Are some popular Sci-fi themes anti-Evangelic?
470557
I don't really think so, although I'm not really speaking from a completely educated point of view here.  Asimov's Laws of Robotics, I'm not familiar with, but being a former Trekkie, I'd love to take a phaser blast at this one.  If you think about it, the prime directive was both a really really good idea and also kinda silly.  It prevented them from interfering in otherworldly affairs unless they had developed Warp capability.  In a way, it seems almost arrogant, like they're not good enough for us to get involved.  It's actually almost alleghorical.  Isn't it a widely accepted idea that the only prayer God will hear from a sinner is the sinner's prayer?  So basically God's "prime directive" prevents him from interfering with worldly affairs unless they've developed "warp drive" (a personal relationship with Jesus Christ.)  Not to mention Sci-Fi stands for Science Fiction, and Fiction is exactly what it is.
373847
I found the language of the show to be quite interesting. Fore instance, during the first half of the show, they kept asking the question: "Is it real?" This isn't really what they meant, what they meant was "Is it old?" To me, they were implying that "real" = "true".\n\nThey also did not mention several Gnostic beliefs that would have discredited the movement in many people's eyes. You remember the scene at the last supper when they talked about Jesus laughing because the disciples were worshipping the wrong God, that the God who created the universe was actually an inferior God that was not worthy to be worshipped. What they didn't say was that Gnostics believed that this was the God of the Old Testament, so they ignored the Old Testament.\n\nAnother thing that stuck out to me was the phrase "When Jesus appeared on the Earth." Because they believed that the material world was evil, they had what is known as a Docetic view of Jesus. That is, that Jesus only appeared to be human, because God would have never become human and contaminated himself with the material world.\n\nI strongly agree with the speaker at the end who said that the Gospel of Judas provides valuable historical information about the history of Christianity and the movements within it. It shows us that there was never one single Christianity being practiced.  People have beein arguing about who Jesus was since a few minutes after he died.  With that being said, I do not personally believe it provides a historically accurate picture of the characters of Jesus and Judas.\n\nFinally, they seemed to think the fact that there were many Christianities unique. I have to disagree with that. There are many different versions of the Christian faith today, with different holy texts, etc. The book of Mormon is a prime example.\n\nIf you read the other Gnostic texts, you will find they have a lot in common with the Gospel of Judas.  For instance, both the Gospel of Judas and the Gospel of Thomas elevate one of the Disciples above the others.  The Gospel of Mary Magdalene does the same thing for Mary.  None of the four canonical gospels does this for their author.\n\nAnother thing that absolutely amazes me is that we have 4 gospels that tell very similar stories.  There are some minor differences in the order of events or the events included, but they are consistant for the most part.  One new gospel is found that offers a different story and many people jump on that and say, "Wow!  This is the real story."  It just doesn't make any sense.
913496
Your proposal was getting interesting until you introduced a gratuitous element into it - "God". I've seen this argument before and it actually works against the concept of a god, or gods. Rupert Sheldrake has proposed a less ambitious, but interesting, theory wherein human mentation is necessarily projective - a bit like a classical field in ordinary physics. The point is that if it were true, then humanity can be seen as more intimately integrated to some essential character of the universe - but this essence needs no supernatural characteristics. Indeed the concept would be diminished by it.\nFor example, in his proposals there are empirical parameters for detection of this characteristic or its manifestations - again, just as if you were talking about, say, electromagnetism.\n\nI'm not saying I buy the theory. I am saying that the substance of the theses points away from the supernatural. Of course if the theory has any success, it may provide a basis for talking about what humans have disguised, or abstracted, as god or gods.
534384
i agree with everything that jerik f said. the film is based on a book of fiction with some reasonable .what if..' theories...and it is a great film, in my opinion - but - everyone is entitled to theirs.....\nand no, Christian people shouldn't oppose it, if anything the film encourages a healthy debate on the subject doesn't it?  and the one thing that Christian people like to do is talk about their religion, don't they?
1134353
They look fairly interesting.  I'm not a devout Christian or anything, I just love apocalypse tales (The Stand is still one of my favourite books), and the Rapture would probably fit into that category.  I've just never gotten around to it.
927080
Actually, you'd be surprised at how accurate that South Park episode was.  Whenever they had "THIS IS WHAT SCIENTOLOGISTS ACTUALLY BELIEVE" on the screen, they were NOT kidding.  Yes, the bit about aliens is true.  And yes, it's true, L. Ron Hubbard, the science fiction writer, created a "religion".  Here, I'll explain what it's all about.\n\nIt is a CULT. Despite what a few fanatical members may say, it IS a cult. The church harasses & bullies anyone who they deem an "enemy" (basically anyone who has anything negative to say about the "church"). They will RUIN YOUR LIFE if you speak out against them long enough.\n\nThe founder is L. Ron Hubbard, the science FICTION writer who once told a friend that the best way to make lots of money is to start your own religion. Though being a very outspoken critic of psychiatric drugs, it was discovered upon Hubbards death that the anti-anxiety drug hydroxyzine (Vistaril) was present in his body, which several of his assistants would later attest was only one of many psychiatric & pain medications Hubbard ingested over the years. (visit this link to read about the uses of hydoxyzine: http://www.drugs.com/mtm/v/vistaril.html )\n\nScientologists believe the evil alien ruler Xenu killed a lot of aliens (Thetans) from around the universe by bringing them to earth & blowing them up inside volcanoes. They believe the souls of these aliens (these souls are "Body Thetans") have attached themselves to us & cause many of our mental & physical ills. Members who know about Xenu will attempt to deny it or pretend like it doesn’t matter.  They are required to sign a contract binding them to silence on the matter.  Lower level members don’t know about Xenu & accordingly deny everything because they honestly don’t know.\n\nTo rid ourselves of "Body Thetans" & also “engrams” (past negative experiences stored in our unconscious mind) so that we can become “clear”, we have to go through "auditing" with a member of the “church” who uses an "e-meter" to measure our “reactive mind”...... & we have to pay lots & lots of money for “auditing” (purchased in 12.5-hour blocks, costing anywhere from $750 for introductory sessions to between $8,000 & $9,000 for advanced sessions) & to take courses on Scientology to advance to higher “levels” in the “church”. The “church” has also taken a very hostile stance towards psychiatry & psychiatric drugs irrespective of the fact that some people require medication to remain adequately functional in everyday life. They deny the reality of chemical imbalance & profound mental disturbance & accordingly do NOTHING to effectively stabilize the dangerously unstable. The “church” has been known to withhold prescription pharmaceuticals from member (with deadly results).\n\nScientology is undeniably a cult. For more information on what a cult is & what their damaging effects are, please visit the link provided at the bottom of the sources. Just know that Scientology DOES qualify by meeting these 5 criteria:\n\n(1) It uses psychological coercion to recruit, indoctrinate & retain its members. (2) It forms an elitist totalitarian society. (3) Its founder leader is self-appointed, dogmatic, messianic, not accountable & has charisma. (4) It believes 'the end justifies the means' in order to solicit funds & recruit people. (5) Its wealth does not benefit its members or society.
647875
The criticism of extremist religions was appropriate, considering what's been going on in the world for the last couple thousand years, especially since 2001. I didn't, however, care much about the message that faith is simply a choice, and not altered by inconsistencies in the bible or otherwise. While I can appreciate this idea, I just don't care, and I don't think religion, Jesus, and Mary Magdeline, are particularly interesting subjects. I thought it was kind of interesting - the idea that Jesus and Mary Magdeline were married and had kids, but, at least in the movie, that excitement was brief, and couldn't carry it. It seemed like it tried desperately to do other things to make it interesting. For example, there were murders, phobias, dark pasts, treacherous acts, plot twists, secret identities, intricate puzzles, mysterious forces at work, high drama, I mean they really tried to throw in everything under the sun, but if you only find the main premise mildly interesting, then all these elements fail. \n\nAlso, the idea that the blood line had survived, was not exciting to me, but probably mostly because I'm an athiest, so being a relative of Jesus' really becomes meaningless.
883820
Let's take the religious aspect away from this question first. Even if we assume that there is no God, then the probability of other lifeforms existing elsewhere in the universe is extremely high.\n\nEven in our "visible" universe taking the number of stars with the ratio that are expected to have planets, with the ratio of those that should have planets capable of supporting life, with the ratio of those where life has actually started, we still come out with a significant number. When we start thinking about the concept of the "multiverse" with the existence of other dimensions, then this becomes mind-boggling.\n\nComing back to religion, it is a natural aspect of the human mind that we should see ourselves as central to the importance of the universe. So it was when we thought ourselves to be the centre of the solar system and, no doubt, so it will be as and when we discover something outside the currently visible universe.\n\nI think most people (other than creationists) see the story of Genesis as an allegory. I personally see no clash at all between my scientific views and my beliefs as a Christian. If God created life, why should he have not created it elsewhere as well as on Earth.\n\nSo the answer to your question is, yes.........there has to be other planets (or indeed moons) with life on them, may be even within our own solar system !
577321
There probably is missing Gospel. What relevance? It would have the same message, no?
647283
the left behind series did not bash religion, y2k was a real problem that was averted with years of hard work.\n\nThe Da Vinci Code takes a lot of shots at christianity, the catholic church in particular.
970191
you are right Mav, too often this forum is used by the various Christian denominations to promote their own sides agendas, and not the true message of the Lord, which I think still stands today`Love all mankind as I have loved you`.
438016
There were definitely people who believed Chick's anti-Catholic propaganda back in the 1970s. I remember a lot of Fundamentalist churches back then that regarded Chick tracts nearly on par with the New Testament itself. Children, in particular, were given Chick tracts (and the larger, scarier anti-Catholic comics by Chick) and told to give them to all their Catholic friends. Of course, the Chick tracts aren't just anti-Catholic; they're also homophobic, anti-Pagan, anti-Masonic, and just generally rampantly paranoid. \n\nChick tracts are still popular in some areas (especially for scoffers who collect them like trading cards). The last time I saw a bunch of Chick tracts was on the parking lot of an arena following a heavy metal concert...evangelists had passed out the Chick tracts, and a horde of young headbangers tore them to shreds, littering the whole area with the resulting confetti from the mangled tracts.
115655
I'm sure a lot of them are. But I also notice a lot of questions that are a thinly veiled attempt to promote christianity. I'd say there's probably a connection between the two things.
837997
No it seems that they are not.  If you want to see any really interesting work on the subject of electricity and animus as a fluid you'll have to go back to Dr. Frankenstein's library of outdated and disproven theoretical works on natural philosophy.
554183
Yes. The reason why is because such movies glorify sin. Cutting of people's arms, rape, and other evil actions. These movies do not lift your mind up to highger things, such as your salvation nor do they add to the Glory of God.
46862
To dismiss it because of its religious origin would be the same as dropping American history because the founders believed the Bible to be true.\nhttp://www.schneblin.com/studies/pdfs/our_founding_fathers.pdf\n\nYou do not have to bring in the Bible to teach Intelligent Design. You can postulate the possibility as "another view" which can be used as a counterpoint to evolution. You can even postulate the ET theory with aliens dropping off life on an inhabitable planet--anything. But to forbid its teaching is just as much a crime as the Roman Catholic Church condemning Galileo for saying the earth orbits the sun.\n\nI will repeat my argument here:\n\nImagine you are a secular scientist. A meteor falls to the earth and you go to examine it. Upon scraping the crust away, you find that it is a ball of pure, mirrored metal. Back at the lab, you find that you can open an airtight access door. Inside are extremely complex gyros, camera systems, computer processors and propulsion system. \nNow what would you, a secular scientist, be your first scientific conclusion? A.) Imagine how many years this must have been in space to evolve? or B.) This is far beyond our abilities to create, it must be from an extraterrestial source!! \nWith only the evidence of a complex machine, with no way of knowing or testing its origin, of course, no contest, B would be the secular scientist's response. \nBecause some people have "faith" that there is life on other planets, they are not catagorized as "religious" so are free from ridicule. But because we see the complexities of the human machine and proclaim "designer" we are thrown out of schools by the judges, demeaned by scores of people on this forum and others, and debased as mindless lemmings.\n\nDNA is a very complex organic computer program that could never evolve. So either you believe in the ET seed theory, or in a Designer. Evolution requires billions of years to even get to the simple cell. Sorry, the sun would have been too hot only a million years ago to sustain life. So why do fundamentalists oppose it? Because it is not science, it's theory with very little evidence. I have not even gone into the fact that the human body is an intrigate closed-system with a fantastic balance system, ability to heal, think, imagine, love and reproduce.\nSo, as a scientist who cannot go back in time and document the origin of such complex lifeform, what are you to think?
98727
Dan Brown always starts his trash novels with a "disclaimer" that all things within the book are true.  Unfortunately, he misleads a lot of readers with this fake claim.  The part dealing with matter and antimatter is that antimatter is strictly theorectical.  The reason antimatter was theorized was to explain why the observable universe is chaotic and why there is too much measurable energy to equate the creation of planets.  The ever changing antimatter/matter chaos tries to explain this.\n\nThere is real use of magnetic fields to capture sub atomic particles though, but these would still be considered matter becuase they do indeed have atomic weight.  Don't worry too much about it.  The technology to create an antimatter "bomb" will kill many more scientists developing this psuedo science than an actual terrosrist utilizing this drummed up fictional bomb.