should serve as a warning to Christians on how easily the Christian message can be changed. Even within the first century of Jesus's death, the Gnostics rose up to claim that secret knowledge is required for salvation. After the legalisation of Christianity in the Roman Empire, Arianism arose to claim that the members of the Trinity were not equal. In medieval times, the Cathars advocated against reproduction. Even today, there is a promotion of the prosperity gospel which encourages the pursuit of wealth and health at as evidence of spirituality.

Thus Christians must always be discerning about ideas that are presented to them.

Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world. 2 This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God -- 1 John 4:1-2

An alien band plays a Christmas song to Peter, without understanding what Christmas is

Uniting as family is important
The major thing I think the film does well is the secular presentation of the Christmas message. Christmas is not about gifts or Santa Claus, but rather uniting as one family.

This film parallels the Christian message, which emphasises that the birth of Jesus paved a way for the people to be adopted into the family of God.  

For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love he predestined us for adoption to sonship through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will—  to the praise of his glorious grace, which he has freely given us in the One he loves. -- Ephesians 1: 4-6

Of course I am not saying Peter's father represents God in any way, but the fact that the movie focuses on the importance of the intangible ties between the Guardians (specially two of them).

The Guardians exchange gifts with each other

Conclusion
I am pleasantly surprised but how a short and simple Marvel film can bring a warm message. I recommend it.

Alternative Culture: Triangle Strategy Theological Review

 

One of the many moral arguments in Triangle Strategy

Triangle Strategy is a 2022 strategy game for the Nintendo Switch. In this game you have to organise your party by upgrading their individual skills and weapons, clever positioning and terrain management to lead them to victory in various battles. The style of battling is similar to Final Fantasy Tactics.

Where the game differs is that the three advisors you have in the game, Benedict (your retainer), Frederica (your betrothed) and Roland (your best friend) sees morality in three different ways. Benedict tends to favour utilitarianism (i.e. greatest good for the greatest number of people). Frederica tends to argue for liberty (i.e. individualism), while Roland stands for morality (in this game, he favours honour and duty).

Thus such conflicting viewpoints often forces the player character (Sereona) to make a stand. Such decisions (in the game) will alienate some allies while elevating others. 

The great thing about this game that it forces players (in this case, my wife and I) to discuss hypothetical situations and defend the moral decisions. In this post I want to examine the game's moral system from the view of Christianity.

Christianity and morality
Right of the bat, it is important to note that Christian philosophers have discussed morality to great detail.

William Paley (the Father of Intelligent Design) was an advocate of utilitarianism. In his book Moral and Political Philosophy (1785), he argued that God's laws as laid down in Scripture were intended to promote widespread happiness. He saw Christianity as a rigid and logical system in which the greatest utility is produced if everyone followed God’s will. 

There is also justification in Scripture for the importance of honour-based morality. Theologians have argued that honouring parents, the Sabbath and marriage were instituted by God for eternity. It was also pointed out that in 1 Timothy 5, Timothy was instructed to honour widows in a time and place when they were second-class citizens. This implied that Biblical concepts of honour sometimes goes beyond the culture of the era

Lastly, the Bible has been used to support individual liberalism. In Luke 15, Jesus uses parables to describe the importance of every lost sheep and coin, and these parables have been used to support the worth of every person.

Christianity recognises the complexity of morality
Yet Christianity rejects the simplicity of moral issues. In many scenarios, the Bible highlights the complexity of making moral judgements, and focuses on reflection rather than establishing an outright decree. In Exodus 18, Moses himself was advised to appoint men to aid him in judging moral decisions. In 1 Samuel 24, David (against the advice of his men) refused to kill Saul (who was masterminding David's assassinations).

Christianity is more than just morality
The main purpose of Christianity is to be more than moral. Yes, Christianity does contain certain moral principles (like the importance of obeying God over man is advocated in Acts 5:29). However, Christianity is not just adhering to moral teaching or principles.

It is about forming a lasting relation with Christ and to be reconciled with Him. In it we will grow in our moral insights.

My confession: Samson the great moral failure

 

Hercules from the game SMITE

Synopsis of Judges 13 - 16
It started like a classic story. The ancient Israelites did evil in God's eyes, and He allowed the Philistines to oppress them. Yet God did not abandon his people by promising them a man to deliver them from the Philistines.

Samson was that man. With God's blessing, Samson was a man of great strength. He achieved great feats like killing a lion with his bare heads, and killing a thousand men with a donkey's jawbone.

Unlike the preceding judges, Samson did not follow the laws of his people. He wanted to marry outside his tribe, ate unclean food, and never seemed to develop in character. Even till the end, he never sought to follow God, but focused his life (and death) on revenge. 

Samson was a man of great gifts, but was also a great moral failure.

Cu Chuliann from the game SMITE

Parallels to mythologies
One thing interesting in my readings is that the Samson seems to fulfil the heroic archetype in most mythological stories I know.

In Greek/Roman mythology, Hercules is blessed with strength and sought to overcome the trials laid before him. Thor fulfils this role in the Norse tales, Horus in the Egyptian religion and Sun Wukong in Chinese legends. In Celtic myths, Cu Chulainn is the hero.

Even some of the deeds are similar. Hercules slayed the Nemean lion, while Samson killed a lion. Both Hercules and Samson were betrayed by women.  Cu Chulainn was weakened (and killed) only when he broke his taboo, and Samson was weakened when he broke his.

Yet unlike most of these heroes, Samson shows no improvement in his morals. From the start he started seeking things for his self gratification, even though he was an appointed judge of Israel. In his last prayer he still sought revenge for himself, rather than to free God's people.

Then Samson prayed to the Lord, “Sovereign Lord, remember me. Please, God, strengthen me just once more, and let me with one blow get revenge on the Philistines for my two eyes."
(Judges 16: 28)

What can we learn from Samson?
Despite his moral failure there a few lessons we can learn from this:
1) Be careful worship people with great gifts

But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them—bringing swift destruction on themselves. Many will follow their depraved conduct and will bring the way of truth into disrepute. In their greed these teachers will exploit you with fabricated stories. Their condemnation has long been hanging over them, and their destruction has not been sleeping.
(2 Peter 2:1-3)

In our meritocratic Singapore (and maybe world), there is a tendency to follow or listen  people who are seemingly gifted or produce great results. Yet we forget that our human idols are just that -- merely human, and therefore are open to selfishness and manipulation.

For instance, the evangelist Ravi Zacharias misused his reputation to manipulate women. This came as a shock to the Christian community as Zacharias was well-know for his oratorical skills and converts. 

2) Jesus is greater and better

He [Jesus] said to them, “This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms.”
(Luke 24:44)

For my Christian readers, we must interpret our heroes and our own lives in the light of our saviour Jesus. Jesus is a way better example and hero than Samson.

He [Jesus] grew up before him like a tender shoot,
    and like a root out of dry ground.
He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him,
    nothing in his appearance that we should desire him.
He was despised and rejected by mankind,
    a man of suffering, and familiar with pain.
Like one from whom people hide their faces
    he was despised, and we held him in low esteem.
(Isaiah 53: 2-3)

As described by Isaiah, Jesus was not attractive by contemporary standards (of that time). Jesus did not use his outward appearance (beauty or majesty) to attract us to the message, but in his personhood.

With due respect: Is good something in itself, or is something good because God command it?

A few year's ago, my agnostic friend asked me a question, "Does God approve something because it is good? Or is something good because God approves it?"

At that time, I did not know that this question was known as Euthyphro dilemma. This dilemma presents the monotheist (people who believe in an active God) with two paths:

A) Moral goodness is independent of God

B) God determines what is good

In this post I will examine both paths, A and B, and the problems the paths posed for Christianity.

A) Moral goodness is independent of God
God is subordinate to morality
The most prominent problem to the Christian arising from Path A is that God has to follow an abstract entity known as moral goodness. This challenges traditional understanding of God as being omnipotent (Murray and Rea, 2008).

God is not needed for morality
Another problem is that if morality exists independent of God, then this challenges the necessity of God as a law-giver. In other words, there is not a moral need for God to be involved in the world (Oppy, 2009).

B) God determines what is good
Morality is arbitrary
Adopting this stand is also problematic to the Christian. This means that what morality is dependent on the whims of God (Murray and Rea, 2008).

Morality is subject to the strongest

Another issue is that it makes into a "might makes right" situation. This makes God as a tyrant, since he enforces what is moral.

False dilemma?

St Thomas Aquinas, the medieval theologian did address Euthyphro dilemma. He argued that it is a fallacy to separate morality from God, as God is the definition of good. That means that objective good and God's will is the same thing.

References

Murray, M.J., Rea, M. (2008) An Introduction to the Philosophy of Religion.

Oppy, G. (2009) Arguing about Gods.

For further reading

Reasonable Faith's link 

William Lane Craig's lecture

Summary:

With due respect: Name one thing that Christianity has done for us?

Recently, I watched a conversation between historian Tom Holland (not the actor) and atheist philosopher AC Grayling. During the respectful debate, Grayling challenged Holland to name "one thing" that Christianity had done for humanity.

To put it in context, Grayling argued that the societal contributions of Christianity came from other ancient sources and therefore Christianity was not unique in its contributions. In other words, the world would not have been affected much if Christianity had not existed.

While Holland countered eloquently, I listed briefly some unique societal contributions by Christianity.

1) Philosophy of science

While ancient India, China and Greece came up with scientific discoveries, the scientific philosophy (that included major ideas of experimentation and formal logic) was developed with the background of Christian theology. China, India and Greece did not even come close to uncovering that philosophy.

It had been argued that without Christianity establishing that a logical God would create an understandable world, science as a philosophy would not be thought about.

2) Universality of rights

Another unique thing that Christianity brought was the universality of rights. God revealed to Apostle Peter in Acts 10 that the idea of being God's children was not a matter of genetics (i.e. being Jews) but a matter of belief. 

In doing so, Christianity laid the foundation of Universal Human Rights, since all humans are seen to be children of God.

3) Presumption of innocence

Another great contribution that Christianity laid was the idea of the presumption of innocence: that one was considered innocent till proven guilty.

Formally formulated during the Inquisition, the presumption of innocence drew inspiration from Abraham's negotiation with God over the destruction of Sodom (Genesis 18). From the Inquition came many modern systems of law and order, one of which is English Common Law.

Recommended readings:

James Hannam (2009) God's Philosophers

Rodney Stark (2005) The Victory of Reason: How Christianity Led to Freedom, Capitalism, and Western Success

For reference to the video:

Alternative Culture: Bad Genius Review

Bank (left) confronts Lynn (right) over her cheating plan.

At the moment I am enjoying Netflix. Netflix had brought to my attention a slew of films I would have otherwise missed out on as they are non-Hollywood or widely advertised in Singapore. I have mainly been watching Sword Art Online: Ordinal Scale, the Wandering Earth and Modest Heroes. The film I do want to do a theological review today is the 2017 Thai film Bad Genius.

The paper chase

In Asian society, formal education is highly valued. Thus the competition for grades and scholarships is highly intense in Thailand. Seeing a business opportunity, poor Thai student Lynn decides to help her schoolmates cheat using a code system in return for cash. To increase her earnings, she decided to include more clients into her cheating scheme.

Later in the movie, she was engaged to help cheat during the international standardised university test called the  STIC (analogous to the SAT or GRE). Realising she could not come up with a cheating system alone, she decides to recruit Bank (another smart student) into her schemes.

The surest way to hell

Interestingly Lynn, who had prided herself in her intelligent and practical schemes, started to feel increasing guilty as her participation in cheating deepens. On the other hand, Bank who had earlier held fast to his morality, was willing to dive deeper and deeper into cheating.

The movie seems to make the following statement: People who are most sure about their goodness are more likely to fall into the path of evil. Those who recognise their sinfulness are more likely to be take the path of redemption.

Parable of the debtors

I am surprised to see this movie's parallels to the parable of the debtors (Luke 7:40-47):

Jesus answered him, "Simon, I have something to tell you."

He said, "Teacher, say on."

"A certain lender had two debtors. The one owed five hundred denarii, and the other fifty. When they couldn't pay, he forgave them both. Which of them therefore will love him most?"

Simon answered, "He, I suppose, to whom he forgave the most."

He said to him, "You have judged correctly." Turning to the woman, he said to Simon, "Do you see this woman? I entered into your house, and you gave me no water for my feet, but she has wet my feet with her tears, and wiped them with the hair of her head. You gave me no kiss, but she, since the time I came in, has not ceased to kiss my feet. You didn't anoint my head with oil, but she has anointed my feet with ointment. Therefore I tell you, her sins, which are many, are forgiven, for she loved much. But to whom little is forgiven, the same loves little." He said to her, "Your sins are forgiven."

Let's us not take pride in our self-righteousness and remind ourselves that we too have potential for great good or evil.

My Confessions: Reflection on Esther 4

One can sometimes do good by being the right person in the wrong place. -- GK Chesterton

One of the Bible's heroes I admire is Esther. After all, she was queen, had a book (and possibly a sweet-smelling chemical compound) named after her and was the beauty of the land. When i was young, I thought she was pretty brave to stand up to the king to save the Jews.

Recently, I had the privilege of reading it again. While not diminishing her bravery, I realised that she was initially reluctant to save her people from governmental persecution when first informed of a conspiracy by her cousin Mordecai. In fact, she only moved to action after she was told that she would be an eventual target. In Esther 4: 12 -14,

When Esther’s words were reported to Mordecai, he sent back this answer: “Do not think that because you are in the king’s house you alone of all the Jews will escape. For if you remain silent at this time, relief and deliverance for the Jews will arise from another place, but you and your father’s family will perish. And who knows but that you have come to your royal position for such a time as this?”

I began to realised that God had placed Esther in a position of power not because she was particularly courageous or moral, but so that she could be used for a divine purpose.

What I learnt
Despite my current predicament or situation (no matter how bad it is), I know that God can use me. Not because I am particularly talented, but because of God's foresightedness and love.

Alternative Culture: Socrates Jones: Pro Philosopher

Socrates Jones (in green), accompanied by his daughter Ari, debates Thomas Hobbes

A game of philosophy
Socrates Jones: Pro Philosopher allows you to take the role of an accountant whose lack of interest in analytic thinking frustrates his daughter, a student of philosophy. When an car accident sends the duo to the afterlife, Socrates Jones must argue his way back to the land of the living against the famed moral philosophers.

A Phoenix Wright clone? Nonsense!
Socrates Jones: Pro Philosopher is a thinking game that shares many similarities with the Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney series (References to Phoenix Wright are made in the game). Sporting similar features like clarifications, objections and an assistant, Socrates Jones nevertheless has its own unique charm.

Instead of using evidences to support your objections (as in Phoenix Wright), Socrates Jones has to expose the contradictions of his opponents.

While Phoenix Wright is pitted against dishonest witnesses and determined prosecutors, Socrates Jones has to content with Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mills.

The good
The game does a fantastic job simplifying difficult philosophical concepts, such as the social contract, Act Utilitarianism and even the categorical imperative.

The philosophers portrayed even subscribed to the stereotypes we have about them. For instance, Immanuel Kant walked away from an argument due to his rigid timetable.

Another fantastic point is that the game forces you to think about morality in a deep way.

The bad
One thing that frustrates me in the game is that despite the developers' best intentions, not all the best arguments were captured. For instance, I wanted to explore the theology of Euthyphro (that all religions assert a common good) further, but was not allowed to.

I also wished that more philosophers were added, such as Confucius, Aquinas, Hagel, Hume and everybody's favourite, Nietzsche.

The game also seems to limit you to the philosophy of Alasdair MacIntyre. MacIntyre (1988) argued for the recognition that we will never find a complete answer to the question of morality.

Theological review
I loved this game. It is a fantastic introduction to moral philosophy, and made me as a Christian reconsider my paradigms. Part of me wishes to meet Martin Luther in the game though.

I give this game 89/100

References
MacIntyre, A. (1988) Whose Justice? Which Rationality?

Alternative Culture: Confessions (2010 Japanese film)

My friend, who is doing a Masters in art asked if I wanted to watch a Japanese film with her. The last Japan films I watched were of the Death Note series, and it was L: Change the World.

So wondering what the film was like, I decided to watch Confessions with her. After all, it was an Academy Award nominee, so it had to be at least a decent film.

Confessions tells the story of a teacher who seeks to avenge her daughter's death, by going after her killers. The two killers are her own students.

The storyline
Moriguchi Yuko (Matsu Takako) announced to her form class of 13 year-olds that she is resigning. She revealed that her daughter (Ashida Mana) had been killed by two students of the class-- Shiomura Naoki (Fujiwara Kaoru) and Murakawa Shinya (Amami Juri), even though the police concluded that her death was via accidental drowning. The rowdy class remained apathetic and rude until Yuko reveals that she had injected HIV-positive blood into the milk of Naoki and Shinya. Although none of them would be infected with HIV (you can't get HIV from drinking tainted milk! More people should study Biology, like me!). the class shrieked in horror as they back away from both Noaki and Shinya. Yuko reminded the class that "all life is precious" hypocritically and finally took her leave.

Confessions is unlike a typical revenge story, as it is told from five perspectives, thus involving flashbacks and flashforwards. Let's go through each of them.


Shiomura Naoki
Naoki suffered from inferoirty complex. He joined a sports school, but was not good at sports. He joined a cram school, but was not good in his studies. Everyone in class bullied him, and he longed for a friend. Everyone, except Shinya.

Sick of Yuko's attempts to help him, Naoki suggested that they should target Yuko's daughter to teach Yuko a lesson. On the day of the murder, Shinya rigged a purse to deliver an electric shock to render Yuko's daughter unconscious (but alive). Thinking that he had killed her, Shinya boasted that he finally did something note-worthy. He then confessed that he never liked Naoki anyway, and was just using him to lure a target. In other words, Naoki would never amount to anything, much less a killer.

As Shinya left the scene of crime, Naoki discovered that their victim was still alive. Remembering Shinya's words, he tossed the Yuko's daughter into a swimming pool, effectively drowning her to deny Naoki's claim to murder.

Upon thinking he was infected with HIV, Naoki dropped out of school, and refused to attend classes in the new term. He refused to let everyone and everything touch him, and scrubbed everything he touched, thinking that he had infected it (like Lady Macbeth).

New teacher Yoshiteru Terada (Okada Masami) naively attempts to reach to him with enocuragement and messages from the class (the class had made notes of encouragement for him, but contained cryptic messages to remind Naoki of his murder), but his attempts only drive him further to insanity. Kitahara Mitsuki (Hashimoto Ai), the class moniteress suggested to Terada that he was pursuing a lost cause, but this drive Terada (who does not knowthe whole story) to increase his efforts.

Mrs Naoki
Naoki's mother (Kimura Yoshino) is incapable to believing that her son's mediocrity is his fault. She blames society, Yuko, Terada, his classmates and herself (basically everyone except Naoki) for her son's condition. Continually absolving her son's innocence in the light of recent events, she finally hits a breaking point when Naoki confesses that he intentionally killed Yuko's daughter. Taking the blame of her son's action, Mrs Naoki wrote a letter of confession and stabbed her son in the chest. Naoki then demostrated what he was really good at-- killing, and stabbed his mother.

Kitahara Mitsuki
After the resignation of Yuko, the class began to taunt and bully Shinya, constantly reminding him that he was a killer. Only the class monitress Mituski refused to take part in such activities. Upon discovery of severe bullying, Terada reprimanded the class, and Mituski was immediately suspected as Terada's informant. So she shared the bullying with Shinya.

Such bullying made Mituski close to Shinya, and they become good friends. Believing her love for him would change him, Mituski confessed she admired Shinya's genius. To impress Shinya, she told the police the reason for Naoki's breakdown-- the frequent visits of Terada. This destroys the naive Terada's personality, confidence and ultimately his faith in the character of his students.

Murakawa Shinya
Shinya is a genius with a superiority complex. Despite winning a science fair, he craves fame, and was upset when news of a juvenile murdering her whole family made the front page. Abandoned by his mother (a professional physicist) when he was young, Shinya was hoping that his genius would allow his mother to finally accept him. He would show off his inventions in his blog (his source of confessions), but she did not reply.

He went to the extent of intenting to kill Yuko's daughter but failed. This denied him the chance of fame. He finally broke and decided to blow the whole school up. When ridiculed by Mituski for his craving for fame (as mummy issues), he beat her to death via a blunt object.

Despite planting the bomb at the school hall, it failed to detonate as he activated it. What happened?

Moriguchi Yuko
Yuko had planned everything all along. Refusing to over her evidence to the police (as they would have pressed light charges to minors), Yuko took revenge into her own hands.

She had played on Terada's enthusiasm, and advised him to keep visiting Naoki (counting on the nastiness of her ex-class to ruin Naoki further). As Mituski regularly met up with her, Yuko learnt about Shinya's family issues. She was the one who had moved the bomb, and confessed this act to Shinya over the phone, and that the bomb was placed at his mother's office. In other words, Shinya killed his mother.

Confronting Shinya (who was now in tears), Yuko told him that he had tasted his own medicine (death of a loved one), and now he had to work on a road of reformation and redemption. "Just kidding," she ended, rejecting his possiblity of redemption.

Discussion
Social responsiblitiy: Classic Liberialism and Conservativism
One of the ideas the film explores is the idea of responsibility. Who is responsible when a person commits a crime. Traditional Liberialism (sounds like an oxymoron) tends to place the blame on society, while Classic Conservativism places blame on the individual.

And to some extent, the film explores both cases. Naoki can be easily seen as a leaf in the ocean, being pushed an influenced by Shinya, his classmates and his mother. He bases his self-worth on his friends and parent, and he slips into depression upon Shinya's betrayal and the painful reminders by his classmates.

Shinya, on the other hand is a force of his own. Other than motivated by fame (his self-worth), he attempts to kill Yuko's daughter and the school, and actually kills Mituski and his mother himself. Despite his genius and strong personality, he fails to choose what is right. This is most poignant when Yuko rightly pointed out that Shinya could have chosen not to detonate the bomb. But he did.

Self-worth
The film places a lot on self-worth. It does not take a philosopher to underline the importantness of this question. For Naoki's mother, it is her son. Thus when realising her son was beyond redemption, she murders him. For Shinya, it was his mother's respect and the need for global recognition. Upon wanting those, he planned to murder a school to make headline news.

However as Christians, we have to remember that our self-worth is in God. After all, if we believe in God, then we are reasonable to believe in our own value. God made us his unique creations, possessing unimaginable, intrinsic worth.  Furthermore, each child of God has a unique gifting from the Spirit, indispensable and irreplaceable (1 Cor 7:7).

In the film, we see how family, fame and love can lead to destructive circumstances. Although the three can be admirable things, they can be devestating once made the ultimate goal in life. As you can see, theology matters.

For more details on self-worth, read this.

Redemption
The film lastly suggests that some people are beyond redemption. Naoki's mum saw it in her son. Yuko saw it in Shinya. Even Mrs Naoki's and Mituski's attempts to redeem Naoki and Shinya respectively ended in failure and death. In fact Yuko concludes the movie by stating that redemption for Shinya is a joke.

However, in the Christian view, we have to remember that no one is beyond God's reach (John 3:16). It's not about what we did, but what has been done for us. It's not about where we been, but where our brokeness leads us to. And it's not about what we feel, but what He felt to forgive you. And that's what we preach a Gospel of Christ crucified, to redeem all mankind.

Review
I did like the movie, but found it unnecessarily brutal. I cringed at Mituski's death and dismemberment. I kind of thought that the movie missed out the views of Terada, the new and enuthsiastic teacher, to provide a optimistic framework to the pessimistic tone of the movie.

I give it a 68/100.