On Fullmer and the Compass

So I saw the first movie previews for the Golden Compass several months back and said to my wife "That looks pretty good. We'll have to check that one out." I find myself, after reading about the synopsis of the book and some thoughts from the author, viewing the movie in a largely different light.

As Christians, we can sometimes be overly cautious when it concerns our movie-going. Even in light of the "Albus Dumbledore is homosexual" news released by J.K. Rowling, most never knew it until she said it, and the story still depicts a clearly defined battle between good and evil, much as is evident in the spiritual reality in our world. However, I remember a huge fuss (it was even asked of a potential youth minister candidate, "What is your take on Harry Potter and what advice would you give to parents whose kids want to see it?") being made over the movie and books and how they pertain to Christians. Now, we should be more careful about what our children watch, as the desensitization that has occurred in our society has occurred for a reason. And we ourselves need to be careful concerning movies loaded with gratuitous scenes. However, we don't necessarily have to take legalistic stands if we learn to watch movies with our eyes open. Enough of the side notes, Pullman and the 'Compass' are what we should consider, and how should we respond to those who view the film, and worse yet, buy the books and philosophy being spouted by Pullman.

The Golden Compass is the first in a three-book series published by Pullman that evidently culminates in the killing of God. Pullman makes no apologies for his opposition to organized religion and actually rejoices in being known as an enemy to. Pullman, on his website, seems to have more of a problem with organized religion than with a belief in God. However, if you simply look a little deeper than the surface, you will definitely notice that Pullman is not simply some "religion" hating deist. His is a genuine Hawking-praising atheist desiring to spread atheistic thought to the minds of the children across the world.

The thing that strikes me under the his "religion" section on his website is that his problem is with organized religion and the fact that they have killed, stolen, imprisoned, tortured, etc. throughout the history of the world in the name of "religion" and the will of God. Let me perhaps be the first to apologize to Mr. Pullman. There are dark spots on the history of Christianity that if I had the power to do, I would absolve from the history books. Those acts were done by some malicious and corrupted people, and that does not communicate the truth of the God that I serve. But, I do have at least two problems with you pointing this out.

1. You cannot have the ground you're standing on (the ground which he has chosen is morality) without acknowledging Someone that gives us this moral law. There can be no standard without a Standard-giver. Try as you may to rationalize and convince us otherwise, morality does not arise out of some debt we owe to the universe (as is hinted in his comments on the origins of the universe.) In fact, nature, the very thing that he would insist that we simply come from, operates in opposition to this. Does nature not practice "kill or be killed?" It would seem that we as moral beings have this sense of universal morality because it has been given to us by Someone else...namely God. For more in-depth reading on this, see C.S. Lewis' book The Abolition of Man.

2. Even more grotesque things have been done in the name of atheism. Simply see the control (and how it is exercised) used by so many atheistic government regimes. The atheistic communist parties rule using the same tactics that Pullman so strongly disagrees with when concerning religions of the world. If Pullman is to use this argument against organized religion, then there is a double-edged sword that he is cutting himself with every time he swings it.

Another thing that I find interesting is that both naturalism and religions tell us stories of how we got here, but that both are insufficient to fill in the rest of the story or inform us on how it is going to end. Sadly, I believe that Pullman is misinformed concerning the Christian worldview here. He is correct to say that naturalism cannot answer life's biggest questions...why am I here? What is the meaning of life? What does history mean? But he completely misses the boat in thinking that Christianity cannot answer these questions. The purpose of living is God and our relationship to Him. While he recognizes that this is the Christian viewpoint, he mistakingly equates relationship with and to the natural world with relationship with and to a personal Creator. The two are not the same. His contention is that because we are of the same substance as the stars, we have a respectful relationship and responsibility toward that star. But my question is this: "Does Mr. Pullman relate to inanimate, lifeless objects the same way in which he relates to his family...his friends...the children that he teaches?" This is a faulty comparison by Pullman, trying to say an apple is essentially the same as an orange. A look at the logical implications from atheism and Christianity concerning questions of life:

1. Atheism says you are here because you simply evolved out of cosmic matter. Nothing more, nothing less. You are simply a collection of molecules. Christianity says you are created and fashioned in the image of a mighty God. You are his workmanship. You were no accident, but were purposefully created.

2. Atheism says the meaning of life is protect yourself, ensure your survival, and live as you will for you only have this life. Although some would encourage you against it, for all intents and purposes, you could attempt to consciously live with no moral standard because death is simply just the end. Christianity, however, says that live to glorify God. It is a life to be lived under the grace of Jesus Christ which brings glory to God, a life of moral accountability where we are only found worthy in the death of Another, because our death is not the end.

3. History is circular and we are bound to repeat for the atheist. However, Christianity sees history as moving to an end, a purposeful end that God has determined.

Atheism is a bleak existence. I'm not trying to create an argument to negatively color atheism, simply pointing out the logical conclusion. Atheism is a pointless life.

As for the movie, I would like to see it. How ignorant we can be as Christians sometimes to sit back and critique something with no experience concerning it. We can discredit our critique if that be the case. And when that time comes, hopefully I can speak wisely concerning the movie. However, hopefully this can shed some light on the mind behind the writing and how to answer some the questions that can possibly be posed from the movie...when it gets here.