MonumentalMovie.com

[adpetrafan]

From Kirk Cameron:

"What would help me most is to join me for the opening night of "Monumental" on March 27th. WE NEED 100,000 PEOPLE TO COME OUT MARCH 27. That will fill up the theatres. If we work hard, we can do it. 100,000 people is doable. Tell all your friends today. We are only two and a half weeks away. There are more than that many people who have liked this page! Please tell your friends, family, and everyone you know to direct their support to getting people into the theaters to see my new film about the source of our religious and moral freedoms in this country. http://www.MonumentalMovie.com Thank you and God bless you!"

I was wondering what anyone else here thought. I will probably try to get my family to this movie.

[rexreed]

I have not liked a single movie that Kirk Cameron has acted in. I will not go to a movie to support a cause. I go to movies that are good, not good intentioned. Let me know if this one is worth checking out.

[adpetrafan]

1) I don't think Kirk "acts" per se in this movie. It appears to be more of a documentary.
2) I thought Fireproof was really well made, and had a great message.

=)

[Preacherman777]

You're right about the Monumental movie and I agree, Fireproof was an excellent movie.

[Jonathan]

I don't think the Sherwood movies are intended to be high cinema. As a Christian husband and father, I was personally challenged by both movies.

[LivingRock]

I've loved all of Kirk's movies that I've seen, I'd like to see this one if I can get to a theater

[LivingRock]

The worst "Christian" film put out recently was facing the giants.

Why would you say that, Matthew RJ? Just curious because I adored the movie and it's still one of my favorites. Sure beats the curse-filled, morally backward, filthy humor-filled junk that everyone else seems to be putting out...

[Preacherman777]

I agree, Facing the Giants was a decent movie. A bit too much on the everything in your life will come out sunshine and roses if you trust Jesus, but still a pretty good movie.

[adpetrafan]

I agree, Facing the Giants was a decent movie. A bit too much on the everything in your life will come out sunshine and roses if you trust Jesus, but still a pretty good movie.

That's it exactly.

God in that movie was more like a cheesy game show host

1. They win the championship. Why not be happy with a strong effort and doing your best. Was a win necessary?
2. They get twins. Why twins and not 1 child, or -gasp- why not adopt? See Steven Curtis Champman et al.
3. They get ...a new truck! Why not a friendly mechanic repair their truck, or *gasp* a used vehicle?

I watch this movie then have a crisis of faith, why doesn't God answer my prayers like a personal genie in a bottle?

Because we all know God is not big enought to do those things...

I don't remember seeing the part of the movie that said you would get everything you want if you do something else. I must have missed that.

Anyway, none of this has anything to do with the movie I originally posted about.

[CatNamedManny]

Monumental isn't off to a good start, at least from a historical accuracy standpoint.

http://wthrockmorton.com/2012/03/14/familybible/

Barton says the Bible was “funded by about a dozen signers…” However, the 1798 hot press Bible had, by my count (I have the two page subscriber’s list), 1272 subscribers. Some of the signers of the Declaration and Constitution were on that list, but they were subscribers just like the other 1200+ people who paid their subscription money to get the entire Bible. Barton’s narrative makes it seem as though the signers mentioned (e.g., Adams, Jefferson, Bedford, Dickinson, etc.) put up money over and above the price of a personal copy in order for the printer to distribute them to others. That is not what happened with the 1798 hot press Bible.

If there is some other folio sized Bible published in 1798 that was created in the manner described by Barton, then I hope he will identify it. I can’t find it. However, if the Bible mentioned in Monumental is that hot press Bible, then Cameron’s movie will be at least one part historical fiction.

Turns out Barton, who Cameron uses as a major source, has been around the block a time or two.

http://www.talk2action.org/story/2010/6/3/123527/8452

Shame. Christians have lots of things to be doing. Spending thousands of dollars to die on the hill of revisionist history seems like a misplacement of priorities when there are plenty of people in need of help just down the street from any one of us.

[adpetrafan]

Monumental isn't off to a good start, at least from a historical accuracy standpoint.

http://wthrockmorton.com/2012/03/14/familybible/

Barton says the Bible was “funded by about a dozen signers…” However, the 1798 hot press Bible had, by my count (I have the two page subscriber’s list), 1272 subscribers. Some of the signers of the Declaration and Constitution were on that list, but they were subscribers just like the other 1200+ people who paid their subscription money to get the entire Bible. Barton’s narrative makes it seem as though the signers mentioned (e.g., Adams, Jefferson, Bedford, Dickinson, etc.) put up money over and above the price of a personal copy in order for the printer to distribute them to others. That is not what happened with the 1798 hot press Bible.

If there is some other folio sized Bible published in 1798 that was created in the manner described by Barton, then I hope he will identify it. I can’t find it. However, if the Bible mentioned in Monumental is that hot press Bible, then Cameron’s movie will be at least one part historical fiction.

Turns out Barton, who Cameron uses as a major source, has been around the block a time or two.

http://www.talk2action.org/story/2010/6/3/123527/8452

Shame. Christians have lots of things to be doing. Spending thousands of dollars to die on the hill of revisionist history seems like a misplacement of priorities when there are plenty of people in need of help just down the street from any one of us.

I just had to laugh...

The author of the linked article says they "I cannot respond with 100% certainty", but goes on to give their theories about something that could be entirely unrelated.

I see nothing here that contradicts that one part of the movie. AND, I have not seen the movie yet. BUT, people I respect highly have seen it and have said some great things about it. I look forward to making up my own mind.

Question, why is it so hard to believe that the currently accepted historical narrative isn't the revisionist version? The relatively new theory of evolution has become rock solid gospel truth to some people even thought it is only an unprovable theory.

[p-freak]

Maybe for some this is an interesting read:

http://donmilleris.com/2012/03/21/the-c ... like-jazz/

[rexreed]

Blue Like Jazz sounds like a good movie. I've really enjoyed most of Steve Taylor's work. I had not heard of this till the Monumental movie thread here at The Petra Zone.

[CatNamedManny]

A friend of mine worked on the production of Blue Like Jazz and did a documentary of Steve Taylor that came with an interactive online segment, http://www.tobeaclone.com/. Looking forward to seeing that movie. Taylor, unlike Cameron, in my opinion, has consistently produced quality work.

The reason we can be certain the "Christian foundation" narrative is revisionist is because we can trace it to its origins in the 2nd Great Awakening of the early 1800s, and we still have the evidence of many of the actual founders themselves, as well as the actual Constitution, which omits God entirely, not bothering with even the deistic euphemisms for him found in the Declaration.

Evolution in this context is a non sequitur.

[gman]

Arguing the Christianity of a nation based on the lack of God in the Constitution is a bit like arguing the Christianity of a music artist based on the lack of Jesus in their lyrics.