Her actions in the end are the logical ones of a TRUE BELIEVER

Amen and thank you Jesus: Great analysis... someone gets this film... Actually I think a lot of people get it.. If only fundamentalists would get it..

reply share

add reply

formatting help

al666940-3. Your logic is flawed.

[SPOILER!!!]

She didn't kill her daughter because she thought God was TESTING her. She killed her daughter in order to send the the child to to heaven so the kid could be with her father. She did this because God wouldn't come to get them and the child desperately missed her dad. Clearly she was angry with God for not coming to meet her in the desert, so she decided to take things into her own hands and send her kid to heaven on her own terms, not God's.

And she never hinted that God was "testing her." On the contrary she took personal control of the situation by demanding that God do it her way. Remember when God didn't show up, she told her child, "we'll give God one more chance!" That's not the motives of a woman who believes God is testing her loyalty. On the contrary she is testing and demanding God's loyalty to her.

In the end she didn't "Reject" God in the sense of not believing in God. Clearly she believed in Him in view of the fact that she was angry with Him. In order to gain entry into heaven, she merely needed to say that she "loved God." She couldn't honestly say that, and therefore was not allowed entry into heaven.

Also, the movie continues on in the storyline where she and the sheriff are "raptured" up to the gates of heaven. She's given a choice to enter, but she's so ticked off by then that she can't come to say she loves God. So I'm not sure what you meant by "bull sh*t", but within the framework of the movie, God DOES exist. Where's the delusion you keep bringing up? She was deluded that God would meet her in the desert, but I don't think that's what you mean. She was deluded that God would protect her family from harm in view of the fact her husband was murdered, but I don't think that's what you mean either.

I'm assuming you mean delusions of the actual existence of God, but not sure. IF that's what you meant, your logic doesn't follow since she clearly sees the entry point into heaven and can't bring herself to love God and be in heaven with the rest of her family. Clearly God exists and she was angry at Him. At least you got the angry part correct but that fails to mesh with your theory on delusions. Her actions in the end had nothing to do with "logic of a true believer", it was all about anger because God allowed her husband to be murdered.

Here are examples of several interpretations based upon different biases:

A psychologist would most likely say she was a deeply depressed person suffering from Dependent Personality Disorder or some other mental impairment and put an unhealthy need on God/religion, a God/religion that was not meeting her emotional needs.

Many persons who are not psychologists would agree and use the lay-terms "whacko" or "nut job" to describe any person that kills her child.

Christian fundamentalists would most likely say, she got what she deserved because she didn't follow God's will and tried to do it her own human way. They would most likely also agree she's mentally ill.

Atheists would most likely say, it's really sad she put so much hope and faith in a God that is non-existent. They would most likely agree she's mentally ill and needs help.

And lastly a person who prescribes to the religion of anti-religion would contend she's a religious zealot and that her actions were stereotypical of anyone who prescribes to a religion. So stereotypical that they are even logical within the prejudicial confines of a stereotypical true believer.

reply share

add reply

formatting help

Some people think that Mimi's actions in the end just don't add up. Killing her daughter as to demanding proof from God.

Your whole understanding of why she killed her daughter is flawed, and thus your whole explanation as well. she did not kill her daughter as a way of demanding proof from god. she killed her daughter to send her to be with her daddy. stupid, yes. but not done for the reason you laid out.

Well, every fundi thinks God would actually ask them to do something like that, so it's not unreasonable of her to rationalize her need to prove she isn't nuts that way.

while I am not a fundamentalist christian in any way, I am agnostic, I can tell you that you are wrong again. I have several fundamentalist friends, and none of them believe this. I am sure there are some who do, but you are going out of your way to stereotype and generalize. It is like saying that every man is a wife beater just because a few do it.

And rejecting God in the end is simply the reaction of someone who know deluded herself but can't bring herself to admit it, no matter what.

did you even bother watching this movie? she rejected god, not because was deluded, but because she could not love something that had allowed her to kill her child in his/its name, then says, "oh, by the way, everything you believed is true, and all you have to do is say you love me to be with me." She had just slaughtered her daughter believing it was what her god wanted her to do so that they could be with her father. she was not deluded. she was certainly wrong. However, she did what she did in the name of her god, who happened to be doing absolutely nothing to stop it. she rejected her god in the end as she could not love something that just sat back and watched as some much evil took place and god did nothing. then when you die says, "now just love me and you will be taken care of. don't love me and you go to hell."

This film simply exposes the problems with fundamentalism and true believer rationality.

again you have a very limited understanding of this film. while it does express a problem with how religion in any form can take away rational thought it also probes what might possibly happen to a "believer" if said believer begins to question said god and his "hands off" actions in the face of so much pain, sorrow, and suffering.

In other words: the true believer will keep on believing regardless of proof to the contrary (being in the desert for weeks). And if said person reaches the point where sustaining the belief is no longer possible, she will demand some proof that she is right (sacrificing her daughter), of course, disguised as "God is testing my faith, and has one final test, like with Abraham".

that is not what this movie said at all. she was not demanding any proof at all. again, go watch the movie again. she was not looking for any proof. Just as abraham was never looking for proof. you need to reread the story of issac and abraham. god was looking for proof of abrahams faith, not abraham looking for proof of god. I totally think the story of abraham and isaac is ridiculous, but it is not what you say it is. And the killing of her daughter is the same way. She killed her daughter to send her to be with her daddy when she had lost all hope. she was not looking for god to do anything to show her proof. she was a woman who was mentally messed up and thought she had a good understanding about her god. once she was eventually confronted by her god, she realized that her god was not what she thought he/it was and was sickened by him/it.

What really motivates this is the NEED to prove to hersehf she hasn't wasted her faith and energy on bull sh*t. Because to realize and ACCEPT that would be even more devastating than any hardship she's endured.

you obviously have an agenda here. she had no need to prove to herself anything. she really did believe this stuff. she was wrong of course, but she believed it. In the end, she realized rejected her god because she now believed that a loving god would not have allowed her to do what she did. It was a very good movie that not only exposes flaws in all religions that ask you to follow on blind faith, but also ventures into what it would be like to confront your god after acting on said blind faith and realizing what you did was horribly wrong.

And then when no proof comes forth, her inner world implodes. She simply cannot escape the fact that she indeed WASTED everything on bull sh*t anymore.

again, what movie did you watch? what proof? either she really did come to be raptured with to her god and thus she was given proof that he did exist, which is not what she wanted to begin with anyway, or she is now in a mental state of constant hallucination. What happened at the end when she was confronted by her god is that she rejected everything she had been taught. it is 180 degrees from what you are saying. she said to hell with it. You, her god, allowed me to do a horrible thing, while thinking I was doing what you wanted. Yet her god did nothing to stop her. she rejected her god because she was sickened by him, not because she could not accept that she had wasted everything.

And all that is left is an undying hatred. Nothing hurts more than discovering one been fooled into having REAL faith on something worthless. And especially is one fooled himself.

yes, I can see this. she does have a hatred. she now sees her belief as worthless because she believed her god was loving. once she actually did kill her daughter it finally dawned on her what she was doing. her blind faith led her all the way to doing such a horrible thing, then when she finally did it, the shock woke her up and she realized how wrong she was. when she confronted her god, she could not love him/it as she was disgusted that her god would allow this to take place. was her faith worthless? that is subjective. If you believe that the final goal is to be part of the rapture and make it to heaven with the other believers, then her faith was not worthless. On the other hand, if you have some sort of epiphany, as she did, then she can begin to see that there was a lot more to this than just having faith in your god. there are several dynamics unfolding her. You are so focused on just on part that you have tunnel-vision and it is causing you to not see the big picture.

But since she cannot bring herself to accept that SHE deluded herself and SHE is responsible for everything, she turns her rage at God.

exactly how did she delude herself? where was god in all of this? everything she believed is taking place in the end. the believers are raptured and taken to heaven. she really believed she saw pictures of her husband. she had many of her fellow believers, especially that "prophetic" boy, telling her things. I am not saying I agree with her belief. But you are missing a huge piece of this story. while they do delve into the way religion can brainwash a person. it also takes great lengths to examine what would happen to a person who showed such faith, took actions on said faith, then when they had to think about said actions, changed their view on the faith/god.

And since being fooled like that hurt more than anything, one reasons that ANYTHING else is preferable to risk being foold like that again.

your quotes sound like they are from somebody who is bitter about being fooled by something in the past. But that is not the case here. she was not fooled. she was not looking for proof. she was doing what she thought was right. then once she did it, she realized it was wrong. she was angry that god allowed her to think she was doing something right, when it was wrong. she was angry that she could not kill herself after she killed her daughter. she was a very very angry person because she began to open her eyes. not because god did not give her proof. at the end of the movie, her god still existed and all the things she believed were still true. but she had a totally different viewpoint. She really thought she was doing the right thing. But the pain and self-hatred for what she did, after she did it, was so great, that it woke her up from her blind faith. once this happened, she no longer could have faith in her god any longer. so, even though, she was confronted by her god and her daughter on the doorway of heaven, she could not love him any longer. she lost her faith by doing because of her faith. It is really quite ironic.

Thus her stubborness at rejecting God, even at the cost of her eternal soul.

stubborness? she rejected god because she no longer loved him, and could not love him as her eyes had been opened. at this point, her soul was the least of her worries.

That's the logic behind evil people that simply cannot bring themselves to repent. Because to accept their fault hurts more than being damned.

wow. you need to take some psychology courses on the workings of the human mind. do a little research on serial killers and you will get a better understanding of how the "evil" mind works. people who are, as you put it, evil, have no need to repent. they don't see that they have any faults and they don't have any sort of mechanism that stops them from doing wrong, or what we deem as wrong. your understanding of the psychology behind what we call "evil" is very limited. these people could not care any less about being damned. they don't care if we think they are wrong or not. and what should they repent for? in there minds, right and wrong is totally different than what we see as right and wrong.

In this movie, the mother was not evil. she was deluded and she was going on blind faith. but she certainly was not evil. that was the whole point of this movie. she was a good person who acted on blind faith. Her faith was shattered by what she did and she then could no longer love her god. this has nothing to do with evil.

reply share

add reply

formatting help