Art and the Kingdom

Art and the Kingdom

14 min read
Music

Wye Oak, Religious Belief, and Fear

14 min read
25 views
No Comments on Wye Oak, Religious Belief, and Fear
14 min read

The indie rock band Wye Oak wrestles with fear as a motivation for religious belief and unbelief in their song Dog’s Eyes.

Do you believe in God, or not? Take a moment to reflect. Now be honest with yourself: do you believe (or not) due to purely rational considerations? Do you hold onto this belief, not because it is driven by your desires, emotions and preferences, but because you think it is truly the best explanation of the world? Maybe, you want to insist that yes, you are a believer or nonbeliever solely due to a cold, detached, probabilistic assessment of the dizzying amount of arguments for and against God. But chances are, the answer to this question is no. You are a human being, after all. Your feelings are at least as much of a factor as the facts. 

The indie rock band Wye Oak is probably my favorite band out there. Their music is gorgeous and their lyrics are poetic and compelling. But they are a secular band with some atheistic messages in their music that, as a Christian and a fan of theirs, I always wanted to address. I’ve found that Wye Oak’s messages are usually subtle and ambiguous, but there is at least one song which expresses one of the most articulate attacks on religious belief I’ve ever heard in music (but maybe I just haven’t listened to enough music). 

What’s the attack, you may ask? Well, it’s about fear. Wye Oak suggests that (Christian) theists are subconsciously driven by existential terror to believe what they believe. In some cases, at least, they might have a point. Like I said, religious belief is difficult to disentangle from personal feelings, and fear is certainly no exception. But that sword cuts both ways. 

Dog’s Eyes

Perhaps Wye Oak’s most well known album is the 2011 album Civilian. One of the songs in this album is called Dog’s Eyes. It’s an excellent song, in my opinion. It’s also pretty anti-religion. This song opens with some pretty blunt lyrics:

Can’t see yourself in evolution
The history of our creation
So dogs eyes
Smiling
Scare you about dying1

Of course, Christian apologetics has come a long way since the 1925 Scopes Trial. Plenty of theists, and even Christians, believe that the Neo-Darwinian evolutionary paradigm and traditional theism (as well as biblical Christianity) are compatible. But this issue is irrelevant for our discussion, because I think that Wye Oak’s point has broader application than just the creation-evolution debate. In an interview, Jenn Wasner, the lead singer of Wye Oak, addresses the song and explains, 

“I think some people have a really hard time being like, ‘I’m not an animal, you know, I’m something else. We’re not monkeys.’ You know, that thing of just like, ‘Oh, you’re just afraid. You’re just afraid to die, like you’re afraid that you will waste away…You will waste away into eternity, like every other living creature on this planet.”2 

So this is the point: theists believe that human beings are specially created by God (whether by evolution or a more direct method of creation) and that there is an afterlife. But they believe this because they are afraid of the alternative. The alternative says that there is no God, that human beings are nothing more than clumps of matter produced by blind evolutionary processes, just like dogs, and that when they die, there is no afterlife, only eternal nothingness. Our theistic rejection of atheism is not rational, but is rather more like a coping mechanism. 

Wye Oak are certainly not the first to have made this point. Sigmund Freud also thought that theistic belief was a kind of psychological coping mechanism or “wish-fulfillment”. He writes, “the terrifying impression of helplessness in childhood aroused the need for protection-for protection through love which was provided by the father; and the recognition that this helplessness lasts throughout life made it necessary to cling to the existence of a father, but this time a more powerful one. Thus the benevolent rule of a divine Providence allays our fear of the dangers of life…”.3

It’s really not a very novel argument. We’ve heard it all before. Religion is a crutch, a way to cope, something you run to when you’re being shot at in a foxhole or something like that. Perhaps, as some atheists have suggested, religious belief is something programmed into us by evolution because it’s biologically advantageous. There are a few theistic responses we can offer to this kind of objection.

First of all, to argue that a belief is false by pointing to its origin, or how someone came to acquire said belief, is not a sound argument. It commits the genetic fallacy; even if the way you came to acquire a belief is strange or illegitimate, it does not follow that your belief itself is false. Maybe someone has a phobia of flat Earth theory (call it “flat-phobia”), and that is the only reason he believes in a round Earth; let’s say that “flat-phobia” is the only reason anyone believes in a round Earth. It doesn’t follow from this that it is false that the Earth is round. So maybe religious or theistic belief is a product of irrational or arational motivations, like fear, or maybe evolutionary processes are responsible. It still does not follow that theism or religious belief is false.

But could religious belief be irrational, or at least not rationally justified? Obviously “flat-phobia” is not a good reason to believe in a round Earth, so could religious belief be irrational in the same way? The Christian philosopher Alvin Plantinga has argued that the answer to this question is: it depends. It ultimately depends on which worldview is true. Plantinga argues,

“What you properly take to be rational or warranted depends upon what sort of metaphysical and religious stance you adopt…the dispute as to whether theistic belief is rational (warranted) can’t be settled just by attending to epistemological considerations; it is at bottom not merely an epistemological dispute, but a metaphysical or theological dispute”.4

If atheism is true, then religious belief is (probably) irrational, for likely the same reasons that Wye Oak, Freud, and evolutionary biologists offer. On the other hand, if theism is true, then God has likely provided us with the cognitive faculties to accurately “detect” Him, so religious belief is (probably) rational.5 In short, Plantinga concludes that this whole Freudian type objection fails. You cannot dismiss religious belief as irrational without first determining whether or not religious belief is true.

So I think the most interesting part about Wye Oak’s treatment of religion is not their direct attack of it, but rather the way that they wrestle with the testimony of God and the culpability of unbelief. Because maybe it is here that we can discover that fear and other irrational or arational motivations for belief are not uniquely religious phenomena. There is no “free lunch” for atheism.

God’s Eye

Through Dog’s Eyes, we’ve seen religious belief from a secular lens. But what about secular belief from a Christian perspective? Could it be that atheists are not solely motivated by “rational” considerations with respect to their beliefs? Maybe. Maybe the problem with unbelief is not ignorance, but the same type of emotional resistance that atheists accuse Christians of having. 

The next two stanzas of Dog’s Eyes explores Wye Oak’s struggle with religious belief. It turns out that they can’t fully escape the lingering idea that God really is with us. Here is what Wasner sings:

I can’t shake the superstition
Jesus give me your permission
And God’s eye
Looks in
Like a ghost you don’t believe in6

And in the next stanza, Wasner sings:

Someone let me live this way
And I cannot get rid of it7

What exactly is Wye Oak admitting here? Why are they so haunted by religion, if they think it’s just a fear-based illusion? In the aforementioned interview, Wasner says,

“There was definitely some religion in my upbringing. I wasn’t in the most strictly religious family, but it was there. And also, it’s just sort of, it’s ambient, it’s in the air, like we pick it up, you know, it’s around.”8

I’ve found these particular lyrics as well as Wasner’s statement to be very interesting. In Christian theology and apologetics, much is made of God’s “general revelation”. This is the idea that God has made Himself known to all people as the moral lawgiver through their conscience and as the creator of the universe through the evident signs of design in creation. This theological concept is based off of Paul’s reflections in Romans 1:

“The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse” (Romans 1:18-20). 

So from a Christian perspective, the reason that unbelievers “can’t shake the superstition”, and feel like “God’s eye looks in”, and even perversely feel the need to ask Jesus for permission to disbelieve in Him, is because they know that God exists, as God has made it plain to them. As Wasner puts it: it’s in the air. 

Cosmic Wish-fulfillment

So how does fear come into the picture for the atheist? Here is what Scripture says:

“This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that their deeds will be exposed” (John 3:19-20). 

Might this be why unbelievers wrestle with “God’s eye” looking in? Wasner says,

“I think the more poisonous aspects of religion, of organized religion, are sort of the cause of much of human suffering, and pain and violence. And not even if you want to, you know, just talk about on a personal scale, rather than a global scale, shame, shame, it’s just a source of so much shame. And that feeling of ‘I am bad, I am wrong.'”9

I don’t think Wasner is alone here. I think a lot of people distrust the church due to its “fire and brimstone” messages. Whenever the church becomes legalistic in its teaching and treatment of people and it focuses solely on shaming people and saying falsehoods like “God hates gays” and telling people that they are going to hell (period, no gospel afterwards), then the church has become a stumbling block and a failed witness. This sort of religious trauma is something that Jesus can speak to and heal.

However, I suspect that the “shame” which Wasner, and many non-Christians, speak of, is not just directed at illegimate Christian teaching and practices. Rather, I think lots of people just don’t like the idea that they are a sinner. Everyone wants to think of themselves as a good person. But this is not what the Bible teaches. Paul says, “for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23). And so all people are deserving of God’s wrath. In light of this, of course people are afraid. They know they are guilty, and, like the murderer on death row, know they deserve punishment. Of course people want to deny that God exists or that Christianity is true.

The atheist philosopher Thomas Nagel admits,

“I want atheism to be true and am made uneasy by the fact that some of the most intelligent and well- informed people I know are religious believers. It isn’t just that I don’t believe in God and, naturally, hope that I’m right in my belief. It’s that I hope there is no God! I don’t want there to be a God; I don’t want the universe to be like that. My guess is that this cosmic authority problem is not a rare condition and that it is responsible for much of the scientism and reductionism of our time.”10

So, ironically, it seems that the fear narrative can be turned on its head. If Christianity is true, it is atheists who are motivated, not purely by rational considerations, but by fear, to reject God. It is God’s eye that scares them about dying (only this time, the death in question is spiritual death). Plantinga writes,

“Indeed, unbelief can also be seen as resulting from wish-fulfillment-a result of the desire to live in a world without God, a world in which there is no one to whom I owe worship and obedience.”11

The Antitode to Fear

Alright, but so what? So what if, given Christianity, atheists are the irrational ones? Given atheism, Christians are the irrational ones, so it seems we’re even. Like Plantinga said, we are in a sort of epistemic deadlock. So who cares? Maybe we should just leave each other alone.

But how can we? Someone has to be right. And depending on who’s right, someone may have good reason to fear. So who is right? I will not try to answer this question here, but (no surprise) I think the evidence points towards Christian theism as being true. And so, to the atheist I will say, take Nagel’s discomfort seriously. This is no stalemate.

But that is not how I want to end this article, especially because it is about Wye Oak’s music. It was a bit painful for me to write this, because I love and admire the band so much, and especially Jenn Wasner and all her other music. So there is no personal hostility towards the band; in fact, I was partly inspired to write this out of love for them. And out of love for all non-Christians and atheists, I want to end by saying that the Christian message is not primarily about hell. It is primarily about hope. In the Wye Oak song It Was Not Natural, Wasner sings,

It was not natural, all along
Only human hate could give us something so unforgiving12

But when it comes to Christ, nothing could be further from the truth. Though Paul says that “all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God”, in the very next verse he says, “and all are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus” (Romans 3:24). Christ has died for everyone, theist and atheist, believer and nonbeliever, and everyone can accept God’s forgiveness and free offer of salvation through Christ. For “as far as the east is from the west, so far has He removed our transgressions from us” (Psalm 103:12). Don’t ask Jesus for His permission to deny Him. Ask Him for freedom from sin and shame.

  1. Wye Oak, “Dogs Eyes,” recorded March 2011, track 4 on Civilian, Merge Records, audio. ↩︎
  2. “The Making of Civilian by Wye Oak,” Life of the Record, accessed March 2026, https://lifeoftherecord.com/wye-oak-notes. ↩︎
  3. Sigmund Freud, The Future of an Illusion, 30. ↩︎
  4. Alvin Plantinga, Knowledge and Christian Belief, 40. ↩︎
  5. I think this would be true even if other arational or irrational factors, such as fear, motivated religious belief. As long as our God-given cognitive faculties were functioning well, and would in fact “detect” God, then our theistic belief would be rational, our emotional motivations notwithstanding. In fact, it might be that, given theism, a proper fear of mortality and the prospect of divine judgment is a rational motivation for religious belief. ↩︎
  6. Wye Oak, “Dogs Eyes,” audio. ↩︎
  7. Ibid. ↩︎
  8. “The Making of Civilian by Wye Oak,” Life of the Record, https://lifeoftherecord.com/wye-oak-notes. ↩︎
  9. Ibid. ↩︎
  10. Thomas Nagel, The Last Word, 130-131. Emphasis mine. ↩︎
  11. Plantinga, Knowledge and Christian Belief, 43-44. ↩︎
  12. Wye Oak, “It Was Not Natural,” recorded April 2018, track 5 on The Louder I Call, the Faster It Runs, Merge Records, audio. ↩︎

Continue Reading
No Comments on Wye Oak, Religious Belief, and Fear
11 min read
Movies

Project Hail Mary

11 min read
42 views
No Comments on Project Hail Mary
11 min read

Project Hail Mary inspires questions about the cinematography of space, the existence of aliens, and the importance of sacrifice.

Project Hail Mary, a movie already receiving Oscar buzz for best actor, best picture, best visual effects, and many more, dropped into theaters this past Friday achieving a weekend box office of $140 million globally and $80 million domestically.1 The movie tells the story of Ryland Grace (Ryan Gosling), a reluctant but brilliant and underappreciated science teacher, who is recruited by NASA to fix the catastrophe of the sun dying due to a bacteria called Astrophage that is eating our sun. It turns out that Astrophage is not only eating the Milky Way’s star, but other stars as well. So, in desperate need to save earth, Grace is sent to another galaxy’s star – Tau Ceti – where he meets an unlikely friend named Rocky.

The movie is an achievement in all areas, deserves Oscar nominations, and is worth the money to go see in theaters! The movie also makes me want to dive into Andy Weir’s novel which the movie is based off of, and has inspired three main thoughts regarding the cinematography of space, the existence of aliens, and lastly, the thematic importance of sacrifice throughout the film.

The Heavens Declare the Glory of God

The film begins with a phenomenal portrait of space, or of what one should call “the heavens.” The visuals, screenwriting, and cinematography do not hate space! While many space movies portray space as a dark nothingness that wants to kill us, this movie is more optimistic and portrays visuals that are hauntingly reverent. Today, our culture thinks of space much like the writers of the Ancient Near East thought of water as primeval dark chaos, something deadly and itself lifeless, and something that destroys our order.2 While some may still fear water, our culture at large does not fear it. However, we do fear space.

Grace, when he wakes up on the ship, also fears it; although, this may be due to him being alone without his past memories, not necessarily because he fears space, as later on in the movie, he is comfortable and maneuvers space as if it is his home or a regular street on earth. The cinematography captures the life-giving nature of space when it pans forward to reveal a heavenly painting of galaxies and stars set before Grace’s eyes:

Space should not be thought of as a deadly dark void; rather, it should be viewed as something that has a voice, a life-giving voice that makes us aware of the beautiful artist that painted it! We ought to return to gazing at the stars and feeling the immense grandeur of the heavens that our home floats in. Oddly enough, this was the intention of the directors, Phil Lord and Christopher Miller:

“One thing about this story that’s unique is that a lot of films are about someone who feels at home on Earth, wakes up in space, and they feel lonely. This is a movie about someone who feels lonely on Earth. They go to space and find a friend. We wanted space to be, in a funny way, inviting. The old vacuum of space is actually warm and inviting. You’re closer to heaven. The way the film is textured visually, we wanted it to feel more homey.”3

The directing, acting, and dazzling cinematography achieve this invitation to ponder space not as lonely but as a warm home that “brings us closer to heaven.” I argue that it doesn’t just bring us closer to heaven, it is the heavens! C.S. Lewis, in Out of the Silent Planet, uses the character Ransom to explore the misnaming of space. Ransom, just like Grace, wakes up in a spaceship and experiences the vastness of the heavens. Lewis writes:

“He could not call it ‘dead’; he felt life pouring into him from it every moment. How indeed should it be otherwise, since out this ocean the worlds and all their life had come? He had thought it barren: he saw now that it was the womb of worlds, whose blazing and innumerable offspring looked down nightly even upon the earth with so many eyes – and here, with how many more! No: space was the wrong name. Older thinkers had been wiser when they named it simply the heavens – the heavens which declared the glory.”4

Lewis is right. When I look at photos from NASA’s Hubble Telescope, or go stargazing, or when I watch interstellar movies, I do not think of space as “space.” Simple “space” does not cause reverence within me nor does it cause me to feel the presence of God. Grace in the movie asks Eva Stratt, the leader of Project Hail Mary, if she believes in God. She replies, “it beats the alternative.” While that sentiment is most definitely true, a more confident reply could be given. The heavens scream from the top of their lungs that God exists! The only question is if our ears are attuned enough, and not blocked, so that we can hear the voice of the heavens.

While I do feel the presence of God while gazing at the stars, I also do wonder if there is more than just us human beings.

Are There and Should There be Aliens?

Our culture is fascinated with the idea of extraterrestrial life, especially extraterrestrial intelligent life (ETI). From NASA and SpaceX to countless movies and novels to academic and unhinged podcasts, we all ponder if we are alone in this universe. Around 65% of American adults think life exists outside of our planet.5 Historically, when we thought of Aliens, we always connected malicious intent and danger with them; however, Project Hail Mary reverses that! The trailers make it known that Grace forms a deep friendship with Rocky and while Project Hail Mary is not the only story to portray Aliens as loving and safe, it is one of the only ones that has stirred this question in my mind: if there does exist ETI, are they sinful? This question does presuppose some metaphysical conditions of our world, namely the fall and that our human nature is inclined to sin. It also engages the wider discussion of whether or not theism, and the Christian story in particular, is compatible with ETI. Interestingly, those who are religious are less likely to believe in ETI.6 However, religious folk need not worry that ETI is incompatible with their faith.

Historically, Christians have not seen other life forms as contrary to the faith. During the medieval church, there existed the medieval dictum “bonum est diffusivum sui” (roughly “goodness is self-diffusive”), which argued that God’s goodness implies that He created an infinite number of worlds with an infinite number of creatures so that His goodness could be shared. Even today, massively influential figures like Billy Graham and Pope Francis believe in the possible existence of aliens.7 Once one allows for the existence ETI, fun theological questions arise: to what extent did the fall of both Satan and the fall of humanity affect the universe; if there are fallen alien creatures, does Christ save them in the same manner He saves us; if so, could Christ take on multiple incarnations (interestingly, giants of the faith like Augustine, Aquinas, and Bonaventure thought yes);8 what kind of natures would these creatures have; could what we mistake as aliens be us interacting with the spiritual realm; would they have their own scripture?; and what other creations, like what unimagined, humanly impossible colors, exist?

Answering these questions would take essay upon essay so I leave them for you to ponder; however, the answer to the question that arose in my mind while watching Project Hail Mary is no; I currently see no reason why ETI would have to necessarily be sinful.

WARNING: SPOILERS AHEAD!

Before watching Project Hail Mary I never thought that I would care so much about a faceless rock creature but, as a good movie does, I slowly began to find this character extremely endearing. Rocky does not give off a scent of sin. He first seeks out Grace even though he does not know if Grace is a threat or not, Rocky is deeply saddened by the death of his fellow crew that were on his ship, lives on what seems to be a peaceful, sin-free planet, and he ends up displaying an incredible act of love for Grace. There already does exist unfallen creatures in this fallen world (e.g. Archangels Michael and Gabriel). C.S. Lewis explored in Out of the Silent Planet the existence of unfallen creatures and I see no theological, historical, practical, or philosophical reasons why such creatures could not exist. And if such creatures do exist, then they could display great acts of love such as self-sacrifice.

Sacrifice

WARNING: SPOILERS AHEAD!

The movie is centered around friendship and this friendship builds into a deeply moving climax. Due to a fuel leak that leads to Astrophage causing the ship to spiral into chaos, Grace is knocked out by the chaos and is left for dead while Rocky is still conscience. However, Rocky cannot escape his bubble without risking death due his physical nature being entirely made up of metal with oxides. If he leaves his bubble, he will essentially catch fire due to the oxygen. Rocky, fully knowing this, risks his life to save Grace.

Later on, after recovering and heading their separate ways, Grace finds out that the Taumoeba (the predator of the Astrophage) is able to escape Rocky’s ship which would leave Rocky and his planet doomed. Grace, who was forced into this mission and did not want to sacrifice himself for his own human race, chooses to sacrifice himself and go back to save Rocky and his people. This pulls at one’s heart, completes a great character arc for Grace, and demonstrates the altruistic narratable desire that all humans have… to be told a story about sacrifice! However, there is one glaring element that is missed in the story.

The Sacrifice of both Rocky and Grace are not of the highest sacrificial order. Grace has amnesia for the whole movie, but near the end we, alongside Grace, learn that he was cowardly and selfish as he could not muster any courage to sacrifice himself for the betterment of his planet. In a flashback scene, Grace speaks with one of the astronauts that is going on the mission and tells him that that he admires the gene that makes him brave. The astronaut responds, “It’s not a gene, you just have to have someone to be brave for.” The bravery and love that Rocky and Grace have is the love of friends, something admirable and beautiful, but there is a deeper love. The Apostle Paul writes:

Very rarely will anyone die for a righteous person, though for a good person someone might possibly dare to die. But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us. Since we have now been justified by his blood, how much more shall we be saved from God’s wrath through him! For if, while we were God’s enemies, we were reconciled to him through the death of his Son, how much more, having been reconciled, shall we be saved through his life! (Romans 5:7-10).

We love because He first loved us, and His love is unconditional, a love that is foolish to our human intuition because it dies for it’s enemies. Neither Rocky nor Grace die for their enemies, Grace could not even die for his acquaintances. The love of God is unique and radical. It is something we all desire, to be loved even though we ourselves are often unlovely. This is the Gospel – that we are reconciled to God through Himself and for Himself so that we can learn to be like Him and share such unconditional love with the world. We all have a human itch for this love and while Project Hail Mary does not portray love for enemies, it does satisfy this itch of sacrificial love and is why the movie is phenomenal as all great movies reveal and copy the meta-truths and meta-narrative that we live in.

  1. Rubin, Rebecca. “Box Office: Ryan Gosling’s ‘project Hail Mary’ Scores Biggest Debut of Year with $80.5 Million, Sets Amazon MGM Record.” Variety, March 22, 2026. https://variety.com/2026/film/box-office/project-hail-mary-box-office-biggest-debut-2026-amazon-mgm-record-1236696247/. ↩︎
  2. Thanks to my friend Michael Hamilton for this connection to Ancient Near Eastern Literature. ↩︎
  3. Thomas, Lou. “Phil Lord and Chris Miller on Project Hail Mary: ‘We Wanted the Movie to Feel like You Were in the Guts of a Machine.’” BFI, March 13, 2026. https://www.bfi.org.uk/interviews/phil-lord-chris-miller-project-hail-mary. ↩︎
  4. C. S. Lewis, Out of the Silent Planet (New York: Scribner, 2003), 34. ↩︎
  5. Kennedy, Courtney, and Arnold Lau. “Most Americans Believe Life on Other Planets Exists.” Pew Research Center, June 30, 2021. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2021/06/30/most-americans-believe-in-intelligent-life-beyond-earth-few-see-ufos-as-a-major-national-security-threat/. ↩︎
  6. Alper, Becka A., and Joshua Alvarado. “Religious Americans Less Likely to Believe Intelligent Life Exists beyond Earth.” Pew Research Center, July 28, 2021. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2021/07/28/religious-americans-less-likely-to-believe-intelligent-life-exists-on-other-planets/. ↩︎
  7. C. A. McIntosh and Tyler Dalton McNabb, “Houston, Do We Have a Problem? Extraterrestrial Intelligent Life and Christian Belief,” Philosophia Christi 23(1), 2021, 113-114. ↩︎
  8. Ibid., 109. ↩︎
Continue Reading
No Comments on Project Hail Mary
9 min read
Music

Noah Kahan and Religion Part 2

9 min read
72 views
No Comments on Noah Kahan and Religion Part 2
9 min read

Noah Kohan’s music explores themes of religious trauma, spiritual divide, and the impact of religion on friendship.

The Great Divide

Now with the two songs in our rearview, we shall now see the possible connections. First, Kahan mentions self harm and a car crash. He sings:

We got cigarette burns in the same side of our hands, we ain’t friends
We’re just morons, who broke skin in the same spot
But I’ve never seen you take a turn that wide
And I’m high enough to still care if I die1

Secondly, Kahan also mentions that the one friend, maybe the one who stayed in the hometown and who battled with suicidal alienation, failed to understand his friends life:

You know I think about you all the time
And my deep misunderstanding of your life
And how bad it must have been for you back then
And how hard it was to keep it all inside2

Thirdly, the friend, who found absolution in religion, may have done so only through imperfect contrition due to the moral injury he received in the car accident. He may also have grown up experiencing religious trauma. Kahan sings,

I hope you settlе down, I hope you marry rich
I hope you’re scarеd of only ordinary s***
Like murderers and ghosts and cancer on your skin
And not your soul and what He might do with it3

The interpretation can vary, as I myself wonder if this worry for his own soul comes from a deep moral injury or from religious trauma or both. Fourthly, we get some clues about how the friend feels towards religion. Echoing the hurt found in “Orange Juice,” Kahan sings,

I hope you threw a brick right into that stained glass
I hope you’re with someone who isn’t scared to ask
I hope that you’re not losing sleep about what’s next
Or about your soul and what He might do with it4

Once again, the interpretation is unclear. The stained glass could refer to a church or it could refer to mentally seeing through a stained glass due to one’s mental health, and the friend wishing for the stained glass to be destroyed so that the friend can see clearly.5 I think the correct interpretation, due to the religious connections in the song itself and in “Call Your Mom” and “Orange Juice”, is that the stained glass is of a church. If this is so, then it seems that the friend who stayed in the hometown desires for his friend to abandon his religion. And it seems that the primary reason for the severance of the friendship isn’t the traumatic event itself but a great spiritual divide.

The Great Spiritual Divide

One’s faith often separates; in fact, sociology and psychological studies demonstrate that boundaries and separation is almost necessary for community and identity to exist.6 Paul understood this when he wrote to the Corinthians. He writes, “I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people — not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world. But now I am writing to you that you must not associate with anyone who claims to be a brother or sister but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or slanderer, a drunkard or swindler. Do not even eat with such people” (1 Cor. 5:9-11).

Paul speaks of not associating with people inside the church that do not follow Jesus’ commands. However, Paul does recognize that Christians must associate with all people – believer or not. Today we have a dichotomy between private faith and the rest of our lives. This dichotomy is a later approach to religious life and did not exist in the first century. Religious life was one’s life, it carried over into all aspects of one’s life. One’s religious life has a deeper impact on relationship then trauma or shared history does and this is exactly what Noah Kahan’s song portrays. The telos of a person’s religious life demands that he walks on a different road. This goes for all people, not just Christians. What we bow down to, what we give priority to, directs our path no matter who we are!

Because of this, a great divide does exist and is bound to show up in friendships that have different values. As C.S. Lewis remarked, “That is why those pathetic people who simply ‘want friends’ can never make any. The very condition of having Friends is that we should want something else besides Friends. Where the truthful answer to the question Do you see the same truth? would be ‘I see nothing and I don’t care about the truth; I only want a Friend,’ no friendship can arise- though Affection of course may. There would be nothing for the Friendship to be about; and Friendship must be about something, even if it were only an enthusiasm for dominoes or white mice. Those who have nothing can share nothing; those who are going nowhere can have no fellow travelers.”7

With this said, this should not stop one from saying hi and loving his friends, no matter their friends life choices, when roads cross. When roads cross, one can simply say “we’re just glad you could visit” or “I hope you settle down and marry rich.” But, as Noah Kahan’s friend points out, some times one can’t say hi because of the possibility of stumbling off the road. For the friend, alcohol is too much of a temptation and the friend ought to understand this and have sympathy. Paul recognizes this when he talks about eating meat sacrificed to idols (1 Cor. 8). For such moments, both the unbeliever and believer should use reason in love to go about their relationship.

Now, Noah Kahan also brings up Hell and the fear of it that his friend has; however, as they exist across a divide, they may misunderstand one another.

Religious Trauma and Misunderstandings

Throughout the three songs, we only hear from the perspective of the non-religious friend. Although the friend was fine with his friend “swearing his soul to Jesus,” it does seem that there exists anger for Jesus taking the number one spot. Is it possible that the friend singing builds a straw man for his friend’s faith as he thinks he is only religious because he is fearful for his soul? This could be a misunderstanding as there are often infinite misunderstandings across a great divide. Strawmanning one’s belief system, whether religious, non-religious, or anti-religious, is something we ought to never do. It could also be possible that the friend does only believe in Christ because he fears for his soul, resulting in imperfect contrition. This leads to the discussion taken up by many fans of Noah Kahan about religious trauma.

To this, I wish to provide an antidote to the problem of religious trauma within church culture. On Hell, C.S. Lewis said, “There is no doctrine which I would more willingly remove from Christianity than this, if it lay in my power.”8 God Himself would gladly get rid of Hell (Ez. 33:11). Secondly, the culture and the church have a massive misunderstanding on what Hell is and we ought to fix this through scriptural teaching rather than continuing in conceptions of Hell from Christian/Greek folklore such as Dante’s Inferno. Thirdly, Jesus speaks of the Kingdom of Heaven/God more than one hundred times while he speaks of Hell only 11-12 times. The church should reflect this! The church, like God, should desire for there to be no Hell and emphasize the Kingdom over Hell, but we also must not shy away from hard scriptural passages.

We must do this in a way that avoids real trauma. The church goer should not feel like God is an abusive father who will whip him with a belt anytime that he disobeys; rather, God is a father who calls his scared child out from the bed to hug him and to tell him that he loves him. What God calls His church to do is to model Christ and Christ did not come to condemn the world but to save it (Jn. 3:17). Jesus Himself makes an interesting note that it is people’s words that condemn, not Himself (Jn. 12:47-48). We ought to incorporate nuances in how we speak about hell such as incorporating other historical positions such as annihilationism and waiting to teach such doctrines to people of a suitable age. Lastly, we must get clear that it is not God that sends one to Hell.

Noah Kahan, while getting music right, gets theology wrong as he thinks God sends one’s soul to Hell, but this is not the case. C.S. Lewis seems to pull from John 12 when he writes, “Hell begins with a grumbling mood, always complaining, always blaming others… but you are still distinct from it. You may even criticize it in yourself and wish you could stop it. But there may come a day when you can no longer. Then there will be no you left to criticize the mood or even to enjoy it, but just the grumble itself, going on forever like a machine. It is not a question of God ‘sending us’ to hell. In each of us there is something growing, which will be hell unless it is nipped in the bud.”9

It is the grumbling that condemns us. It is the abuse of alcohol that creates Hell. If the abuse is not nipped in the bud, then that alcoholic misery shall remain for all eternity. When we teach on Hell, we ought to be clear that it is sin (missing the mark), that puts one a trajectory towards hell, and that it is God who calls us to repent (to turn) so that we can hit the mark! While some may still accuse the church of causing trauma for simply teaching about sin and eschatological realities and will refuse to engage in dialogue, the church ought to still conversate with all people willing to listen and understand. Ultimately, there will be divides, something that Noah Kahan knows well, but these divides do not need to sever hospitality, friendship, and love. If this happens, then we miss the mark and that is exactly what God calls us not to do!

  1. Noah Kahan, “The Great Divide,” (Mercury Records, 2026), audio. ↩︎
  2. Ibid. ↩︎
  3. Ibid. ↩︎
  4. Ibid. ↩︎
  5. https://genius.com/38485682 ↩︎
  6. Haslam SA, Fong P, Haslam C, Cruwys T. Connecting to Community: A Social Identity Approach to Neighborhood Mental Health. Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2024 Aug. 28(3):251-275. doi: 10.1177/10888683231216136. Epub 2023 Dec 26. PMID: 38146705; PMCID: PMC11193917. ↩︎
  7. C. S. Lewis, The Four Loves, (New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1960). ↩︎
  8. C.S. Lewis, The Problem of Pain, (London: Centenary Press, 1940). ↩︎
  9. C.S. Lewis, The Great Divorce, (New York: HarperCollins, 2001). ↩︎

Continue Reading
No Comments on Noah Kahan and Religion Part 2
6 min read
Music

Noah Kahan and Religion Part 1

6 min read
85 views
No Comments on Noah Kahan and Religion Part 1
6 min read

Noah Kohan’s music explores themes of religious trauma, spiritual divide, and the impact of religion on friendship.

Noah Kahan, an artist with over seventeen million streams and who was nominated for a Grammy in 2024, is releasing a new album on April 24th of this year. To begin hyping up his album, he released the album title track “The Great Divide.” In it, he explores a relationship that was merely based off of shared trauma that has been severed and explores his own feelings of longing to know if the friend is well. He also explore religious themes such as Hell. There are multiple easter eggs in the music video for the song. Two very important callbacks are to the songs “Orange Juice” and “Call Your Mom.”

When we see young Noah in a car with his childhood friends, the visor of the car reads “Call Your Mom” and later we see a younger Noah hand his friend orange juice. While there are many more easter eggs, these two are pivotal as the three songs – “The Great Divide,” “Call Your Mom,” and “Orange Juice” – may be exploring the same themes and life story.

Call Your Mom

First, we’ll quickly go over “Call Your Mom.” This song is about desiring one’s friend to find purpose, to refrain from self-harm, and about being there for a friend through darkness. In the song, the lengths to which Kahan goes for his friend is seen when he sings:

Stayed on the line with you the entire night
‘Til you let it out and let it in

Don’t let this darkness fool you
All lights turned off can be turned on
I’ll drive, I’ll drive all night
I’ll call your mom
Oh, dear, don’t be discouraged
I’ve been exactly where you are
I’ll drive, I’ll drive all night
I’ll call your mom
I’ll call your mom1

The song then talks about nights in the hospital and the grief that suicidal alienation creates. The ache is loud and silent at the same time, is terrifying, and is something that many of Noah Kahan’s fans can sympathize and empathize with. The bridge of the song explores ways the friend can stay alive:

Medicate, meditate, swear your soul to Jesus
Throw a punch, fall in love, give yourself a reason
Don’t wanna drive another mile wonderin’ if you’re breathin’
So won’t you stay, won’t you stay, won’t you stay with me?
Medicate, meditate, save your soul for Jesus
Throw a punch, fall in love, give yourself a reason
Don’t wanna drive another mile without knowin’ you’re breathin’
So won’t you stay, won’t you stay, won’t you stay with me?2

We are alive only when we have trajectorial lines to walk on; we need to “give ourselves a reason.” Having no purpose in life, or being an existential nihilist, increases the statical chances of suicidal thoughts, depression, and many more harmful associations.3 We need teleology within our lives and often this is brought by meditation, religion, and love. Noah Kahan does not care what option his friend chooses; he just wants his friend to keep breathing. In “Orange Juice”, it seems that the friend may have chosen religion.

Orange Juice

I do not know for sure if the friend in all three of these songs is the same friend, but there are many parallels. Noah Kahan, elaborating on the song, says,

I wrote Orange Juice about two friends reconciling after years of being apart. A tragic accident that they went through kind of separated them and one person found religion and the other person stayed in the town where the accident happened and kind of just moved forward… It’s really a song about how trauma can bind you and how it can also separate you and I always think that going through something traumatic should at least bring you closer to the person that experienced it with you. And I think the hardest part about that is sometimes it makes you go farther away and I wanted to write about two people coming back together after that time… I drew a lot of inspiration from my own life, my own struggle with addiction, and alcohol, and friendships that I’ve lost and haven’t been able to maintain. And I wanted to create a story about two people that represented a lot of challenges that I’ve gone through, that people in my life have gone through, and that’s what Orange Juice is about at its core.4

The song itself is amazing and is one of my favorites. In the song, there is the notion that religion has caused the main separation between the two. Kahan sings,

See the graves as you pass through
From our crash back in ’02
Not one nick on your finger
You just asked mе to hold you
But it made you a stranger
And filled you with angеr
Now I’m third in the line up
To your Lord and your Savior.5

Kahan here possibly refers to the fatalities that we learned about from “Call Your Mom” and Kahan later says that the friend did not put “those bones in the ground.” It seems that the drunk driving incident has caused his friend to find absolution in religion and because of that, he has abandoned his friends as they are like “crows that pull him down.” This will be of major importance in “The Great Divide.” This great divide is something one friend seems to want while the other does not. Kahan ends the song singing:

Honey, come over
The party’s gone slower
And no one will tempt you
We know you got sober
There’s orange juice in the kitchen
Bought for the children
It’s yours if you want it
We’re just glad you could visit6

Sadly, it seems that religion is the main cause of the chasm between the two. One friend has changed too much to come back to his life – both to his hometown and his friends. The other has not changed and this creates the challenge that many of us may experience in our own lives. To what degree should one’s faith dictate how one goes about past friendships? Can a devoted sober-minded Christian socialize with friends that drink? How can a Christian live in love, but yet cast aside his old friends? Should the other friends accommodate their friend’s desire to remain sober? Is it wrong for religion to divide? And, a question that I think “The Great Divide” proposes, is religion the correct answer to moral injury?

These questions will be explored more in Part 2 as we dive into the Great Divide.

  1. Noah Kahan, “Call Your Mom,” track 10 on Stick Season (We’ll All Be Here Forever), (Mercury Records/Republic Records, 2023), audio. ↩︎
  2. Ibid. ↩︎
  3. Kyron, M. J., Page, A. C., Chen, W., Delgadillo, J., & Ngo, H. (2025). Beyond meaning in life: How a perceived futility in searching for meaning in life predicts suicidal ideation, Death Studies, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/07481187.2025.2529281 ↩︎
  4. https://www.instagram.com/reel/CqgIdTiJDDS/?hl=en ↩︎
  5. Noah Kahan, “Orange Juice,” track 10 on Stick Season (Republic Records, 2022), audio. ↩︎
  6. Ibid. ↩︎

Continue Reading
No Comments on Noah Kahan and Religion Part 1
12 min read
Books

The Silver Chair: Naturalism and Self Destruction

12 min read
126 views
Comments Off on The Silver Chair: Naturalism and Self Destruction
12 min read

C.S. Lewis critiques the self-destructive philosophy of naturalism in the The Silver Chair, a book in the Chronicles of Narnia series.

You don’t need to be a historian to know that we humans have a penchant for destroying ourselves. We start pointless wars, or shoot up deadly drugs, or waste our lives on social media. But this devotion to self destruction is not just physical in nature. It is also philosophical. 

Intellectual movements throughout history have deliberately attacked the idea that human beings are special, and that our lives are deeply meaningful, and that we have something transcendent and eternal to anchor our hope in. Philosophical suicide comes in many forms, but much of it derives from the broad worldview of “strong” naturalism, which basically argues that the physical world is all there is to reality. All sorts of bitter fruit grows from this assumption, like skepticism, atheism, and moral nihilism. 

C.S. Lewis understood this worldview all too well. He confronts its self-destructive logic in The Silver Chair, a novel in the The Chronicles of Narnia series. In this story, our protagonists Jill Pole, Eustace Scrubb, and Puddleglum travel to the strange land of Underland, which is a dark underground civilization populated by the miserable looking people called Earthmen. Here, away from the sunny lands of Narnia, the greatest test that our heroes face is not physical danger, but spiritual apostasy. 

A Crisis of Faith

In Underland, Jill, Eustace and Puddleglum free the Narnian Prince Rilian from captivity, thus completing the quest that Aslan sent them on. But before they can escape, the Queen of Underland arrives, the Lady of the Green Kirtle, who is a witch. 

Upon seeing her escaped prisoner, the Witch does not violently attack the heroes. Instead, she throws some magical green powder into the fire, filling the air with a sweet, drowsy smell, which makes it “harder to think.” Then, she starts playing a mandolin-like instrument, which also makes it hard to think. Finally, she begins to question their beliefs about “Narnia” and “the Overworld” and “Aslan”, making our heroes doubt whether or not these things have ever existed. 

The Witch begins by questioning the existence of Narnia. When Puddleglum protests that he knows he has been there once, as he distinctly remembers seeing the sun , the Witch pivots to questioning the existence of the sun. Since they are underground, nobody can point to the sun to verify its existence, and so they have to use analogies to explain it to the Witch. The sun is like the lamp in this room, only far greater and brighter, Prince Rilian says. The Witch laughs at this and says:

“You see? When you try to think out clearly what this sun must be, you cannot tell me. You can only tell me it is like the lamp. Your sun is a dream; and there is nothing in that dream that was not copied from the lamp. The lamp is the real thing; the sun is but a tale, a children’s story.”1

This conclusion is absurd; Jill, Eustace, and Puddleglum have been seeing the sun their entire lives. But in the Underland, in the utter darkness, and under the influence of the magic green powder, and the mandolin, and the Witch’s soft, sorcerous voice, our heroes are eventually convinced to deny the existence of the sun. But it doesn’t end there. Jill, in defiance of the Witch’s narrative, declares that “there’s Aslan”. So then, predictably, the Witch begins to sow doubt about the existence of Aslan and even lions in general. She says: 

“We should do no better with your lion, as you call it, than we did with your sun. You have seen lamps, and so you imagined a bigger and better lamp and called it the sun. You’ve seen cats, and now you want a bigger and better cat, and it’s to be called a lion. Well, ’tis a pretty make-believe…And look how you can put nothing into your make-believe without copying it from the real world, this world of mine, which is the only world. But even you children are too old for such play.”2

The Witch is so condescending, isn’t she? And yet, it’s her arguments that should be laughed at. Obviously there’s a sun! Obviously there are lions! But the Witch’s magic is too powerful, and by this point it seems as though our heroes will completely succumb to her deceit. 

Philosophical Parallels 

Read some naturalist philosophy, and you’ll start to hear some eerie parallels between their arguments and those of the Witch’s. For example, Lewis was no doubt inspired by the 18th century Scottish philosopher David Hume when he wrote the Underland passages. Hume is well known for his skepticism, and he doubted all sorts of things, from miracles to inductive reasoning to the reality of cause and effect relationships. His skepticism arguably came from his naturalist worldview. 

Hume famously made a distinction between what he called “impressions” and “ideas”. According to C. Stephen Evans, “Impressions then are what we immediately experience, either through the senses or by attending to our own minds.” So an impression would be the sweetness we taste when we bite a pineapple. “Ideas” are copies of impressions. We construct our ideas or concepts based on sensations we have had in the past. I have seen a horse before, as well as an animal horn, and so I combine the two and come up with a unicorn.3

Doesn’t this sound familiar? According to the Witch, the “sun” and “lions” are nothing but ideas, or imaginative constructions of things that have already been experienced, such as lamps and cats. And just as the Witch declared “there is no sun”, Hume’s philosophy led him to make some interesting claims himself. For example, Hume thought that the “self” doesn’t really exist. In other words, you and I don’t really exist. Evans explains, “The self for Hume is really just a ‘bundle of perceptions.’ We are just a stream of psychological events following each other rapidly.”4

It’s common to find this Humean skeptical attitude in naturalist literature. Just take a look at two examples:

First, the psychologist Sigmud Freud famously argued that belief in God was a form of “wish fulfillment”. He writes, “the terrifying impression of helplessness in childhood aroused the need for protection-for protection through love which was provided by the father; and the recognition that this helplessness lasts throughout life made it necessary to cling to the existence of a father, but this time a more powerful one. Thus the benevolent rule of a divine Providence allays our fear of the dangers of life…”.5 So, our “heavenly father” turns out to just be a psychological projection; we take the best traits from our earthly fathers and use them to construct God. Again, here we see echoes of the Witch’s arguments against the sun and lions.

Second, speaking about the existence of the soul, M.H. Sabatés sneers, “‘Immaterial mind’ or ‘soul,’ like ‘élan vital,’ ‘elf,’ or ‘chupacabras,’ are ghostly expressions that come from mistaken frameworks or conceptions and do not refer to anything.”6 Remember how condescending the Witch was? Well, this kind of dismissive attitude towards anything non-physical (like souls and God) can be pretty common among naturalists.

So, once the Witch gets our heroes to admit that there is no sun, no Narnia, no Aslan, what then? If naturalists get us to admit that there is no soul, no miracles, no God, what then?

The Horror of Underland 

Underland is a dark, miserable place populated by miserable people. And no wonder. They have no sun to give them light or warmth, no Narnia to roam freely around, and no Aslan to protect and love them. They are living in a dead wasteland. And if Jill, Eustace, Rilian and Puddleglum were convinced to abandon their most precious beliefs, they would be trapped in this wasteland by choice. They would essentially be comitting philosophical and spiritual suicide, depriving themselves of all that is good, true and beautiful.

And if we deny the existence of our own souls, we deny what makes us special in the world. We are nothing but clumps of flesh bound together by chemical reactions, and there is nothing special about that. If we deny the existence of God and the afterlife, then we exist for no purpose, and our lives are absurd and meaningless. If we follow the naturalist’s gameplan, then we imprison ourselves in Underland, a cold, dark abyss deprived of hope and joy. We commit philosophical and spiritual suicide.

But thankfully, our heroes choose to spare their own lives.

Puddleglum stamps on the fire which the Witch threw the green powder in. This reduces the enchanting smell that the powder caused, and fills the air with the unechanting smell of Puddleglum’s burnt foot. He then declares,

“Suppose we have only dreamed, or made up, all those things—trees and grass and sun and moon and stars and Aslan himself…Then all I can say is that, in that case, the made-up things seem a good deal more important than the real ones. Suppose this black pit of a kingdom of yours is the only world. Well, it strikes me as a pretty poor one…I’m on Aslan’s side even if there isn’t any Aslan to lead it. I’m going to live as like a Narnian as I can even if there isn’t any Narnia.”7

The Witch’s plot is foiled, and after that she decides to attack them physically in the form of a snake. Our heroes defeat her and escape the Underland.

Enchantments or Eternity

After I read this story, I wondered, is there any parallel to the Witch’s sweet smelling powder and sweet sounding mandolin in naturalist philosophy? What, if anything, could be attractive or seductive about the miserable, denuded, nihilistic philosophy of naturalism? What about naturalism enchants us?

Lewis’s thoughts in his book The Weight of Glory may give us a hint. He writes, “We are half-hearted creatures, fooling about with drink and sex and ambition when infinite joy is offered us, like an ignorant child who wants to go on making mud pies in a slum because he cannot imagine what is meant by the offer of a holiday at the sea. We are far too easily pleased.”8

If naturalism is true, and there is no God, and we aren’t special, then we don’t have any special role to play in the world and no special obligations to fulfill. And that means that we can do whatever we please. We can chase all the pleasures of life without worrying about the afterlife. And with this enchanting smell in the air, maybe we can be tempted to buy into naturalism. Maybe we can say, “there is no sun.”

So what will we do? Will we give in to the enchantment and destroy ourselves in Underland? Or will we stamp on the fire and expose naturalism for what it really is, and hold on to the hope of a greater joy to come?

And I want to make it clear that I am not encouraging some sort of strong fideism or religious subjectivism here, or any kind of view which tells us to persist in faith even if our religious beliefs turn out to be false. Ironically, this view is actually an unbiblical one, as Paul says in 1 Corinthians 15:17-19: “And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost. If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied.” So I disagree with Lewis, speaking through Puddleglum, that “I’m on Aslan’s side even if there isn’t any Aslan to lead it”. If you’re this person, then by the very words of the Apostle Paul himself, you are “most to be pitied”.

But I also think that there is a way to salvage what Puddleglum is saying. We shouldn’t persist in faith if it turns out that our religious beliefs are false. But it may be that the current evidence appears as though it is against Christianity, or theism, and the data and arguments we have seem to favor naturalism. Or maybe things are just 50/50: the evidence can go either way. In this case, I do want to say, as Blaise Pascal argued, that we should hold on to our faith. The eternal joy that Christianity offers is incommensurably superior to the grim Underland of naturalism. Under the shadow of philosophical suicide, we must fight for our lives.

So I say, in Puddleglum fashion, that even a desperate hope for the eternal God is better than any enchantment that the godless forces of this world can conjure up.

  1. C.S. Lewis, The Silver Chair, 178. ↩︎
  2. Ibid, 180. ↩︎
  3. C. Stephen Evans, A History of Western Philosophy, 337-338. ↩︎
  4. Ibid, 350-351. ↩︎
  5. Sigmund Freud, The Future of an Illusion, 30. ↩︎
  6. M.H. Sabatés, “Reductionism in the Philosophy of Mind”, Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Retrieved from http://www.encyclopedia.com/humanities/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/reductionism-philosophy-mind. ↩︎
  7. Lewis, The Silver Chair, 182. ↩︎
  8. C.S. Lewis, The Weight of Glory. ↩︎
Continue Reading
Comments Off on The Silver Chair: Naturalism and Self Destruction
8 min read
Movies

Frankenstein (2025)

8 min read
170 views
Comments Off on Frankenstein (2025)
8 min read

Guillermo del Toro’s Frankenstein (2025) teaches us about death, faith in science, divine hiddenness, and forgiveness.

Guillermo del Toro’s Frankenstein (2025) is a masterpiece and worthy of an Oscar. In fact, it is nominated for nine Oscars and, without a doubt, will win at least a couple. The film tells the well known story of Victor Frankenstein’s mad, ego driven desires to conquer death, and how, in the process, he creates a monster whom he abandons. I cannot comment on how similar the movie is to Mary Shelley’s 1818 novel as I shall have to wait until after grad school to checkmark that off my reading list. However, there are four important themes throughout the film that I wish to comment on: death, faith in science, divine hiddenness, and forgiveness.

DEATH

In the film, Victor has a callous but scientifically brilliant father and a soft and loving mother. The abandonment of his father creates the medical complication that kills Victor’s mother during the childbirth of his younger brother William. This death, and Victor’s failing to save her, puts into him the motivation to overcome mortality. Oddly enough, death may be what motivates all of us in all that we do.

The Pulitzer prize winning archeologist Ernest Becker states, “the idea of death, the fear of it, haunts the human animal like nothing else: it is the mainspring of human activity – activity designed largely to avoid the fatality of death, to overcome it by denying in some way that it is the final destiny of man.”1 He continues, “all culture, all man’s creative life-ways, are in some basic part of them a fabricated protest against natural reality, a denial of the truth of the human condition, and an attempt to forget the pathetic creature that man is.”2

All culture is shaped by death, without it, culture would not exist. Most of our choices are subconsciously shaped by death. Hedonistic pleasure, virtuous pursuits, our stories, our health, our relationships, and our religious devotion (both atheistic and theistic) are all driven by the inevitable future that death overtakes all. Death, it terrifies us into searching for life.

Ancient stories echo this terror. In the Ancient Epic of Gilgamesh, Gilgamesh says, “how can I rest, how can I be at peace? Despair is in my heart. What my brother is now, that shall I be when I am dead. Because I am afraid of death.”3 The critic in Ecclesiastes groans over death and suffering and its seemingly unfair character, and even states that it is better for one to never have been born at all (Ecc. 4:3). Today, more than five hundred studies demonstrate that we are deeply affected by the terror of our knowledge of our own mortality.4 Death can be a great thing to meditate on (Ecc. 7:4), but we often choose incapable and damaging antidotes when we should choose Him as the antidote.

Victor, while presenting his ability to raise the dead to university faculty, beckons, “God is inept, and we must correct his mistakes!” This causes the university to expel him; however, he finds a funder in Heinrich Harlander, and both turn to science to settle their despair over death.

FAITH IN SCIENCE

Frankenstein has always been taken as a cautionary tale against scientific ambition and the people who, as Elizabeth says, “play God”. Today, the scientific ambition to play God is at an all-time high. Transhumanism, a philosophical movement that seeks the promise of immortality through technologies’ ability to overcome human limitations, is where Victor puts his faith. Today’s pioneers do the same. Oracle cofounder Larry Ellision donated $430 million to antiaging research, and Alphabet CEO Larry Page started Calico with a $750 million investment for life-extension research.5

Some put faith into “brain-uploading”. David J. Chalmers, professor of philosophy and neural science at New York University, states that one day, during the “singularity”, that we will be able to upload our brains to a computer, giving us immortality. However, Chalmers also recognizes that we have no idea how to go about consciousness and therefore, brain uploading. He says, “it is true that we have no idea how a nonbiological system, such as a silicon computational system, could be conscious. But the fact is that we also have no idea how a biological system, such as a neural system, could be conscious. The gap is just as wide in both cases.”6 Transhumanism relies on the metaphysical commitment of materialism, but perhaps we have this wide gap because we are much more than simply material beings.

Any time we reduce man to material, we will end up in evil. Victor states, “In seeking life, I created death.” Instead of seeking life Himself, he created a monster. However, del Toro does not think of monsters as most do.

A MARCIONITE DIVINE HIDDENESS

Del Toro connects more with monsters than with Jesus. He says, “monsters are my religion… my grandma has Jesus. I have Boris Karloff. He was my Messiah.”7 He also thinks of monsters as patron saints and sees Frankenstein as Christ. One only has to look at the striking imagery of the monster being crucified:

However, under this framework, he conjures a Marcionite-like heresy where Victor is a careless and angry creator who gave no thought to what would come after his creation and the creature is Christ whom comes with love and salvation. It seems that the creator is the one who needs forgiveness, not creation. It seems that it seems as though it is the creator’s fault for the suffering we experience and not creation’s rejection of their creator. The creator abandons his creation and his creation yells “VICTOOOOOOOOOR!” The chasm we see between the divine and us is a true reality, but it is not the creator’s fault.

Victor as a child prayed to the archangel Michael as he bowed to a comforting statue of him. However, a bloody, dark angel visits him to inspire his journey of overcoming death. Victor should not be thought of as a God who abandons His creation, rather he should be pictured as Adam and Eve who listened to the dark serpent that told them they won’t die. Victor is us humans who miss the mark in the plethora of ways we try to achieve life.

In the Christian story, it is the Father who had a plan all along to reconcile His creation back to Himself, the plan that the seed of the women would crush the head of the snake (Gen. 3:15). And even del Toro seems to maybe hint at this plan near the end of his film.

FORGIVENESS

Del Toro, a lapsed catholic, cannot rid himself of the Christian ideal of forgiveness. While he may paint God as a negligent creator, the message of forgiveness, that is so central to the Christian faith, is the story’s message as Victor ends saying:

“Forgive me. My son. And if you have it in your heart, forgive yourself into existence. If death is not to be, then consider this, my son. While you are alive, what recourse do you have but to live? Live. Say my name. My father gave me that name, and it meant nothing. Now I ask you to give it back to me… one last time. The way you said it at the beginning. When it meant the world to you.”

The creature responds, “Victor. I forgive you. Rest now, Father. Perhaps now, we can both be human.”

We must forgive ourselves into being. If we do not forgive each other and ourselves, we cannot have life. The Psalmist writes:

When I kept silent about my sin, my body wasted away
Through my groaning all day long.
For day and night Your hand was heavy upon me;
My vitality was drained away as with the fever heat of summer. Selah.
I acknowledged my sin to You,
And my iniquity I did not hide;
I said, “I will confess my transgressions to the Lord”;
And You forgave the [f]guilt of my sin. Selah.
Therefore, let everyone who is godly pray to You in a time when You may be found;
Surely in a flood of great waters, they will not reach him.
You are my hiding place; You preserve me from trouble;
You surround me with [h]songs of deliverance. Selah (Ps. 32:3-7).

If the creature does not forgive, he will waste away along the bitter, groanful road of unforgiveness that leads only to sheol, the realm of the dead. However, once the creature forgives, he is able to look upon the sun, which, as Victor said, is life. May we, through these stories that shadow the real story, realize the forgiveness we have in Christ as His light preserves, delivers, and gives life to all those brave enough to look upon the Son.

  1. Ernest Becker, The Denial of Death, (New York: Free Press, 1973), xvii. ↩︎
  2. Ibid, 32-33. ↩︎
  3. The Epic of Gilgamesh, translated by N.K. Sanders, (New York: Penguin, 1972), 42. ↩︎
  4. Sheldon Solomon, Jeff Greenberg, and Tom Pyszcynski, The Worm at the Core: On the Role of Death in Life, (New York: Penguin, 2006), 10-11. ↩︎
  5. Arina Eunjung Cha, “Tech Titans’ Latest Project: Defy Death,” Washing Post, April 4, 2015. ↩︎
  6. David Chalmers, “The Singularity: A philosophical Analysis,” in Science fiction and Philosophy From Time Travel to Superintelligence, 2nd. Ed. Susan Schneider (West Sussex, UK: Wiley, 2016), 203. ↩︎
  7. https://bgindependentmedia.org/mexican-director-del-toro-frames-frankenstein-as-a-father-son-psycho-drama/#:~:text=Review%20by%20CARROLL%20McCUNE,doing%20a%20horror%20movie%E2%80%94ever. ↩︎

Continue Reading
Comments Off on Frankenstein (2025)

You might also like...

Movies

Romance and Representation: A Review of Crazy Rich Asians

Type on the field below and hit Enter/Return to search