I am a Christian, very familiar with the scriptures and apologetics, but I still enjoyed the movie for its highlights.First, this is not propaganda, since the target audience were people who were already Christians. This movie does not try to convert people, since the scriptures in it are more intended to aid disciples of Christ than to make new ones. If someone wanted to make a movie that tries to evangelize to non-Christian, then it would focus on the teachings of Christ, the exegesis of the bible, the fulfilled prophecies, the lives of the apostles, the history of the church, etc.Second, the dialogue is obviously over the top in many places, as is expected in these type of small studio films, such as Fireproof. However, that doesn't mean they are not enjoyable, but one should expect quality of a movie made for television. The only major part that was poorly argued was the issue of morality. Atheists can have ethics (sometimes called morals) founded on first principles, but they cannot have morals on top of those that have an objective foundation, so any further morals would be subjective. Example: prostitution is ethical, because it is voluntary and consensual, but it is considered immoral by many people based on either their personal views on sexuality which are subjective, or some authoritarian doctrine they believe, such as the bible. For this reason, morality cannot be established as something that transcends humanity, because the subjective morals are not consistent among individuals.Third, Christianity is all about evangelism and testimony. It is faith in the testimony of others, personal experience, and intuition that leads one to God and Christ. Most atheists base their atheism on skepticism, or at least claim that, though I have personally found many to actually have personal problems with God at a deeper root, such as death, the creation of hell, and pain, so the movie is not wrong in presenting an atheist who has a deeper root of resentment for not being open-minded.In conclusion, this is a decent watch for most Christians.

I can't get the time I spent watching it back, so I won't waste much more writing this. It was terrible. Sequels get worse as well.

As a Christian I am embarrassed and ashamed that this movie exists. It is completely unrepresentative of actual life. It demonizes all non-believers and gives a completely wrong message. It also victimizes Christians, something I have rarely felt in my life.

0/4 BOMBI'm a movie buff who was originally interested in this movie to see a debate between God and science. Let me start by saying, I walked in knowing the sub-par standards of Christian movies. I also walked in knowing that it had the potential to be a very enjoyable movie. This was not the case. I hated every second of it. This was not a debate in fact, it was dogma. I have many issues with this movie, which are listed in depth below.1-Film Content ) The film is blatant propaganda. There is no way around it. That in itself is not a bad thing, but God's Not Dead takes such an overwhelmingly aggressive and negative tone. It becomes little more than an attack on all other world views. All atheists are portrayed as "inferior", and on top of that, the arguments the protagonist presents are brash and illogical. The makers of this movie have challenged everyone from physicists like Stephen Hawking to the great philosophers of old. Sitting through God's Not Dead would have been more enjoyable had the arguments been backed by actual logic, but at the same time, far less memorable.2-Character Developments/Portrayals ) The protagonist is my least favorite character in the entire movie. That's something I have only been able to say 4 or 5 times. He was arrogant in his arguments and he was childish in his demeanor. He thought he knew everything, and apparently so did the cast. He (and the avid atheist) based his argument on emotion rather than reason. After 85 or so minutes of waiting for a climax, he decides to shame the emotionally crippled atheist in front of an audience, ultimately forcing him to yield. It was an interesting sequence of events as far as a cinema standpoint (the atheist dies 5 minutes later because he was hit by a car), but as for the boy "evangelizing" both the on-screen and real life audience... not so much. In addition, the atheist felt molded to represent the many people who aren't Christian: an angry, lifeless bad person. This doesn't much contradict the lead role who feels molded to represent the masses who are: an angry, lifeless good person. I feel like it does it's own religion a disservice, it paints a very bland, colorless picture of Christianity, probably a little less likable than atheism. All people are so much more than their worldview, and this movie does nothing to provide you a relatable character or the human condition. It's either a flawless zealot or a broken atheist. 3-Acting/Cinematography ) With everything else going on, I don't expect everyone to have picked up on this one. The camera was very choppy, especially in the classroom and at the concert. The acting really is fairly good, but the main characters too dominant, and the side roles are not allowed to facet their abilities and contribute to the story. (the lady with terminal cancer is a perfect example)4-The Way It Resonated ) I would imagine that God's Not Dead has reached a few people, but only by giving them an ultimatum. The atheist who gets hit by the car has "one last chance to make it to heaven", the lady who has terminal cancer "better hurt up and accept Him". It almost made the impression that evangelism is all about scaring people with the possibility of hell. Of course, one can't complain, since the movie failed on the other front of trying to present a series of valid arguments.This movie should not be representative of Christian movies. It should be characterized by movies which delve deeper into self-struggle and the thirst for spiritual knowledge, two things evidently lacking in God's Not Dead. Anyone who isn't a Christian will be guaranteed to hate this to hell. I sure did!