Avatar and Religion

[Minor Axis]

Interesting article at movieguide.org regarding Capitalism, Christianity, and Avatar (the movie). I made it all the way to the end (not agreeing with most of the authors conclusions) and then choked on this statement:

If you want the truth, read the Bible.

A movie about a bad corporation is a movie about a bad corporation, nothing more, it's not a condemnation of the concept of corporations. I agree with the authors statement that corporations are only as good as those running them.

But this is where religious fervor can take you:

The danger to moviegoers is that AVATAR presents the Na'vi culture on Pandora as morally superior to life on earth. If you love the philosophy and culture of the Na'vi too much, you will be led into evil rather than away from it.​

- this from a Christian.
​

​

Anyone here think that the Navi culture was superior? From what was shown in the movie, this fantasy culture appears to be morally superior. But, so what? It really means nothing when it comes to fiction. The author says there is danger if we all try to act like the Na'vi (which is arguably good, but unlikely), because in the process we might forget about God and Christianity, which he views as very very bad. The problem is when you pick any religion, there is really no truth and the success of a religion could be argued is the result of how people act based on their religion, if they follow the good standards the religion promotes. In this measure Christians and Muslims have failed. Or better said, humans have failed. Maybe if we acted more like Na'vi, we would be better off. But even then, it's a standard, we'd actually have to live up to. Knowing humans, not very likely.

The Vatican on Avatar:

In a recent World Day of Peace message, the pontiff warned against any notions that equate human beings with other living things in the name of a "supposedly egalitarian vision." He said such notions "open the way to a new pantheism tinged with neo-paganism, which would see the source of man's salvation in nature alone, understood in purely naturalistic terms."

Pantheism:

Pantheism is the view that the Universe (Nature) and God are identical,[1] or that the Universe (including Nature on Earth) is the only thing deserving the deepest kind of reverence. The word derives from the Ancient Greek: πᾶν (pan) meaning "All" and θεός (theos) meaning "God" - literally "All is God". As such Pantheism promotes the idea that "God" is better understood as a way of relating to nature and the Universe as a whole - all that was, is and shall be - rather than as a transcendent, mental, personal or creator entity.[2] Pantheists thus do not believe in a personal, anthropomorphic or creator god. Although there are divergences within Pantheism, the central ideas found in almost all versions are the Cosmos as an all-encompassing unity and the "sacredness" of Nature.

Pantheism is also described in Star Wars as "The Force" that surrounds all things in the universe binding them together. Is that any more far fetched than a guy on a throne somewhere unknown? What if Jesus had been a pantheist and his movement had still caught on?
​

 

[hart]

About Dr. Baehr & Movieguide

ABOUT DR. TED BAEHR​

Ted Baehr is Founder and Publisher of Movieguide® and Chairman of the Christian Film & Television Commission®, as well as a noted critic, educator, lecturer, and media pundit. His life’s purpose is to be used of God to redeem the values of the media while educating audiences on how to use discernment in selecting their entertainment.

They are trying to educate u Axis, that's ALWAYS the goal for a religious based organization

 

[Minor Axis]

About Dr. Baehr & Movieguide

ABOUT DR. TED BAEHR​

Ted Baehr is Founder and Publisher of Movieguide® and Chairman of the Christian Film & Television Commission®, as well as a noted critic, educator, lecturer, and media pundit. His life’s purpose is to be used of God to redeem the values of the media while educating audiences on how to use discernment in selecting their entertainment.

They are trying to educate u Axis, that's ALWAYS the goal for a religious based organization

I did not realize Movieguide was based solely on a Christian view of movies. Consider me educated. Thanks!

Any Pantheists around here?

 

[hart]

Me I'm a Unitarian I'm keeping my options open I do like the idea of the sacredness of Nature though

 

[MoonOwl]

The Vatican doesn't have any room to talk about anything right now......

I thought the message a good one. Imperialism coming to a world and taking what they want. Consequences be damned. That's us.

God is on our side against the lowly heathens... Us too...

Sucks don't it? We in our arrogance......

I can see why it didn't win. An Anti-War-ProPagan movie.... Perish the thought.... I thought it kicked Hurt Locker's ass....

But I'm a Pagan so I guess that's understandable.

 

[Accountable]

It's obvious to anyone with the most rudimentary religious education that the movie is obviously a comment on religion. Just look at the evidence:

• The strangers were 9 feet tall and blue
• The central being was unintelligent in the traditional sense, and was of the physical plane.
• and most importantly
• The closest communication was through giving and getting a piece of tail - pony or otherwise - whether between giant smurf or animal.

Obviously a line-by-line parallel with the Bible.

 

[Goat Whisperer]

I disagree with the author for simple reasons--almost all wars or excuses to start wars, have been based off religion. Argo, no religion, quiet a bit more peace on Earth.

I'm not saying we shouldn't believe in a 'greater being' who will give us an 'after life' if we live a 'morally correct life'. I'm saying, I am sick of religious roullete. The truth is not a single one of us can possibly know the truth about what religion is true or not. And fighting about it, having crusades, and spilling blood--all that is doing is causing good people to do morally injust things, the opposite of what religion should promote.

I personally think religious institutions are far more harm then good.

 

[Accountable]

Very few wars if any have been based purely off religion, which leave excuses to start wars, as you point out. If the excuse of religion hadn't been available, another handy excuse would have been used. Ergo, no religion, a bit less religion on earth, nothing else.

 

[RedRyder]

Man! I thought Avatar was just a movie about fantasy.

Were there subliminal messages that have now changed me (us)?

*scratches head*

 

[Minor Axis]

But I'm a Pagan so I guess that's understandable.

What exactly is Pagan? This Wiki link does not do a good job of explaining it:

The term pagan is a Christian adaptation of the "gentile" of Judaism, and as such has an inherent Abrahamic bias, and pejorative connotations among Western monotheists,[3] comparable to heathen and infidel also known as kafir (كافر) and mushrik in Islam. For this reason, ethnologists avoid the term "paganism," with its uncertain and varied meanings, in referring to traditional or historic faiths, preferring more precise categories such as polytheism, shamanism, pantheism, or animism.

The term pagan is from the Latin paganus, an adjective originally meaning "rural", "rustic" or "of the country." As a noun, paganus was used to mean "country dweller, villager."[5] The semantic development of post-classical Latin paganus in the sense "non-Christian, heathen" is unclear. The dating of this sense is controversial, but the 4th century seems most plausible.

I disagree with the author for simple reasons--almost all wars or excuses to start wars, have been based off religion. Argo, no religion, quiet a bit more peace on Earth.

I'm not saying we shouldn't believe in a 'greater being' who will give us an 'after life' if we live a 'morally correct life'. I'm saying, I am sick of religious roullete. The truth is not a single one of us can possibly know the truth about what religion is true or not. And fighting about it, having crusades, and spilling blood--all that is doing is causing good people to do morally injust things, the opposite of what religion should promote.

I personally think religious institutions are far more harm then good.

I agree with your premise. Humans corrupt the search for truth by assumptions and jumping to conclusions.

Very few wars if any have been based purely off religion, which leave excuses to start wars, as you point out. If the excuse of religion hadn't been available, another handy excuse would have been used. Ergo, no religion, a bit less religion on earth, nothing else.

I'm not so sure about that, but I don't know enough to flat out disagree. And think religion and subjugation go hand in hand. I might have used the word "historically" except there is a group out there today who want us to become Muslims or be purified by being blown to little bits.

Man! I thought Avatar was just a movie about fantasy.

Were there subliminal messages that have now changed me (us)?

*scratches head*

The movie makes some religious conservatives insecure as if it will convert the flock to Pantheism. They are just worried about your soul.

 

[MoonOwl]

I use Pagan as I wouldn't classify myself as a Wiccan. These days "Pagan" is an umbrella term that all the nature-based religions use as a generality. Just as there are many sects of Christianity that call themselves Christians yet don't believe exactly the same.

As it says above "Pagan" was used to classify Rural people. The old 'religion'. More in tune with the earth and the seasons & cycles and the Gods & Goddesses of old.

Or, you could jump from Europe and look at our Native Americans. Once again, much more in tune w/the earth and nature and the respect for both that that entails.

Again, a broad term to encompass the nature-based religions.

In my little pea-brain at least I know there is someone out there who could explain it much better than I

 

[hart]

We have many pagans at my UU church, but some also classify themselves as Wiccans. I don't care, they are fun people with interesting views and I like learning new things......though I must admit I haven't been to church for a while, may go tomorrow though, I will go look up what the sermon will be if it sound interesting.

 

[Goat Whisperer]

Very few wars if any have been based purely off religion, which leave excuses to start wars, as you point out. If the excuse of religion hadn't been available, another handy excuse would have been used. Ergo, no religion, a bit less religion on earth, nothing else.

It's really not that clean cut. Yes, most 'religious' wars had an uderlying cause which would have made that war happen regardless of religion, and while yes, leaders would have found different excuses to start many of these wards, not having religion as a playing card would have drastically changed the outcome of many wars and the amount of blood that was shed in them.

First and foremost, there are the kamakaze fighters--the suicide bombers. Many people have the belief that if they sacrafice themselves for their religion, in war, they are garenteed entrance into heaven. This isn't the reason for all suicide bombers, but it is for most. Imagine if there were little to no suicide bombers. Would 9/11 happened? What about the entire war on terror?

Religion is an excuse for leaders to start wars--but it is a reason to fight in them for followers. A lot less people would be willing to fight in a war, simply for land or money, then that are for religion. Thusly, while may of the same wars would have happened, a lot less destruction and death would have come from them.

 

[hart]

Religion is an excuse for leaders to start wars--but it is a reason to fight in them for followers. A lot less people would be willing to fight in a war, simply for land or money, then that are for religion.

I TOTALLY agree with this, I don't know how anyone couldn't :thumbup

 

[Dana]

I think it's a fucking movie and like most flicks imitates elements of real life.

 

[Accountable]

It's really not that clean cut. Yes, most 'religious' wars had an uderlying cause which would have made that war happen regardless of religion, and while yes, leaders would have found different excuses to start many of these wards, not having religion as a playing card would have drastically changed the outcome of many wars and the amount of blood that was shed in them.

First and foremost, there are the kamakaze fighters--the suicide bombers. Many people have the belief that if they sacrafice themselves for their religion, in war, they are garenteed entrance into heaven. This isn't the reason for all suicide bombers, but it is for most. Imagine if there were little to no suicide bombers. Would 9/11 happened? What about the entire war on terror?

Religion is an excuse for leaders to start wars--but it is a reason to fight in them for followers. A lot less people would be willing to fight in a war, simply for land or money, then that are for religion. Thusly, while may of the same wars would have happened, a lot less destruction and death would have come from them.

Kamekaze's were not religious so they're a bad example, but your point is valid about religious zealots. I think maybe you carry it too far. We have religious zealots today, but the world wars were not religious wars; they were nationalist/racist. Our civil war wasn't religious, but it was the bloodiest war in our history,

Other than the Crusades, most European wars were wars of conquest, fighting for King and country. No, the more I think about it, the less I see religion's hand in the major wars of history. Religion doesn't make zealots, it attracts them. You can be sure that a person with that kind of personality would find a target for his zeal if religion didn't exist. John Hinckley did.

 

[Peter Parka]

And there was me thinking it was just a fantasy film about silly blue men or something.:dunno

 

[Accountable]

And there was me thinking it was just a fantasy film about silly blue men or something.:dunno

If it was fantasy the blue girls would have bigger tits.

 

[Dana]

I think it's a fucking movie and like most flicks imitates elements of real life.

:homo:

 

[hart]

Dana, why would you say you agreed with yourself? Strange