In the film, The Apocalypse (2002), the
Apostle John is a prisoner at an island-prison because he is a Christian. He is
having visions of heaven in the last of days and Valerio, another prisoner is dutifully
writing what John dictates so various church congregations can know of John’s
revelations. He is esteemed so much by other Christians that he feels pressure
to steer them to God’s truth. Too much esteem, I submit, is being directed to
John, as he is, as he admits, only a human being, though he does get caught up in
his own direct access to God, as in being able to know the will of God. This is
a temptation for any religionist, especially religious leaders. Although
subtly, the film conveys John’s over-reaches though without having another
character explicitly refer to them as such.
In one of his visions, John
hears the question, who is worthy to open the scroll of the meaning of mankind
to God. That is, why did God create our species? What does God intend for us in
creating us? The answer that John receives is that God wants people to turn
back to God to praise God and feel God’s love. Who is worthy to break the seven
seals on the scroll? Only the innocent lamb who gave himself to be sacrificed for
humanity. “Look,” an angel tells John during a vision, “the Messiah has
triumphed, and so he will open the scroll.” Indeed, as John points out, the
core of the Christian faith is that God will be victorious over evil at the end
of time. In the meantime, John believes God is calling him to lead people to
God’s kingdom.
Other Christians in the movie
think John’s significance is more than merely preaching on how God’s truth can
lead people to God’s kingdom. Gaius, the leader of a congregation, says, “We
must wait until his letters show us God’s will.” This implies that John has a
special access to God in virtue of having visions and being the last person
alive who witnessed Jesus’s crucifixion and resurrection. Irene implores John
to come with her to escape from the prison. “We need you so badly. You’re the
only witness to the resurrection of our Lord. They will listen to you. You will
save us.” It is highly significant that in praying, John says, “I am only human,”
and he replies to Irene, “Only the Lord can save us. But now he wants me here
to deny my own name and testify to his.” John believes that Jesus is keeping
John at the prison. It is God’s will. But is it? Even John finally admits to
Irene that he could be wrong. After all, John feels that he should help Christians
who are lost. So, after John tells her, “I have to stay. The Lord has spoken to
me,” and Irene begs John in the name of Jesus to escape to save her and the
other Christians, he suddenly realizes that he, a mere mortal, could be mistaken,
so he joins her. As it turns out, the Lord has not spoken to John; his place is
with the struggling Christians rather than in prison. In fact, John is very
mistaken.
John’s sudden realization
should be a wake-up call for any Christians who are so utterly convinced that
they know the will of God in their lives. It is not as if everything that
happens is God’s will; such a belief ignores the impact of free-will, which in
turn is necessary to avoid the conclusion that God is responsible for evil.
Historically, the Jansenists, for whom Augustine’s later works rather than the
early book of free will are important, believed that the Fall damaged free-will
rather severely such that no good whatsoever can come from us. In the film,
John voices this theology in stating, “my strength is not from me; it comes
from the Lord. But to stave off the self-love that manifests as selfishness, is
it necessary to deny having any strength of one’s own? Augustine holds that
self-love of that of oneself that is in the image of God has positive religious
value. Must even such self-love be denied in order for the sin of selfish
self-love to be expunged from a person’s nature? Augustine clearly thought that
self-love is not necessarily a sin. Even Jonathan Edwards argues that self-esteem
is a neutral self-love in religious terms.
Therefore, John deserves some credit for giving food and drink to an old man and Valerius, respectively, when they are mistreated by Roman guards in the prison. Acting thusly in line with Jesus’s preachments and example, John does not risk incurring the sin of self-love. Ironically, in believing that he knows God’s will for him, that sin can find enough pride to grow on. John’s compassionate acts matter in a religious sense, in terms of him entering the kingdom of God. So, John is mistaken again when he states, “He who believes shall have eternal life.” Without love put in action, even faith that moves mountains is for naught. John is correct, therefore, in stating as a Christian that “God is love, and whosoever lives in love lives in God, and God in him.” John is hit by the Roman head of the prison and put in a cage for days for having wiped the back of a violent, nasty prisoner whom a guard has just whipped. John uses his free will in compassion to an undesirable and thus not only believes that God is love, but actively chooses to participate in loving acts that are inconvenient. It is subtle, but very important, that the other prisoners and Roman guards are taken back as if in awe when John is compassionate in actions to the weak, old, and even nasty. This awe is not owning to John’s salvific personhood, as though he has direct access to knowing God’s will and can save Christians who feel lost.
In short, John’s strength is not wholly due to God; free-will was not so warped in the Fall that Christians do not deserve some credit for choosing to act in line with Jesus’s teachings on how to enter the kingdom of God that is within, rather than just at the end of time. The film could do more to emphasize that John’s compassionate acts instantiate the presence of the kingdom of God within him, and this would not be the case were John not able to exercise enough of his free-will in choosing to act rather than just believe consistent with the type of inconvenient love preached by Jesus in the Gospels.
