Who doesn’t love a good love story…and isn’t true love about the love of the soul, not the love of the flesh and all the external things that can get in the way? So how about if we take the “flesh” out of it and a girl falls in love with “a mysterious soul named ‘A’ who inhabits a different body every day”—that would make for an intriguing and beautiful, true love story, right?!
I haven’t seen it yet, and I am curious to see how they end up handling the story—maybe (probably) there are some (really) good things in it. But, I am very concerned. First off, they didn’t take the flesh out of it. This isn’t a movie about souls only, it’s about souls incarnate, in flesh. It’s just that that flesh of one of them is changing—sometimes male, sometimes female.
Here is the message here—that our bodies don’t matter; they are separate from our soul. And if our soul is completely separate from the body it inhabits, then male, female…it’s no different. So for Rhiannon, loving a boy is no different than loving a woman, just different packaging but the soul is the same. And in this sci-fi reality, is it so bad to just suspend our biases about our reality and just accept this for the sake of the story?
I think it is—largely because this isn’t some absurd science fiction world that plays by different rules. This world is very much our world. And the story appears to be making a statement—that sexuality is fluid and immaterial. It doesn’t matter. Our DNA doesn’t matter; our bodies don’t matter. Therefore, you can “identify” as anything you feel because who you are is about you soul, which has nothing to do with your body. And since our flesh doesn’t matter, it certainly doesn’t matter the gender of who you fall in love with.
If we follow this logic to its natural conclusion, however, why stop with humanity? Why didn’t A’s soul also embody an animal? If our DNA and our soul are not connected, have no relationship to each other, then the insanity keeps going. People can identify as animals or even plants. And to fall in love with an animal, even though the Bible would say that was bestiality, how could we say it was wrong, or any different from any other love—if we allow this kind of logic? (Also, age…why not embody a child, and someone old? Where does it stop?)
It’s a slippery slope.
I want to point out that Christ came “in the flesh” because flesh matters. And he didn’t just show up a grown man, he came in the flesh the way we do—from the point of conception. He grew and matured. These things aren’t something we get to opt out of or skip…they are intimately connected with our soul. In fact, anyone who studies profiling has to see the connection. A good profiler can look at a picture of someone, having never met them, and tell you quite a lot about their personality (a quality of their soul). Conversely, that same profiler can study someone’s actions and habits (the evidences of their soul) and create a pretty accurate physical description—because the two are linked. The popular show Criminal Minds is largely based on this idea.
We wear who we are in our faces…and our faces affect who we are. Yes, beauty is more than skin deep. And yes, attraction is based on more than just the flesh, but it’s more than, not wholly different from. So, while it may be a nice idea, it is also a dangerous idea.
I was playing devil’s advocate with myself over this. I thought, isn’t Every Day kind of the same as Beauty and the Beast? I mean, he had one soul in two different bodies, right? But that’s not quite right. He started as a man and returned to that same body. In the interim, however, the witch changed his body to more accurately reveal what was in his soul. She didn’t disconnect the one from the other, instead, she more accurately connected them. And then, when his soul had learned kindness and love, his body again reflected that. His body revealed what was in his soul, it was never disconnected from it.
I think God made us this way to protect us. When we meet someone, we intuitively know something about who they are, inside. Their physical appearances tells us all manner of things about who they really are. It keeps us all honest, to some degree. If you’re familiar with The Portrait of Dorian Gray, it plays with this idea. Dorian’s face never changes. A painting of him takes on all the things his face normally would, not just age, but his deeds as well. And because he can do whatever he wants and get away with it, because his face will never tell the truth, he becomes a hideous human being. The truth of that is told in the painting which he hides from the world. Throughout history we have recognized it to be truth that our soul and our flesh are distinctly connected and that each has something to say to the other and about the other. This idea that the body is irrelevant packaging, just a different shade of wrapping paper that absolutely bears no significance to the item inside—it’s new and it’s nonsense…dangerous nonsense.
Questions for Discussion:
- What are the benefits of telling a love story that doesn’t depend on people’s physical appearance?
- Do you believe that the soul is really disconnected and wholly different from the body/the flesh—that the flesh doesn’t affect the soul at all?
- What does the idea of profiling (think Criminal Minds) reveal about the connection between body and soul?
- If our physical form is really irrelevant, then why do you think God created us with them at all? And why would Jesus to come in one? And why create us with such diversity?
- Do you think this movie supports the LGBT (etc. etc.) agenda? How?
 Quoted from the Fandango movie description.