(Spoiler alert) Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr. and their commitment to non-violence are being discussed in a high school AP history class. A student Brooke asks if this is similar to the teachings of Jesus. The teacher Grace Wesley responds that it is and make some references to the bible.

The movie's plot collapses right at the beginning. The bible references are enough to get her dragged to the principal's office where she is forced to either recant her statements or face the end of her teaching career - a highly, unlikely scenario to begin with. Grace was only answering a student's question. She wasn't leading her students in prayer and she wasn't preaching from the bible as though she were teaching Sunday school. The mere references to the bible, however, are too much for Brooke's freethinking parents and the "evil ACLU." Brooke's parents file a lawsuit against Grace.

As the courtroom drama starts to unfold, we learn that ACLU lawyer Peter Kane's goal is to "prove, once and for all, that God is dead." In the jury selection process, "Duck Dynasty" fans are considered reliable to the defense, while "Pretty Little Liars" fans are considered helpful for the ACLU. Brooke's parents are never shown mourning the recent death of their son in a traffic accident, and are hoping that the winnings from the lawsuit will finance Brooke's going to college at Stanford. The movie overlooks the probability that a high school teacher is most likely not a person with deep pockets. As if making a mountain out of Grace's molehill response to Brooke's question wasn't bad enough, the movie goes off on tangents about the separation of religion from government and the historical existence of Jesus.

I'm assuming the makers of the movie didn't hire a legal consultant to provide them with advice on the fine points of trial procedure. In the real world, an attorney cannot compel his own client to take the stand, and would definitely not treat her as a hostile witness. The ACLU attorney should have been raising objections to the defense bringing in Christian apologists to prove the existence of Jesus (or at least he should have brought in his own expert witness who could have shown there is no evidence to support the historical existence of Jesus). The whole court room scene would make any 1st-year law student laugh.

There are a few subplots going on in the movie. The atheist-turned-Christian blogger Amy Ryan who found in "God's Not Dead 1" (GND 1) that she had advanced cancer learns that the cancer is in complete remission and believes that it was cured by prayer. The Chinese student Martin Yip, who became a Christian in GND 1, is disowned by his father who has arrived to take him home. Brooke discovers that her late brother was a Christian. Eventually, she becomes a Christian (what a shock). Like GND 1, the movie ends at the Newsboys' Christian rock concert.

And just to add a little fuel to the conspiracy fire, a group of ministers are told by their senior pastor (Fred Dalton Thompson is his final film role) that their sermons for the past three months are being subpoenaed -- never mind the fact the such a subpoena, which screams First Amendment violations, is never likely to be issued in the first place. He never says who issued the subpoena. At the end of the movie after the credits, Pastor David Hill (another character from GND 1) is arrested for refusing to comply with the subpoena. In the real world, the ACLU would have helped the ministers defeat the subpoena.

As in GND 1, non-Christians are held in low regard. They are portrayed as either shallow (Brooke's parents), rigid (Yip's father), or devious (ACLU lawyer Peter Kane).

The cases listed, by the way, in the closing credits which claim that Christians are being persecuted for their beliefs have almost nothing to do with religion in public schools. Their focus is instead on requirements for birth control coverage under health insurance laws, and laws against discrimination based on sexual orientation.

The message of the movie is that Christians are victims and are under attack from all sides by evil "secular rationalist forces" that control the government - even in Arkansas (the state's never mentioned by name but its flag and the state capitol building are shown on a few occasions). The movie is made by Christians for Christians who aren't going to ask hard questions about how it's so out of touch with reality.

In the real world, some Christians (but not all) want to tear down the separation of religion from government so that they can use the government to spread their religion. Roy Moore, Pat Robertson, et, al, rail for mandatory prayer and mandatory bible studies in public schools. The non-Christians (Moslems, Jews, atheists, among others) that stand up against these high-and-mighty leaders are the ones who have been targets of hate and violence. They sometimes have had to classify themselves in lawsuits as John or Jane Does. They're not likely to have large crowds supporting them outside the court, like the crowds cheering the ACLU in this movie. Usually, they'll face angry crowds.

In recent years, some Christians (but not all) have been portraying themselves as victims for not being able to discriminate against LGBT individuals.

Note: As a historian, I would have responded to Brooke's questions by pointing out MLK's references to Jesus in his "Letter from a Birmingham Jail", which Grace's lawyer referenced in the court. I would have also mentioned that Gandhi said, "I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ." (Christian Europeans, especially the British, in Gandhi's day treated non-Christians and non-whites like second-class people or worse, which hardly reflected a belief in "love thy neighbor.")

A fascinating sci-fi alternate reality thriller with a fundamental reality twist that would put Hitchcock and the writers of the Twilight Zone to shame. Imagine a world where Christians were victims of oppression and persecution in the United States. As hard as it may have been to conceive of such an outlandish alternate reality (much less make a film about it), the team behind GND2 were Kubrickian in making this film. The idea itself is worth 10/10 stars on its own, all the way to its conclusion of an ordinary schoolteacher besting an Orwellian justice system. It puts everything in perspective, as the oppressors become oppresses (the shoe is on the other foot, so to speak). The film carefully parallels the persecution of non-Christians by seemingly earnest (but deceptive) believers, and completely switches it around! There were some faults, of course. Some of the legal jargon was misused (as it depicts a civil suit, yet the heroine is warned of criminal liability), and the presence of some expert opinions didn't really seem to be relevant to the case. Also, the dialogue did seem, well, unrealistic (but such is to be expected of Sci-Fi films). Overall, however, I felt transported to another dimension at the film's onset, one where Christianity was routinely shunned in the US. I felt as if I were really there. The one thing that stuck out, though was the audience: It didn't seem like a sci-fi prone audience, although the other viewers seemed even more convinced of this truth of this alternate universe than I was. I give it 8/10 stars.

God's Not Dead 2 is another paranoid fantasy where Christians are being persecuted for their beliefs in the US. A teacher, Grace Wesley, is asked a question about Jesus in history class and gives an innocent answer. Suddenly, an arsenal of evil atheists led by the ACLU takes her to court for violating the separation of church and state. Meanwhile, pastors are forced to hand in their sermons for review by a government agency in a subplot that is introduced and then dropped and never resolved.

The whole plot is ludicrous. In the real world, the villains obviously wouldn't have a case because Wesley didn't actually preach to her students. But for the sake of the plot she's taken to court so that we can get to hear "expert witnesses" like Lee Strobel tell us that Jesus really existed, as if that's what the case was really about. In the closing credits, about a dozen real court cases are cited as inspiration, but if you read the summaries about them not even one of them is even remotely similar to the case in the movie. This just shows that the whole premise of the movie is a complete straw man with no basis in reality, designed to feed the persecution complex of some Christians. Movies like this only makes Christians look ridiculous.

Firstly, I'm an atheist. I was raised a devout Episcopalian but I often refer to myself as a secular humanist & non-believer but raised with culturally Christian views. Having said that, I noticed right away at the scene in the history class that nothing Melissa Hart said actually violated any hard & fast 1stAMD separation issues. She was within her rights to share those historical facts. She responded to a question in a history class about historically specific correlations between traditions in non-violent protest and passive resistance. Maybe she could have omitted the lengthy scripture quote from the Gospel---but a sound argument could be made that even that was academically relevant too. So...IMHO it was quite relevant and legal. Remember...I'm not a "believer". No school board would take this complaint seriously. I actually think that the ACLU might have defended Melissa Hart!!! It's obvious that the movie makers are trying to unfairly demonize the "freedom from religion" crowd (a rapidly growing demographic BTW) as fanatically unreasonable and angry. In fact, I've found that the exact opposite is usually true. Just research the landmark Kitzmiller vs Dover School board case. As to the ongoing portrayal of atheists and liberal religious types throughout the film, it's an inartfully constructed "straw man" set up for the express purpose of getting easily knocked down. Poor Christians! They have a Biblical persecution complex and are happiest when they can imagine being burned at the stake by the ACLU and a shouting, un-Churched mob of pagan non-believers! Wait 'til you see how they depict the ACLU lawyers as basely motivated by notoriety, power politics and publicity. Not very good...and not persuasive. I think most people can see through this bit of evangelical agitprop whether religious or non-religious.

What drove me into this film? Well, that is hard to describe since in English there apparently doesn't exist an equivalent word for the German term "Schadenfreude". But allow me to elaborate: I am a sucker for bad movies. I love the Ed Wood and Al Adamson flicks, Italian cannibal flicks, German schnitzel-westerns, Ninja flicks from Hong Kong, Greek porn-comedies, etc. I openly admit and repent not. Yes, I do own a copy "Saving Christmas" and watch every Kirk Cameron flick (again: "Schadenfreude"). I only realized that there was a sequel to the original train-wreck when somebody pointed out that "Batman vs. Superman" is only doing so well at the box-office because there was no competition apart from a handful of bible-thumping-flicks. So I took a pilgrimage of-sort (the only cinema that showed it was about an hour's drive away) and to put it into the words of the target-audience, let me now testify to what I hath witnessed and speaketh unto thee: Long story short (remember: this story prattles on for more than two hours, though it actually feels a lot longer): Melissa Joan Hart (best – and ironically – remembered for her lead in the TV-show "Sabrina, the teenage witch"; Catchphrase "Woohoo!") plays a high school teacher, who is suddenly overcome with that ol' itch and begins to sermonize to her students about her believe – in history-class, no less. The logic consequence ensues and she's given the boot, just as a math-teacher would get canned, if he began to preach that one and one is the Holy Trinity. But, unwilling to understand that a school isn't a church, she goes to court and fights for her "god-given" right to preach to children in a class-room.

Now, imagine that scenario: your child comes home from school and, when asked what he/she had learned that day, he/she replies that the god Ganesha has an elephant head (History-class), the basics of L. Ron Hubbard's Dianetics (English-Literature-Class), the basics of Alchemy (Science) and Phrenology-101 (Biology). And that the P.E.-teacher was handing out communion wafers and splashed the students with holy water. I presume that most people would be like "WTF!?" and sue the school for all it's worth. So would any fire-and-brimstone-cussing evangelist. But we're not talking any old heathen religion (Catholicism, Judaism, Hinduism, you name it), we're talking about the "real deal" – which may sound cynical to some readers, but that is exactly the stance this "movie" and its ilk takes.

Sure, we could argue that religion should be taught in school. Plenty of time for the kids to learn about all those countless deities, gods and demi-gods, from Zeus to Odin to Jehovah, and to heck with history, geometry and basic science. I can guarantee you one thing: By the end of the semester, those kids won't even be able to read and write properly, but will be convinced that people once-upon-a-time rode on dinosaurs and slew dragons.

Back to the film: of course "God is not Dead 2" tries to establish itself as some Anti-"Inherit the Wind". All the Christians are portrayed as saints and martyrs, thrown into the lion-pits of a cruel, unjust (and ungodly) world, which wants nothing more than to take away their crutch for reality. "We are the victims and everybody else is the enemy", is the prevailing message, and it makes it very clear, why many Christian fundamentals are considered the American answer to the Taliban. If this sentiment would have been around in the 1940's, surely a Nazi war-criminal would have jumped up at the Nuremberg trials, demanding that the judge "stop oppressing me!" And if you ask me about acting, editing, production-values and everything else that goes with a real movie: well, it's a two-hour-plus sermon, featuring either zealots or washed-up has-beens, happy to see the front of a camera. And sure, there'll be plenty of claqueurs, who'll clap and cheer this flick, calling it the greatest thing since Noah's flood, etc. But don't let yourself be fooled. It's trash, no matter how you look at it. Again, if you have seen "Inherit the Wind", you might remember how that film ended; hence, here goes the mandatory one point out of ten.

Some movies are meant to entertain. Some movies are meant to educate. A few movies are meant to deceive. This movie falls into the latter category. The "true story" is not true. It rests somewhere between "heavily dramatized for a gullible audience" and pure fiction. The film is a flagrant attempt to promote the "victim culture" which is increasingly prevalent among conservative Christians. It is a story of a teacher who was called to task for daring to discuss Jesus in the pubic school classroom. The producers seek to stoke emotions of outrage over what they purport to be discrimination against Christians who are not permitted to use their public jobs to evangelize in public schools. There is anger and outrage because teachers are told to check their religion at the door to the schoolhouse. What the movie does not explore is the common deceptions used by evangelical Christians to "sneak" their version of Christianity into the classroom with the intent to proselytize to their captive audience of impressionable young minds. It does not explore the fact that of Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim and atheist parents send their kids to school to learn the ABCs and not to be indoctrinated by teachers determined to promote their particular brand of religion. It does not explore the reality that Constitutional prohibitions on proselytizing the classroom are there to protect Christians, as well as non-Christians. In short, the move does not entertain. It does not educate. It does however, mislead with a mastery which comes only with practice.

The entire premise of this movie is when melissa joan heart's character mentions Jesus as an example in class the resulting backlash lands her in court. The reality of the situation is that since she was not leading children in prayer or proselytizing, she is allowed to make references to the bible or it's characters in the classroom as long as it is from a literature-based point of view. Then the school might receive a letter fro the freedom from religion foundation or similar body reminding the that a teacher may not preach or lead students in prayer. She might be punished fro the school board, but it would only be the equivalent to a slap on the wrist, if it even came to that.

Sequels are the Achilles heel of most movie lovers. Sure the viewer gets to experience the same feeling they had when they watched the first movie, but it almost always never lives up to the potential. God's Not Dead 2 never has that problem because you simply can't get any worse than its first film God's Not Dead. GND2 takes everything that was hated in it from the first film and puts it right back in a second time around. Atheists are viewed as rude, demanding, and willing to go to great links to take away Christians religious freedoms. Christians are seen as innocent, content, and victims of the violent belief that is Atheism. Odds are if you are going into this movie you either wanted to see this train wreck of a film for yourself or being forced to go with your parents/overly-religious friends. If the later is this case try very hard to fight the urge to scream at the movie and run out of the theater because, trust me, it will happen. Overall the plot is incoherent, the characters bland and lifeless, and the overall theme of the movie is a slap right in the face to anyone who doesn't believe in god. You've been warned 1/10

I watched this movie with no bad intentions, but to see it out of curiosity, but I could not stand this movie. The foundation of the movie isn't even real, teachers are allowed to cite the bible, it's completely legal as long as they're not preaching and trying to convert the students, if this was real life, Grace (the teacher who cited the bible to answer a student's question about Jesus being like Martin Luther King Jr.) would have never gotten in trouble. In reality, teachers aren't allowed to be preachers in classrooms so they won't hurt the rights of others. The first movie and this movie have the character from another culture and religion that gets slapped by their father and convert to Christianity. It's repetitive and an offensive stereotype. This movie is trying to play it off as Christians being oppressed by atheist politicians and that's not the case at all. Christian politicians make up the majority of the House and Congress. The cases that inspired the movie are frankly trash, they quickly ran them through at the end and I scanned them, and it was just homophobia, teachers promoting pro- life and Christianity, in which all of those violate the rights of others. The movie makes it seem like teachers are being crucified for being Christian, and that's not happening at all, what is happening is teachers getting reasonable consequences for hurting their students with homophobia and other things. In the end of the movie when Grace wins the case, the student says "God's not dead' as if people actually say that to Christians, I would never say that to anyone, not to a Christian, a Muslim, a Jew or anyone because that's a violation of their right to believe in whatever they want. The movie would've made more sense if it was about a religion that was actually oppressed like Muslims or other religious minorities. No one can honestly tell people that Christians are oppressed, Christians oppress people. Gays, Transexuals, Blacks, and people of other faiths have been oppressed by Christian politicians in the past and present. Atheists are presented as cold, depressed, and Christian hating people.I don't mean to offend anyone, but this is honestly propaganda, it's the only way to describe the movie. Otherwise, the acting was alright Grace and her lawyers are the only real characters that matter and have somewhat of depth, but they're borderline Mary Sue and Gary Stu characters. The other characters are all tropes and clichés, the girl who converts in the end, quiet Chinese boy, sick pastor, goth girl who's secretly religious, the one black guy so they won't seem racist, but otherwise isn't important to the plot, and the famous band cameo. Overall, this movie had potential but propaganda got in the way. Apparently a 3rd movie is hinted and I have no hopes for that movie and I sadly have to give this movie a 1/10. Christian movies always get harshly reviewed, but this deserved it, there is movies like Facing the Giants that are beautiful and Christian but don't have harmful tropes, stereotypes and generalizations. God's Not Dead 1 and 2 is everything a Christian movie should not be.

This cinematic failure is the sequel to everyone's favorite movie gods not dead. The plot is somehow worse than gods not dead, where now its a teacher who mentions Jesus LEGALLY in a class and gets in trouble with the school board. it would be a civil court but since everybody is atheist it goes to criminal court violating the simple concept of the court system. With the "evil" ACLU on the school boards side, the lawyer resorts to making the court say Christianity is the only religion. after getting people to say Jesus existed and a blind rant on how rights can't be subordinate to other rights ( the right of safety is greater than the right to make money) the good teacher wins! This movie is among the worst Pure Flix has made. And somebody thought it was a good idea to give this film another sequel! Don't watch this pile of trash

"God's Not Dead 2" (PG, 2:01) is a fantasy – and I am NOT (repeat, NOT) referring to the religious beliefs at the film's core. At the Movie Fan Community Facebook Page, we conscientiously avoid taking sides when it comes to religion, politics, or controversial social issues. We simply evaluate movies on their own individual merits. Before "God's Not Dead 2", we previously reviewed about a dozen faith-based movies since starting this page in January 2015 – and we've reviewed the majority of them positively (e.g. "The Young Messiah", "Risen" and "Do You Believe?") and, although we didn't review it, we also saw the original "God's Not Dead". This sequel stands as one of the most unrealistic faith-based films we have ever seen (and, again, we are not referring to the film's biblical message). Our staff includes a former high school history teacher and an attorney. We think you'll find this review to be an objective and well-informed critique and a fair evaluation of this particular movie's own plusses and minuses.

While certainly very much in the spirit of its predecessor, "God's Not Dead 2" features an entirely new plot, but brings back some of the same characters from the 2014 original. Reverend Dave (David A. R. White) and Reverend Jude (Benjamin Onyango) reunite at Reverend Dave's church, while Chinese college student, Martin Yip (Paul Kwo) and blogger Amy Ryan (Trisha LaFache) each continue the respective faith journeys they began when each became Christians in the first film, plus the Christian rock band "Newsboys" again has a couple scenes. Other minor cast members worthy of note include "Duck Dynasty" cast member Sadie Robertson in her first feature film and the late Fred Thompson in a scene which marks his final on-screen role. Of course, as interesting as all that is, the main point of this movie is a second attempt by Pure Flix Entertainment, their go-to writing team of Chuck Konzelman and Cary Solomon, and returning director Harold Cronk to prove to Movie Fans that God is not dead.

This time around, instead of in a college classroom, issues of faith come up in a high school classroom and the main debate is not between an atheist professor and his student, but between lawyers in an Arkansas courtroom. The trouble starts when public school history student Brooke Thawley (Hayley Orrantia) asks her teacher, committed Christian Grace Wesley (Melissa Joan Hart), a question about Jesus' teachings as they relate to the Civil Rights Movement and Grace answers Brooke by quoting a passage from the New Testament. The phrasing of the question and the answer both sound purely academic in nature, but the principal (Robin Givens) and Brooke's parents (Carey Scott and Maria Canals-Barrera) are very upset and Grace soon finds herself appearing before the local school board.

Grace refuses to apologize for the way she answered Brooke's question, so the board lets the case go to court. Brooke's parents are represented by ACLU attorney Pete Kane (Ray Wise) who professes to hate everything Grace stands for. Grace's attorney, Tom Endler (Jesse Metcalfe) is a non-Christian "low man on the totem pole" provided by Grace's teacher's union. Tom is determined to win his case and Grace's grandfather (Pat Boone), whom she cares for in her home, encourages her, but she's afraid that she'll lose everything is she loses her court case. Reverend Dave ends up on the jury, blogger Amy Ryan's interest is peaked and this situation has a big impact on Brooke's life as well. Plus, the whole nation seems to be watching to see whether the name of Jesus will be barred from the classroom. Tom has to establish that Grace's classroom discussion with Brooke was historical and, therefore, academic in nature. He decides that the best way to prove his case is to prove Jesus' existence as an actual historical figure. As part of his case, he calls witnesses who include famous real-life atheists-turned-Christian authors Lee Strobel and J. Warner Wallace. Then, this young lawyer pulls a couple late trial tricks that are shocking to see the judge (Ernie Hudson) allow and to see opposing counsel not fight against harder.

"God's Not Dead 2" is well-acted and mostly well-directed, but it buries its own message underneath a pile of implausible plot points and dialog. The script imagines a world in which the mere mention of Jesus' name in a public school classroom could get a teacher fired and her teaching certificate revoked. Although some recent court decisions have gone against the Christian perspective on certain issues, the country that this film portrays simply does not exist. Nor does a courtroom exist in which the types of legal arguments and tactics that we see in this film could be employed. This movie furthers its fantasy by filling its world with non-Christians who are always bad people – uncaring parents, angry protesters, stupid judges and evil lawyers – even casting a man who once played the devil in a TV series as the plaintiff's attorney – and having him glower in the courtroom scenes as if he really were Satan himself.

Those stereotypes represent the exception rather than the rule in real life and they're insulting – both to those who aren't Christians, and to those who are, but also have friends and acquaintances beyond the walls of their church. One-dimensional characters do this film no favors, nor does the script jumping back and forth between trying to prove that God is alive and that a teacher should be able to speak Jesus' name in an academic context, but actually proving neither. The more our staff members discussed this movie, the more we became concerned about the blood pressure of the lawyer on our staff. Furthermore, the movie ends with a post-credits scene setting up another sequel. We hope #3 improves on #2's fallacious story. "D"

If you watched the first one have some idea what the second one will be like. God's Not Dead 2 is basically the same as the first one; evil immoral atheists vs good wholesome Christians, lots and lots of Christian propaganda, and a poor story that is mainly made to insult non Christians.

What's new? Well instead of evil atheist teachers and abusive parents, we have the entire government which for convenience of the plot is made up of atheists and oppresses anyone who so much as says the word Jesus. This movie packs more hate and bigotry than the first one and this one tries to convince audiences everywhere that atheists are after your beliefs and want to abolish your first amendment rights.

Other than the propaganda and the pure ignorance of reality, the cast and directing was also poor. Story (as I said earlier) is mainly propaganda and doesn't really consist of any rich plot content at all as it focuses entirely on trying to shove Christian hate messages down your throat.

My review: Don't watch this movie!! It doesn't matter if you're Christian, Atheist, Muslim, Jewish, Buddhist, or whatever, it's horrible and should be avoided at all costs!!!

Some propaganda movies are valid pieces of cinema in spite of their propaganda due to groundbreaking advances in the art of cinema. That is why I can watch battleship Potemkin without sharpening my pitchfork and setting fire to the master copy. This movie... does not have any groundbreaking advancements of cinema, a story based on falsies and so much political baggage weighing it down so that if it jumped it would level Huston. Do yourself a favor and avoid at all costs, and if you see the DVD release... do the shop-keep a favor and snap the disk in half, as the movie in any watchable format would technically make the disk a defective product. If anything, if you know this movie is worthless, it could get a cult status as the room of propaganda movies. Probably not what the filmmakers thought but at least we would get a textbook on NOT to tell a story out of it.

This movie is simply a piece of propaganda for "religion" that leaves God shaking His Head and muttering, "Oh maaaaaan?!?!?!?!".

These issues have way more complexity to them than this simple minded presentation. The fact non-believers are made into these authoritarian, fascist- lite officials is beyond suspended disbelief. That believers are somehow the kind and open-minded ones is also incredibly shallow. One reviewer wrote about the persecution she's suffered at the hands of atheists, but might I would like to see the evidence. I seem to remember historically the KKK has referred to itself as Christian.

This movie is a shallow and blatant attempt to stir up the worst in people for the simple purpose of making a buck. A complete slap in the face of true religious belief and God.

The life of the Creator/Deity of the infinite universe of time, space, and matter gets a second go round in God's Not Dead 2. In this film, Advanced Placement History teacher Melissa Joan Hart is suspended when she quotes from the Gospel of Matthew in answer to a student's question concerning Jesus, Gandhi, and Martin Luther King. Somebody tapes the lesson and Hart's hauled up before the school board and then put on trial. For what I'm still not sure as this is not a criminal matter. Now what John Thomas Scopes was put on trial for teaching evolution back in the 20s, that was a criminal matter. All that should be happening here is a legal appeal of an administrative ruling and certainly that is civil.

I remember many years ago in New York City in the Bronx I believe there was a teacher fired for bringing up Jesus as her evangelical faith tells her she has to. She was told that she could not be talking about religion. With all seriousness and ingenuousness she replied she wasn't talking about religion to her students, she was talking about Jesus. That got her deservedly canned. Poor woman had not a clue.

The school board retains the biggest villain in the evangelical modern world, the American Civil Liberties Union. Ray Wise is a properly smarmy lawyer whom if he wore a handlebar mustache would be twirling it. Hart's lawyer is Jesse Metcalfe late of the revived TV Dallas and he's the hero of the piece saving Hart's job and right to her beliefs.

I brought up the Scopes Trial and those of us who've seen any version of Inherit The Wind remember that the judge ruled out scientific expert testimony about evolution. That's not what happens here as Jesse Metcalfe is allowed to bring in religious 'expert' testimony from some real folk playing themselves. I guess different rules apply in Judge Ernie Hudson's court. Mike Huckabee is playing himself as Fox New commentator and he's probably cursing the fact that God's Not Dead 2 was released after he called a halt to his presidential campaign.

The original God's Not Dead was a Christian propaganda piece, but in terms of the film the story was interestingly presented. This one played like a long episode story from the 700 Club. I'm sure it will play heavily on the Christian film circuit and will be rented a lot by youth pastors all over the Bible Belt once it goes to DVD.

It's a truly simplistic world these folks live in. They're right, the Bible is the word of God not to be questioned or given alternative interpretation. And those who don't believe are either sinners beyond redemption or a fertile evangelical field to be plowed.

Seeing the united front the kids give Melissa Joan Hart in support you know this is a Bible Belt community she's from. I wonder if there are any kids openly saying that she was wrong. God help them, the gay kids must be very deep in the closet there.

first i want to mention i'm an orthodox and that i could not bear to see the movie more than 30 minutes.

the good guys in this move have a very puritanical presence. they seem so very calm and also seem a bit retarded. dialogues are very limited, predictable. they want to sound deep but end up laughable.

i believe this movie does a great disservice to Christians. the dialogues sound like members of a sect are talking. it makes faith look very shallow and almost weird. it makes the believers look very dumb and narrow minded.

lee me distill it a bit further. if i would not be a Christian i would think that Christians are a dubious sect, a little slow in the head and would look at it with doubt.

This movie shows (on the screen) of atheists and non-Christians as being ridiculous, but it just ends up showing us (off the screen) how ridiculous many Christians in the US are.

This movie doesn't work in many Christian countries except in the US, where Christians are under the illusion that they're being attacked.

This movie comes from the same kind of thinking that using "Xmas" instead of "Christmas" is an attack on Jesus himself. Xmas is used in situations where Christmas is too long (license plates, usernames, hashtags like #xmas2016, etc.). The symbol X for Christ has been in use for 1000 years, this is not a recent thing. Let's not forget another symbol that looks like X that is used for Christ.

This movie ignores facts and realities.

For example, early on the teacher is told that her actions/wrongdoings will be judged in a civil court, but the parents are so outraged that they may up it to the criminal court. Hold on, what? The criminal court is not a degree of civil court. If steal $200 of Snickers you go to the criminal court, you don't go to the Maximum Civil Court. These are different branches of the justice system, they're not degrees. You can't bump up a case to the criminal court with outrage just as you can't send a murderer down to civil court where it's easier to win. This movie pretends that the parent's outrage (they are feeling "yucky" was the quote) can send the case to criminal court, what about if the parents are feeling generous? Can they send it down to family court?

It doesn't work that way.

What Grace did was not a crime. I'm not saying "poor little Gracie is not a criminal," I'm saying that there are no laws in the penal code, state or federal, that she has broken. It doesn't matter how outraged anyone is. The penal code has laws, like murder (1st and 2nd degree) manslaughter, rape, theft, larceny, attempt, conspiracy, accomplice, etc. There is not one single law in the criminal code in the United States that refers to mentioning Jesus in the classroom.

Forget getting to a judge, the police cannot arrest you for that. That would be unlawful arrest. Yes, criminal law means police, it means arrest, it means jail, but it means a lot of forms to fill and in that form you have to specify the crime. It means a bail hearing, a guilty-not-guilty plea. I'm surprised this movie did not bring the FBI into it, maybe a SWAT team storms the school to seize bibles,

This movie pretends that the state can just make up laws on the fly and arrest Grace and charge her with laws that don't exist.

The bad guys are people that say "We want to prove once and for all that God's dead." They hit her with injunctions, lawyer's fees, trying to bankrupt her. The bad guys also reject a juror (in jury selection) because he's a marine. Apparently atheists hate America too.

As a Christian, I see this movie has succeeded in inflaming negative feelings against Christianity. It makes it look as if secularists are anti-Christian and anti- God. Many actual Christians don't want to send their kids to school that mix things up. Science class is for science, English class is for English, math for math and religion is for religion. I don't want my kids going to a school where random teachers waste my children's team. My kids already go to teachers (bible class) who know what they're teaching, not some random unqualified hack giving their personal interpretation of the bible. But this movie would put me on the side of those who want to kill God or prove that he's dead.

This movie is a success in getting people to have more hatred for Christians. Just reading the review section of this movie is enough. This is another version of Kirk Cameron's Saving Christmas.

I saw this movie after contemplating between this and Meet the blacks. I picked this cause everyone fights over these types of films and I just wanted to watch it as a normal film. It has many flaws mostly in how messy the script is with about 4 subplots. The movie also hates on nearly everyone but Christians. The plot is so messy though, characters mostly bad except for the teacher and the lawyer, also the script tries to overdramatize everything, and even though there's a small amount of good chemistry and a good idea somewhere in this film it never shines.

I elaborate more on this movie in my Video Movie Review on my Youtube Channel here's a link if you want too or are willing to check it out.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC9Eq8dcMjUhLWxzlp4cOARA

I am going to try to make this into a hobby and any feedback is appreciated as well :) If you don't want to watch it that is also fine. I know this is basically self promotion but at the same time you've got to get yourself out there somehow.

This film is terrible. It's nothing but religious propaganda. Don't watch it. I still need many lines of text to complete this review. Right now I'm sitting on the toilet at work. It smells awful in here, but it's still more pleasant than this movie. If you want Clarissa to explain how "Christian persecution" works, go ahead and watch this abortion of a movie. Sorry, sorry. I know a lot of you are anti human rights and I probably shouldn't have said the "a" word out loud in such distinguished company. Did I mention that I'm emptying my bowels right now? I feel so much better, almost as light as I felt when this steaming pile of celluloid finally ran out of reel and I got to leave the theater. You guys remember Ernie Hudson? He was in Ghostbusters. Well, get ready to never look at Ghostbusters the same again because he's also in this movie. Well, that's ten lines of text. Enjoy.

God's Not Dead 2 follows an ensemble cast (some old, some new), all flung into the sticky tendrils of a flimsy courtroom drama surrounding a history teacher and her answer to a contentious classroom question. Because Ms. Wesley (Hart) had the temerity, the gall, nay the malicious, impudent daring to draw parallels to Martin Luther King Jr. and Jesus Christ, the public school, teachers union, local government, and the ACLU are all out for blood. Will Ms. Wesley be able to continue professing her faith? Will she lose her job? Will Reverend Dave (White) finally be able to start his car? And did Tituba really see Goodie Proctor with the devil?

Okay let's dissect this bloated corpse of a movie by first highlighting the good parts. Director Harold Cronk has sure learned a lot since 2014 though some of the elevated crane shots and glossy establishing scenes may have something to do with a bigger budget. His ability to manipulate his audience to well up in a flurry of sanctimonious pride and self-adulation is not to be underestimated. Thankfully, God's Not Dead 2 doesn't outright vilify atheists and doubters like it's prequel; in-fact one of our heroes, scrappy attorney Tom Endler (Metcalfe) is an agnostic who doesn't become a convert by the end credits. Also as far as acting goes, returning cast member Paul Kwo is given much more to do than be a walking Asian stereotype. He exhibits a sincerity we never saw before and one can't help but think if the movie were about him, it'd be a hundred times better. Then there's Melissa Joan Hart who truth be told is a much better central figure than Shane Harper, who's pious college freshman was more weaselly than anything.

Yet what the movie gets wrong, it gets very wrong; starting with it's representation of a legal system gone rogue. While confusing and conflating basic legal concepts like "precedent" and "discovery" and "defendant", the film nevertheless aims its sights on drumming up accusations of religious persecution while playing to the very tired culture war clichés we've gotten sick of twenty years ago. Much like the film's predecessor, God's Not Dead 2 isn't based on any specific case of religious persecution. It's more cobbled together out of a few lower court cases taken out of context and those dubious Facebook posts your angry Uncle from Omaha wishes were true but aren't. In a side story, returning character, actual producer and Keystone Kops impersonator David A.R. White has to turn in three years worth of notes on his sermons to the government because of...reasons. While doing so he confronts a grotesque bureaucratic flunky who warns him in an exchange so over-the-top you'd swear the movie was hinting at a vast Atheistic conspiracy.

In response to the film being called an example of "fake persecution" by an Atheist blogger, White stated, "It's an interesting thing, because, if it wasn't real, why do they get so offended by it...I don't think it would annoy people if it wasn't true." Of course if we followed that logic every teething toddler at a Dennys would be considered a sage. Religious persecution is a big deal worldwide as explicitly stated when Reverend Jude (Onyango) warns Martin of his plan to preach the gospel in Communist China. Despite Christianity being the largest religious doctrine in the world, Christians are harassed, discriminated against and oppressed in many places all over the world. And yes it does sometimes happen in the good 'ol US of A though despite some limitations you can still express your religion at home, school, work, church, billboards, park benches, television, radio, magazines and newspapers. Why cheapen a very real problem with a false conceit? Especially one even committed Atheists and the ACLU would side with the plaintiff.

Thankfully the main takeaway in God's Not Dead 2 is something most people can get behind; we shouldn't stifle religion nor any exchange of ideas or perspectives, even in something as revered (or in this case vilified) as the hallowed halls of a public school. That message is certainly a cut above God's Not Dead's (2014) all Atheists are whining children who never got what they wanted for Christmas. With a door wide open for yet another sequel to this drivel, I honestly would rather hear the rabble in Inherit the Wind (1960) sing "Give Me That Old Time Religion" in a loop for two hours.

It was exactly what I needed, when I needed. Very inspiring. Would watch again. Remember that we cast our votes with our money, this was the best $12.50 that I have spent to watch this film. I really believe that films like this are what is missing in society now a days- just a good film to inspire. When reading the reviews for this movie I think everyone is projecting their own biases Christians as well as Non- Christians and forget that we are here to review the film not each other. If there was anything I would change from the movie it would be nothing. I think that the director was really detailed in the way he wanted to portray certain characters and did so very effortlessly. If anyone who made this film/cast sees this review, all I want to say is thank you for making my day so much better than what it was. It may have been acting, but I am certain you felt it was much more than that almost a duty and I thank you for this.

I really enjoyed God's Not Dead 2. I enjoyed the first "God's Not Dead" film as well. The God's Not Dead films are similar in that they deal with how God and the Bible are received in the modern academic environment. God's Not Dead 1 dealt with the issue from the perspective of a Christian college student with a professor that is hostile to his faith. God's Not Dead 2 deals with a Christian high school teacher that has to deal with an angry school administration. The acting in both films is good and the story lines are very insightful and creative. I'm very thankful that many different Christian films are making it to the theaters. Other Christian films like War Room, Mom's Night Out and Risen have done well and have shown some diversity in styles of films that are being released in the Christian genre. I hope more films like them are released in the future to continue offering moviegoers more options for what they can see on the big screen.

It must greatly frustrate the religious right when they are routinely (and unfairly) portrayed in major films as fanatical, sanctimonious, comical, backwoods hicks. Well, "God's Not Dead 2" is clearly their revenge. In this movie, ACLU lawyers are all sneering, oily, evil Simon Legrees. School board characters are all smug, administrative wonks who readily conspire to persecute the sweet, perky teacher. The faces of anti-religion protesters are contorted into manic, rabid, drooling hatred. And mainstream media are all resolutely against God.

There are only black hats and white hats in this film. (Or should I say halos and horns.) No quarter is given to the many nuances or complexities of this issue. Which is a shame. It's a serious subject and deserves better. But the producer and director had no interest in any of that.

Clearly, this film is unapologetically one-sided. Conservative Christians feel embattled and marginalized in an increasingly secular world in which they are repeatedly losing watershed court cases. They haven't had much to cheer about recently and this film hits back at that "unfair", "Godless" world. Consequently, Evangelicals will absolutely love this film. All others will likely never see it unless they're dragged to the theatre and handcuffed to their seat.

As a Christian, I quite enjoyed the discussion of historical Jesus from the researchers/authors who played themselves in the film. What's more, GND2 is cinematically well crafted. But it take's more than just dreamily uttering the name of "Jesus" to make a good film. GND2 quickly deteriorates into a two hour sermon from the pulpit.

Oh, and BTW, it should come as no surprise that Pat Boone still can't act... and neither can Robin Givens.

The fact that this movie was released on April Fools Day is all the proof you need that this movie is just a joke

You know what's worse than a preachy movie that preaches to the already converted? A preachy movie that deliberately paints the opposition in a bad light to sell their narrative.

The first God's Not Dead was a stupid movie about a atheist strawman disguised as a philosophy professor. There was nothing there of merit and it was only there as an echo chamber for those that believed as the movie makers did. This one however takes the persecution a step further into an America that never actually existed.

Melissa Joan Hart plays a teacher who one day mentions Jesus in a historical context while in class. For this she's sanctioned, everybody loses their minds and the evil ACLU steps in to prosecute her. The fact that they got Ray Wise to play the lead prosecutor and had him play it as devilishly as possible I'm sure was just a stylistic choice and not a way of trying to paint the ACLU as a bunch of satanists. If you've actually checked the facts you'd see that the ACLU has actually defended Christians when their rights were trampled upon. But that's not good story telling for these people so they leave that out and hope you don't check.

What follows is a standard courtroom drama which should never have gone as far as it did in the first place. There's no statute or law that states that you can't mention the name of Jesus in a classroom. What you can't do is read from a bible or teach Christianity unless the class calls for it like in a comparative religion class.

There's also a subplot where Pastor Dave from the previous movie is on the jury and later on is taken into custody for not providing the transcripts for his sermons. This is the plot for the upcoming "God's Not Dead 3". Again this isn't a bad thing as it's there to make sure churches don't lose their tax exempt status by promoting a political candidate which they're not supposed to do.

In the end it's a predictable movie with a predictable ending that will have the Christians feeling good and everybody else wondering why they wasted money on this.