The Kingdom of God as Liturgical Empire is Dr. Hahn’s finest work. This reviewer has read some of Hahn’s other works and has some of them in his personal library. He is a professor of Scripture and Theology at Franciscan University in Steubenville, Ohio, and holds the Pope Benedict XVI Chair of Theology at St. Vincent Seminary. Dr. Hahn has occasionally been part of the Evangelical Theological Society, where this reviewer has met him at a national gathering.

What Dr. Hahn maintains in this commentary is that First and Second Chronicles comprise not an history of Israel between the reigns of Saul, David, Solomon, and their successors up to the Babylonian Exile, but a liturgical recall of those events in order to evoke repentance and renewal of both the Kingdom and of the people of God. “The writing of Chronicles is an act of what the Hebrews called zakkor, an act of remembrance that aims to bring one into the living and vital contact with events recalled” (p. 2). The “why” of Israel’s history is the reason for Chronicles. The why lies in the well-known and often recited passage in 2 Chronicles 7:14, “if My people who are called by My name will humble themselves and pray and seek My face, and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin and heal their land.”

Scott W. Hahn

Hahn makes a very strong case for treating First and Second Chronicles as a liturgical recalling and retelling of Israel’s story. “For the Chronicler, the key to is the Kingdom of David, established by divine covenant and embodied in the temple at Zion at its liturgy (p. 13). The Hebrew terms zakkor (remembrance), seper toledat (assembly/congregation), ma’al (unfaithful), and bekor (first born) appear frequently within Chronicles.

This reviewer had never before thought of Chronicles as a liturgical retelling of the story of Israel, within a rebuilt temple, to remind the people of God of what it takes for God once more to restore, heal and bless them. Yet the retelling of incident after incident was meant to prick consciences, encourage, and renew both people and the Kingdom of God. They were to represent the Lord of the covenant who had delivered them time after time.

Son of God: Their Empire, His Kingdom (20th Century Fox). Actors: Darwin Shaw, Sebastian Knapp, Paul Knops, and Darcie Lincoln. Directors: Christopher Spencer. Music by Hans Zimmer.

From producers, Roma Downy and Mark Burnett comes the movie Son of God. Directed by Christopher Spencer (with additional scenes directed by Tony Mitchell and Crispin Reece), Son of God depicts the life of Jesus based on the Gospel of John. This is made apparent to the watcher as John as an old man narrates the beginning and end of the movie. If you are familiar with the mini-­‐series The Bible by the same producers, then one will realize that there is not much new material in Son of God. It is clear and encouraging, however, that the release and editing of this film was a strategic move to gain national and international cinema exposure to the Gospel story.

The film does well in covering the essential and compelling aspects of the Gospel narratives. Beginning with Jesus’ birth and visitation by the magi, our first image of Jesus the man, is as a solitary figure walking the mountaintops of Judea as he gazes down on the Sea of Galilee. This leads to Jesus’ encounter with Peter as Peter laments the lack of fish he able to catch. Peter’s initial skepticism towards Jesus is placated by Jesus asking, “Just give me an hour and I will give you a whole new life.” Peter’s response is, “Who says I want one?” While this exchange is not found in any of the Gospel narratives it unquestionably addresses a modern day dilemma many of us face. After Peter pulls in a miraculous catch of fish, he becomes aware that there is something different about Jesus, something worth following.

Familiar scenes to many such as Jesus preaching to the crowds, the healing of the paralytic who comes through the roof, the feeding of the five thousand and the resurrection of Lazarus, are skillfully and artistically conveyed. Two scenes in particular though, stand out as especially powerful and moving. These are the calling of Matthew the tax collector as he realizes his sinful nature and sees the hope that following Jesus offers, and Peter walking out on the water to meet Jesus. Both scenes help to depict the power of humility in acknowledging our sinfulness but also our faith in reaching out and walking towards Jesus.

Also well conveyed and communicated is the tension between Roman rule and the Jewish population. Roman brutality is displayed in several scenes and the scheming and politics that was so rife between the Romans and the Sanhedrin in a bid to retain power, underlies much of the film. This is an important subtly that is not to be underestimated throughout the film. While the resurrection of Lazarus, the cleansing of the Temple and Jesus’ reading of Isaiah 61 are portrayed as the acts that seal Jesus’ execution, ultimately it is both Pilate and Caiaphas’ paranoia of losing power, that leads to Jesus’ death.

Son of God: Their Empire, His Kingdom (20th Century Fox). Actors: Darwin Shaw, Sebastian Knapp, Paul Knops, and Darcie Lincoln. Directors: Christopher Spencer. Music by Hans Zimmer.

Son of God is a dramatization, taken from the memoirs of John the Apostle, played by Sebastian Knapp, that starts with the Savior’s brief ministry on His way to Calvary’s Cross and finishes with our Lord’s Resurrection and promised return.

Richard Bedser, one of its 4 writers, was also a writer for the History Channel’s 2011 documentary, Gettysburg—which should speak well of his talent and that of the team of writers, directors, actors and actresses and all who were chosen for this monumental endeavor.

The difficult task before them was to recreate the picture of betrayal and rejection that would lead to Jesus’ death. This biblical story line with the time constraint movies must honor, in 138 minutes, had to feature a selected few of Jesus’ many miracles and sayings. The first half of the movie then features Jesus crisscrossing the holy land under the observation of a Jewish religious leadership that represents a hostility growing more visceral with each word or act of mercy He shares.

Christopher Spencer, the director, correctly understood that the narrative to have any historical relevance needed more than the suspenseful music that now drapes the backdrop of every modern film. Spencer needed a story line that could integrate the miracles of Christ into a single culminating event—his crucifixion. As scholarship knows, one part of the story was inevitable in this regard: the resurrection of Lazarus. This alone would seal the Savior’s fate.

One Sadducee in the movie betrays the general attitude about Jesus among the religious leaders, “There is nothing unusual about Him aside from His ability to cause havoc!”

Jesus’ choice of a tax-collector, Matthew, is featured and appears to be the beginning of his troubles with the religious authorities of the day. Jesus’ notoriety as a potential problem takes off with children flocking about Him by the hundreds and disrupting a Pharisee holding Yeshiva under a tent. Jesus frees a woman taken in adultery and then pronounces an invalid forgiven before helping him to his feet, healed. He cleanses the temple court while crowds of would-be followers surround Him.

The movie does not follow the biblical text without a bit of drama added, a timeline rearranged, and a few details missing. Jesus does not shed tears at Lazarus’ grave, for example. Instead He enters the tomb and kisses His deceased friend on the head.

But I didn’t find this change of narrative offensive because the purpose behind the scene—behind the entire movie—was to help me live the inspiration behind a Divine idea that led to my own salvation. Also, it is safe to say that the words spoken by Jesus here are a reasonable translation of some of our Lord’s actual sayings.

Son of God: Their Empire, His Kingdom (20th Century Fox). Actors: Darwin Shaw, Sebastian Knapp, Paul Knops, and Darcie Lincoln. Directors: Christopher Spencer. Music by Hans Zimmer.

Son of God begins with John’s gospel, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” and ends with Jesus before John on the Isle of Patmos, in Revelation 1:17 “Fear not; I am the first and the last.” What falls between is a cinematic, 138-minute encapsulation of the life of Christ.

For the unchurched, this will undoubtedly present a Jesus that is within the boundaries of creative license and tells the story of Christ with great production value, first rate acting, believable costumes and sets, a remarkable soundtrack by Hans Zimmer (Pirates of the Caribbean, Batman Begins), and some very well-executed directing. It is rated PG-13, but that can only be attributed to the violence of the crucifixion, which spares little of Rome’s brutality.

We get a glimpse into Peter, John, Judas, a hint of Thomas, and short but wonderfully poignant episode with Matthew, but nothing of the other disciples. Mary Magdalene is there as well, almost always with Jesus and the twelve, but solitary woman traveling with a rabbi and 12 men across the Israeli countryside simply is not probable.

Eight minutes is given to carry us from Adam and Eve to the wise men standing before Mary and Joseph with the newborn Jesus. It happens quickly, but anyone with even a passing familiarity with the Scripture can keep up. The film truly begins as Jesus walks toward the Sea of Galilee.

On the one hand, the film is very conscientious of the Jewish people. For instance, “Jewish” is routinely the word of choice over “Jews,” the latter considered derogatory within modern Jewish society. The details: from daily life, customs, and dress are followed, but not always. For instance, the tzit-tzit fringes of the prayer shawls of the Pharisees would most certainly have had the Torah-required tekhelet (blue) threads, but few will catch the omission.

For the churched and biblically literate, let us simply say, you will like the book better than the movie. There were few scenes I did not find some problem with its non-adherence to the Bible. There are many liberties taken from Peter fishing to almost no one there to hear the Sermon on the Mount, to name two quick examples. There are many, many more.

The Pharisees are immediately set up as Jesus’ adversaries, but curiously, it is always the same Pharisee, which hardly makes the case for the cause of all Pharisees as antagonists. That is until Nicodemus comes along. He seems to be a willing cohort or even snitch of the High Priest, Caiaphas. Granted, Nicodemus was in the Sanhedrin and Scripture refers to him as “the” teacher of Israel (John 3:10), but that he might be a co-conspirator with Caiaphas is certainly extra-biblical.