VV#13 - On the Necessity of Bad Guys (for the Glory of the Story)
How Villains are Necessary and Contribute to the Epic Story
A Great Story Without a Villain?
I have a question for you, dear reader. I implore you to try and answer the question honestly:
Is there even such a thing as a great movie epic, without a great villain?
Think of the best movies you've seen, or the best book you've ever read... Did it not, at least on some level, have some sort of great villain, or grand obstacle, that needed to be conquered or overcome? And if you were honest with yourself, would you not admit that, without those villains or obstacles, the movie or story just simply would not have been as good as it was?
Gen X and Warrior Epics
I was extremely lucky to come of age as an adult at the turn of the 21st century (I am the very tail-end of Generation X).
I was entering my early 20s right when the most defining movie epics were being released. Think of movies like Braveheart, or The Matrix, or The Lord of The Rings, or, as mentioned already, Gladiator and Prince of Egypt.
These are masterpieces that capture the mind and hearts of many of those young people who watch them, and regardless of whether they are exactly true to history or not, is, in the end (at least from Hollywood’s perspective, and the satisfaction of the viewer), kind of besides the point.
As a young man, they filled me with a sense of vigor and wonder, and refreshed my mind and soul. And to be quite honest... over two decades later, it seems that, despite the technology that is available to movie producers these days, they simply can't seem to match the sheer power of these turn-of-the-century grand epics.
Despite how many of the younger generations may not appreciate it the same, it still seems to me that there are few better battle scenes than the opening scene of Gladiator… And regarding Gladiator, isn't it true that, without Commodus, the epic hard-hearted villain of that movie that everyone just loves to hate, it just simply would not have been as great a movie?
Over the years, I have watched many YouTube videos debunk aspects of these great movies and point out that many things about them aren't as historical as I had once thought.
But when I look back at myself as a young man, I am so glad I didn’t allow myself to get too caught up in those debates, but that I just simply basked in the greatness of the story, and the glory on display before me of the overcoming of these grand obstacles.
For is it not the case that stories like these often make young men feel stronger and more vitalized with vigor and optimism? And did it not also confirm my faith that, in the end, things work out ok?
And was it not the case that this faith helped sustain me through all these subsequent years?
Yes, I must admit now that, in the end, the "bad guys" in these epic stories, with their "hard hearts", helped confirm my faith in the future, by displaying before my eyes the overcoming of their plans and schemes. Indeed, one of the most memorable bible verses that still sticks out to me more than ever is Genesis 50:20:
"You intended to harm me, but God intended it for good to accomplish what is now being done, the saving of many lives."
Indeed, whether Christian or not, one can still appreciate the principle at work here, which is that the "evil" schemes of men, can end up, in the end (and no doubt, much to the schemer’s frustration), incidentally serving the purposes of good.
The Necessary Hard Heart of Pharaoh (and of St Paul’s own people)
As mentioned already, St. Paul was a Jew. And not just a Jew, but the most devoted of Jews. And at the beginning of Romans 9, he expresses deep sadness at the fact that so many of his Jewish countrymen were not coming to faith in this crucified and resurrected Christ:
"I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart." (verse 2)
He was severely tormented by this quite perplexing position of preaching salvation through belief in a crucified messiah, amongst his own people, the Jews. He even expressed that he would be willing to be "cut off from Christ" if that meant that his fellow Jewish countrymen, who he called "my people, those of my own race" (verse 3) would then be able to come to faith in Christ in his stead.
For Paul, his encounter with Christ on the Road to Damascus, and the realization that Christ was "Lord"… (the word "Lord", by the way, in Paul's statement "Who are you Lord" from the Book of Acts 9:5 was Paul, then "Saul", recognizing Christ as the very "Lord" so often referred to in the Torah), this was, to his discovery, the fulfillment of the Jewish faith that he, more than anyone else, had so passionately believed in prior.
And so even though he would have perfectly understood how shocking his message would come across, he understandably still had much agony and sadness over the fact that so many of those who he had previously associated with, were now rejecting the message that he was so faithfully and passionately preaching as the fulfillment of everything they had believed and practiced.
And so it was quite natural for him to wonder…
Why?
Why indeed were his own people not coming to faith in Christ as he would have expected, if indeed this Christ was the fulfillment of the Old Testament law (as other letters like Hebrews in the New Testament explain)?
And Paul's answer to his own question ended up being simple, but yet (to some) quite shocking...
Namely, that God (Jehovah) simply did not want them to open their eyes and come to Christ.
At least, not yet...
Ultimately, it was for the purposes of the glory of the unfolding Epic Story on earth that was still yet to come. That is, the "hard hearts" of men were something that God still yet wanted to use in His own plan, and for His own Glory, to display His greatness on earth, with what would soon come to pass.
Yes, even those who remained in defiance still yet had their usefulness in the grand story that was about to unfold.
And he would then spend the rest of Chapter 9 of his letter to the Christians in Rome tapping into his own knowledge of the Jewish Torah, in order to make his case.