Alice in Wonderland Review

Hello everyone and welcome back to Deeper Waters where we are currently diving into the ocean of truth. Now lately, we’ve been going through the Summa Theologica of Thomas Aquinas to understand the doctrine of God. However, tonight I happened to go see Alice in Wonderland in the movie theater. Readers of the blog know that I like to review movies that I go and see. (If you plan on seeing this movie, just in case, I recommend you visit this particular post later due to possible spoilers) Thus, we will continue Aquinas tomorrow. (His works have survived for nearly 800 years. One more night won’t kill them.) Before we get to our review, I offer my prayer requests. First off, my continual Christlikeness which, dear readers, is becoming a reality thankfully. Second, I ask for prayers for my finances. Finally, I ask that you pray for me in a third related area in my life.

Alice in Wonderland was of course, a book first, and that book was written by the Reverend Charles Dodgson who is better known as Lewis Carroll. Reverend? Yes. This author was a Christian and he was a logician as well and part of what he wrote Alice in Wonderland for was to teach logic.

Take for instance, the character Absolem, the blue caterpillar. Alice is brought to Absolem to see if she is the right Alice and he answers “Not hardly.” The fallacy is that everyone takes Absolem to be saying “No.” Absolem did not say that however. The question was asking if she is, and truly at that point, she was not yet the Alice she needed to be. Note also the name Absolem. What he says is absolute. Why? He is the truth teller and truth is absolute and if he says it, it is true.

Words are used regularly throughout the movie to get you to think. These are terms like “ought” and “should” and “is.” Some things ought to be but they are not as they ought to be. Some people should know some things but as it turns out, they do not know the things they should or believe the things they should.

Alice is also told that she must slay the Jabberwocky on Frablous Day. She is entirely against the idea as she does not slay anything. Yet, however, all the decisions Alice makes that even seem to run counter to the goal of getting her the Vorpal Sword to slay the Jabberwocky on Frablous Day end up getting her to that goal. Yet are we to deny that Alice truly had a freewill choice in the matter?

At one point, the Red Queen is spoken to by her main henchman who asks if it is better to be feared than loved. Philosophy students should immediately recognize Machiavelli, as he answered that it was better to be feared than it was to be loved in his work, The Prince. Readers are advised to read this work to understand why Machiavelli’s name became synonymous with evil.

As for those wondering about the acting and entertainment value of the movie, it is definitely there. This is an enjoyable movie and philosophy students should find extra interest in it. Most interesting for our purposes is that this was a book written by a Christian and Lewis Carroll is still a favorite author today.

In our age, what we need are more writers like Carroll who blend truth with wit and can teach us something while entertaining us as well. C.S. Lewis was such a writer as was J.R.R. Tolkien and G.K. Chesterton. May God raise up many more!

Tomorrow, we shall resume with Aquinas.

Percy Jackson and the Olympians: The Lightning Thief.

Hello everyone. I could say “Welcome back to Deeper Waters,” but in reality you’re the ones who are welcoming me back. I hope everyone had as good a weekend as I did. Now I know that we’ve been going through the Summa Theologica, but readers also know that whenever I see a movie, I always like to blog about it. Well this weekend I saw “Percy Jackson and the Olympians: The Lightning Thief.” Be prepared everyone. There are spoilers in this so if you want to see the movie, don’t go forward. Wait until you come back.

When I was younger, my sister gave me a book she had of Greek mythology. I loved that book. I wish I’d really had the mindset of examining ideas back then. I didn’t, but I was able to absorb many of the stories and learned them well. A personal favorite of mine was reading about the labors of Hercules. On the other light note, I did love Kid Icarus on the Nintendo. Is it any wonder I love Pit on Smash Brothers Brawl? Greek mythology has just been an interest of mine.

Naturally then, a film like this had my attention.

Apparently in 2,000 years, much hadn’t changed. The Greek gods were still going around cavorting with humans and having children. Now however, Poseidon and Zeus are getting into it. Zeus has had his lightning bolt stolen from him, the most powerful weapon ever, and he thinks one of Poseidon’s kids did it, particularly Percy Jackson, who has no idea he’s a demigod. Zeus gives Poseidon a two-week deadline to recover the bolt or there will be war. Sadly, the movie never addresses the philosophical problems with calling Zeus omnipotent and him needing at the same time something external to himself like a bolt and being unable to find the bolt on his own.

Which was the problem in many ways with the Greek gods. They couldn’t really be seen as gods unless by god you meant a superhuman. In the biblical worldview, man is created in the image of God, but in the Greek system, it seems the gods are created in the image of men. Ravi Zacharias has said it wasn’t that the Greek gods abandoned the Greeks because the Greeks were depraved. Quite the reverse. They abandoned the gods because the gods were depraved. The tales of the gods of Olympus could make a modern day soap opera pale in comparison.

Percy Jackson lives with his Mom and a step-father figure who he can’t stand. He also has his best friend Grover. One day however, he is at a Greek museum and has a teacher take him to a room alone only to have her ask “Where’s the bolt?” and she turns into a fury and attacks him. In comes another teacher in a wheelchair, Mr. Brunner, who tells the fury to let him go or he’ll tear her to shreds, along with Grover, who happens to be on crutches.

Mr. Brunner tells Grover to get Percy’s mother and get them on the run. When they’re all together and on the run, they get attacked by a minotaur. Percy’s Mom is in the minotaur’s hand and vanishes. Percy manages to defeat the minotaur however before entering camp half blood where children of demigods go. He learns that Grover, is actually a satyr who has been assigned to be his protector, and that Mr. Brunner is actually the centaur Chiron. While there, he also forms a relationship with the daughter of Athena named Annabeth and a son of Hermes named Luke.

The camp gets visited by Hades demanding to see Percy Jackson. Hades says he has Percy’s mother and wants the lightning bolt. Percy decides then he’s going to go to the underworld, find his mother and explain the situation to Hades, and then take his mother back. Annabeth and Grover join him and Luke gives them some equipment to help.

Before doing that, they have to get three pearls so each of them can escape the underworld. The journey involves them encountering figures from Greek mythology to fight like the medusa and the hydra. Very interesting is how the entrance to the underworld is located in Hollywood, which I found quite appropriate. When we finally see Olympus, the gods squabble just like everyone else. Hardly the idea of deity.

However, for action and adventure, this is a great film and if you’re  a fan of Greek mythology, you’ll love it. Christians can use this to see how different theistic concepts work and explain the problems of a polytheistic concept. For instance, how could Zeus be omnipotent if he does not have all power over what goes on in the world? Can you have all power and at the same time not be sovereign? (For Calvinists and Arminians, again, work out the details of what that means on your own.) Also, what does it mean for creatures to shift forms. Can a man really be part horse? What does that say about the nature of both?

My final conclusion is I don’t agree with the worldview, but this movie did have action and adventure that kept me hooked the whole time. It is one I definitely plan to get when it comes out on DVD.

Sherlock Holmes Review

Welcome back everyone to Deeper Waters. Last night, I put our Trinitarian Commentary on hold because it was New Year’s Eve and I wanted to celebrate the New Year with a blog. Tonight, I’m putting it on hold because last night, I also saw the movie Sherlock Holmes. So I will be giving you readers my take on it. Before that, I do ask again your prayers as I continue on the path of Christlikeness. I also ask your prayers for my financial situation as I do have to make some decisions in that area very soon. Finally, I ask for your prayers regarding another area in my life related to both of these. I pray for the work of the Holy Spirit there. For now, let’s get to the review.

The movie starts with action immediately with Holmes and his assistant Watson. One scene early on has Holmes studying a man he’ll need to get past in combat and he analyzes his condition and how to best attack in a step-by-step procedure. There’s a reason Holmes was an inspiration for the creation of USA network detective, Adrian Monk. (Ironically, I finished reading “Mr. Monk and the Dirty Cop”, right before I went to see this movie.

The mystery in the movie involves the case of a criminal who has recently been caught and then lo and behold, a few days later it is claimed that he has come back to life by the powers of black magic. He makes his presence known and tells the people that a new age is coming to England and he is in charge.

Hence, one of my friends wrote to me asking about non-Christian overtones and I would say they are there. Holmes, of course, is quite naturalistic not believing in anything supernatural in the movie apparently. Of course, I have no problem with seeking naturalistic explanations.  I have a problem with ruling out all other explanations a priori.

The mystery itself is quite difficult to figure out and the viewer must pay attention to everything that happens and I do mean everything. It does make great use of flashbacks to go back and show earlier events that happened so the viewer can realize all the connections that he should have made earlier.

For those who want action, there won’t be a lack of it. Sherlock Holmes does have skill in combat, which is something that surprised me in the movie. Granted, I haven’t really read the mysteries of Holmes, but I don’t picture a detective like that being a fighter. However, he does fight more with his mind where he plans how he’ll attack and how his opponent will respond and how he’ll counter-attack, again in a step-by-step procedure.

Overall, my mind was distracted last night, so I’m not sure how much I was able to enjoy, but it was a pretty good film. I really don’t think many people will solve the mystery before the movie is over, but then, I suppose that’s what made Sherlock Holmes such a great detective.

Tomorrow, we continue our commentary.

Movie Review: Couples’ Retreat

Hello everyone and welcome back to Deeper Waters. This is probably going to be the final blog before Sunday night as I’m going to be extremely busy this weekend and if you’ve been wondering when the blog was going to come in tonight, it’s because I’ve also been extremely busy tonight. Anyway, I did go to see the movie “Couples’ Retreat” tonight. Regular readers know that when I go to the movie theater, I do blog about the movie that I saw afterwards. We’ll continue our Trinitarian Commentary then Sunday.

The movie involves a couple who is thinking about getting a divorce and they want to go on a marriage retreat to an island called Eden in order to see if they can salvage their marriage. Unfortunately, it’s pricey so they get three other couples to go along with them. Note then the first good thing. All of these people see marriage as something good and worth upholding. (Aside from one guy who is there with his girlfriend after recently leaving his wife, but I won’t say anything more about that as that’s for those who go see the movie.)

Noted also is the one couple who has kids and the kids say they want their parents to go on the trip because they don’t want their parents to get a divorce someday. Divorce is a painful reality. I believe there are times where it is the better option, but in our day and age, divorce is all too easy. A prominent Christian apologist recently told me he’s only been embarrassed once in a debate. That was when he was debating a Hindu who told the audience that at least in the country that follows his religion, 98% of the marriages last while in America, only 50% of them do. The church should be embarrassed but frankly, have we made marriage something worthwhile to uphold? Do we know what marriage really is any more?

So on this island, the couples learn to be more open with each other as they share time with a therapist and with a mystical teacher. This is one area of the movie I had trouble with as the teachers were always portrayed as Eastern style teachers speaking of karma and yoga. (Other moral concerns would include some partial nudity and some crude humor.)

Some realities do come out. The idea for instance that every couple has their problems. Each of the couples ends up working out their own difficulties when push comes to shove and they have to go to the other side of the island for another reason which I won’t go into detail over right now.

Let that be the next lesson. Marriage is hard work, which is something we don’t often realize. Of course, I can’t speak as a married yet, but we often think of the stories that end with “And they lived happily ever after.” However, in reality, in the morning Prince Charming has to go to work and Juliet has laundry to do and children to raise. There is no relationship of any kind without any problems, and marriage will fall into that.

Marriage is important, but we must not make it an idol as can be done and expect everything in it to be perfect. It won’t be. Is it because marriage is imperfect? No. The institution is divine in origin. It is because the people who are married in every case are imperfect. When imperfect people come together, there are going to be problems.

Marriage is a commitment. It is based on something deeper than just feelings. Feelings will come and go. Someone was telling me today that there are times you’ll go to bed at night and wonder “Why did I ever marry this person?” and then you’ll wake up the next day and think “Why did I ever think I could marry anyone else?”

In the end, I think there is a valid lesson to be learned and I am pleased that in the world today, there is still seen the truth that marriage does matter. For the Christian, it matters especially since this is to be a union of Christ and the church. Christians should have the best marriages of all and those must be rooted in Christ. Picture it as two people at different ends of a triangle and Christ at the top. The closer they get to Christ, the closer they get to each other.

What our country and our world needs, if the gospel is going to be proclaimed, is for Christians to really love, value, and live marriage.

 

A Review of “Adam”

Faithful readers of Deeper Waters know that when I go to a movie, I always write a review of it. Last night, I went to see the movie “Adam.” I’ve found when telling this to people that most of them don’t know about the movie at all. That is a shame and I do not know entirely why this movie wasn’t put in most theaters like others are. Maybe someone in the movie industry can explain that. The synopsis at imdb.com describes the movie this way:

Soon after moving in, Beth, a brainy, beautiful writer damaged from a past relationship encounters Adam, the handsome, but odd, fellow in the downstairs apartment whose awkwardness is perplexing. Beth and Adam’s ultimate connection leads to a tricky relationship that exemplifies something universal: truly reaching another person means bravely stretching into uncomfortable territory and the resulting shake-up can be liberating.

Upon hearing that, some readers might recall how during the presidential election, I chose to write about my story:

http://deeperwaters.wordpress.com/2008/10/15/obama-socialism-and-my-story/

Naturally, Adam is the kind of movie I would want to see. I will also be warning my readers now that I am going to be giving spoilers so if you don’t want that, then come back and read this blog later. If you want to see where Adam is playing in your area, go to foxsearchlight.com

Adam is one of a kind, which is something that must be understood when interacting with those of us in the autistic community. When you’ve met one person with autism, you’ve met one person with autism, and you cannot extrapolate on to everyone. I happened to see this movie with a friend and I was able to notice many things that he did not which we discussed on our way back.

Adam is unaware of social cues around him. In fact, I was astounded at some of the things he did that I know I normally don’t do, like walking into the office in the morning and saying “good morning” to someone who says that to him. This is the kind of place where I become non-responsive. If I don’t greet someone, it’s not because of something personal.

Adam is also crazy about space. He loves to talk about it. We find him several times in the movie at his laptop looking up information on anything and if he gets into any conversation with anyone on that topic, stand back, he’s going to go into overdrive. I could find my own relation here as I can be normally quiet, but start me up about philosophy or apologetics or Christianity and I’m on fire. My roommate once spoke about how I was when we had Mormons visiting us and the doctrine of the Trinity came up and it was described as watching a rocket taking off.

At the start, Adam’s pantry has several boxes of the same food selection. I clicked with that immediately as that is also a common trait, something I was very pleased to find out the more I studied this as some who know me know I am incredibly unusual in my diet. Our church, for instance, had a picnic today after the service. My response? Get in the car. Go home. Do the dishes there and fix myself a small lunch at home. It’s just not a pleasant situation and my closest friends with me know that there’s only a small number of restaurants I will order something from.

Adam’s world is changed by a girl named Beth who comes to see him. He doesn’t really know too much how to respond to her and his Dad’s old friend Harlan who is his caretaker in this film as both of Adam’s parents are dead tell him he has to be the man. There are numerous times in the movie Adam interprets something Beth says in a way she doesn’t intend. The results are quite humorous.

One scene at the start has him sitting on the steps of his apartment building on his laptop while Beth comes and is carrying behind her on a rolling device some groceries and says something like “Well, I’m off to carry these heavy items up to my apartment.” Adam misses the cue entirely of the implicit message of “Are you going to help me?”

Beth decides she wants to try to break into his world however and offers to invite him out to join some friends that evening. She says she’ll knock on his door at 8. We see Adam then in the apartment and the clock says 8:11 and he’s all dressed up and ready to go. She hasn’t knocked yet. She does soon however, but Adam never opens the door and he’s crying inside later on. The next day, he tells her he was overwhelmed with something and just couldn’t come.

This was something I understood entirely. The problem was that she had said she would knock on his door at 8 and she didn’t. That threw Adam off entirely. I’ve been told at work that I’m the most exact person with the time clock. If I am to clock in at 8:30, well that is when I will clock in, even looking at my watch to make sure I’m down to the second.

One day, Adam shows her a planetarium of sorts he has in his apartment. What it was entirely, I’m not sure, but I’m thinking that he had computer generation set up in the room all around the ceiling somehow and he just talks to her about space. His friend Harlan is stunned that he did this and even more stunned that Beth likes it.

Adam slips up the next time Beth comes over and asks about the event and says “Were you sexually excited?” Now I consider myself blunt, but I’m thankful I’m not that blunt. When Beth decides she needs to leave then, Adam confesses to her his condition of Asperger’s and how it affects him.

The next day, Beth, at her job as a schoolteacher, asks another teacher about Asperger’s and is told about the book “Pretending To Be Normal” which I thought immediately was a great title. She asks if someone like that is prime relationship material. At this point, she seems to think he isn’t, but seems to change her mind.

Adam gets fired also from his job at a toy company. As he’s grieving from this, he takes Beth to Central Park, as the story is set in New York, and doesn’t tell her why. As he sits on a bench with her standing nearby, two raccoons start passing through the area in front of them leaving Beth amazed. She gives him a book for people with Asperger’s on how to find a job. At this, he kisses her. She doesn’t mind.

I noticed something about the raccoons and asked my friend on the way back if he knew why raccoons were used. He didn’t. So I asked him to tell me what he knew about raccoons. He said “They wear masks.” I didn’t let him go any further. That was all that needed to be said. Adam and the raccoons are similar. Both of them wear masks.

The kiss has changed their relationship and Beth decides she needs to set some boundaries and says she’s fine with kissing and with hugging but no sex. It’s amusing when she tells Adam that her last ex was sleeping with other women while they were together. Then seeing his confusion says “I mean, while we were in a relationship.”

Adam is taken to a party by Beth where nearly every social cue is broken. A mother begins talking about her baby and says “Would you like to see a video?” Adam says “No thank you. Where’s the restroom?” He starts talking to another lady there about the purchase of a telescope and doesn’t realize he’s boring her and is going over her head and she doesn’t know how to get away. Fortunately, Beth is there to help him out.

Later on, Beth and Adam are discussing various matters and Beth is talking about how she’d like to write a book about raccoons for children and she wants it to be talking raccoons. Adam asks why. Why not just have it be about nature. Wouldn’t that be better? She tells him that he’d think so. Adam is offended, until Beth just lets him know what she really means and how she feels about him, which is when she turns their relationship sexual. For those concerned, there is nothing seen here at this point in the movie in the area of nudity. It was quite clean in this regards.

Of course, there is that problem that in movies, sex in a relationship is just seen as the next level. There are not any consequences. If you’re wondering the moral perspective, Beth seems to be more Christian in some way in that when Adam asks her about the Big Bang, she starts quoting Genesis 1:1. Adam simply starts going on at that about the Big Bang. She also tells her father that the rules he has for her in her relationships aren’t written in Scripture. Unfortunately, religious views aren’t expounded on this much.

Beth then takes Adam to a play and her parents happen to be there where they get to meet for the first time. Beth has beforehand found out that her father has been indicted on for something he’s done. What his job is, I don’t recall entirely, but his family is very well provided for. When she and Adam and her parents get together with just them to talk, Adam asks “Did you do it?” and “Could you go to jail?”

Beth doesn’t appreciate the questions later and tells him so. This is a part I still don’t understand as my thinking is “Those seem like perfectly legitimate questions. You want the information? You ask for it.” Rest assured, Beth does apologize after this first fight.

Beth also is teaching her class in the movie of probably Elementary school children and reading the story of the Emperor’s New Clothes. Once again, this is a story meant to remind the reader of the nature of Asperger’s. The boy in the story is the one who is blunt and points out that the emperor is naked. Important since Beth ends saying “I like the boy.”

Adam is meanwhile applying for new jobs and finds one he applies for and hears back that’d involve research on space. Beth offers to help him train for this with learning such features as eye contact, which is something I recognized immediately.

There are many times I talk to people and I realize that I am not looking at them as I talk to them. I seem to have my eyes fixated on some other point. What’s there? Well nothing that deserves my attention at that point, but that is where they are. Beth is a good teacher helping Adam learn how to socialize.

Adam needs the job after all as he doesn’t want to move. This comes to the forefront in a scene discussing his father’s estate and how he’ll have to move since he can’t pay the mortgage and he goes into a tantrum saying he doesn’t want to move. Harlan is the one who calms him down again.

What happens the day of the interview we don’t know immediately, but around that time Beth’s mother calls Adam and asks if she can track down her Beth. Her father has been found guilty. Later on, we learn he had an affair with someone involved in what he’s indicted of. Once again, this is the mask motif playing. Beth’s Dad does not have Asperger’s, but he had been wearing a mask.

Adam begins looking through and finds a note Beth had about “Take Adam to meet parents” which referred to the past event. Beth comes in then and sees Adam upset and when she confesses she just told him a little lie, he explodes, throws things around the room, and yells at Beth on how much he hates her and her Dad is guilty and he hopes she stays in jail. Beth uses some profanity (The strongest in the movie and nothing I will dare repeat here) and tells him he’s a child and leaves.

Always be honest to people with Asperger’s. (Actually, being honest with people generally is a good idea.) Not all of us react like Adam of course, but there is something lost. Many of us are often just looking for people we can trust. That could be something common for everyone, but maybe just harder for us.

When Beth’s Dad is charged and given his sentence, he is told he has ten days to put his affairs in order. Beth’s Mom calls Adam and tells him the address of the house which is where Beth will be. It’s a snowy time, but Adam knows that now he has to make things up to Beth so he gets some champagne and some roses and sets out in the snow. He can’t get to the terminal for the bus because of the stairs and he can’t take a taxi and he can’t drive, so what does he do? He walks the whole way.

Meanwhile, we see Beth at the house talking to her Dad and how her Dad says that Adam is not relationship material. He is in another world. Beth insists that people with Asperger’s do marry and have families and children, but her father is saying no. Shortly after this Beth hears Adam outside yelling trying to find her. Beth rushes outside and her Dad prepares to head out saying “I’ll take care of him.”

Adam tells Beth he didn’t get the job he wanted, but was told he’d be perfect for a job in California in an observatory. He tells Beth he wants her to come with him. Beth’s Dad comes out and says that Beth will not go with him. Beth is furious telling her Dad he can’t dare speak for her. An argument breaks out and Beth’s Dad grabs her which leads to Adam tackling her Dad and knocking him to the ground. When the mother comes out, Beth yells out that she’s going away with Adam to California and they drive off in Beth’s car together.

Beth later talks to her mother on the phone before the leave and says that Adam has never said he loves her. Adam hears this and tells her and then she asks why he wants her to come to California. Adam gives an answer of how he needs her to help him find a place to live, get settled in, fit in, and that she’s like a part of him now. When she hears this, Beth has to disappoint him and says she can’t go with him to California.

When I first saw this, I thought it was a sad point. Thinking back on it now, I think it was sad still, but also a good move on her part.

He is speaking at an observatory to a group of visitors about the telescope and what all can be seen and then says “But one of the best ways might be going out at night and looking up at the sky yourself.” After they leave, a lady comes carrying two heavy boxes, one on top of the other, with a small package on top telling Adam that that one is for him. Adam takes it and then says “Would you like some help with those Carol?” She smiles and says yes.

Adam has moved forward. He didn’t catch Beth’s cue at the beginning, but now he has, and apparently with another lady. I take this as a cue to Adam having a blossoming romance going on in California.

Adam opens up the package later on and finds a book in it from Beth called “Adam.” It’s a book about a family of raccoons in New York City. One was named Adam. He lived in Central Park. Although he didn’t really belong in that world, there he was. Adam closes the book and smiles.

My thoughts on this movie? I think it’s a very good one. It helps bring out the world of those of us with this condition. I have a caution that people keep in mind that if you go see Adam, that not everyone you meet with this is like Adam. Some are more outgoing. Some are not. Adam is actually more capable than many as some need constant care throughout their lives.

I think it would do a world of good to go see this one however and come to understand this world that more and more people by genetics are experiencing everyday. Is that person you meet not speaking to you? Don’t assume right off they’re rude, which is something that has happened to me often. Consider that they might be different.

Realize also there is a reason why we do the things we do. I’m very finicky about my hands for instance and don’t like anything on them. One time we had the Mormons up here and we were having friendly talk about little idiosyncracies on how my roommate and I take care of this place. I said I don’t replace the lid on the trash can because I don’t like touching a trash can lid. I want to wash my hands afterwards. Since then, our lid has remained perpetually off. We just dump everything directly. Now I do take out the trash at times, but always with washing my hands immediately afterwards.

The movie also stated that we’re frequently described as people with no imagination. I find that bizarre. If anything, I have an overactive imagination as my mind is always conjuring up strange scenarios and such. This does allow me to experience much wonder in life as I find it easier to see everyday as an adventure as a result of this condition.

Is the social interaction difficult? Of course. This is why I’m thankful for friends in my life who are my support. For instance, tonight is Sunday and I go bowling every Sunday night. I go with some friends here and their family has kind of taken me in as a third son it seems at times and their support is something excellent to have and I’m really grateful for it.

And now the final conclusion. Go see Adam if you haven’t. Of course, now you know everything that will happen pretty much if you’ve read this, but go see it anyway. Seeing it can be more revealing than hearing about it. If you have small children, you might want to go see it without them first. I’d say anyone of Junior High age could probably watch this film, but parents need to discuss certain matters afterwards.

And yes, I do plan to buy this when it comes on DVD.

The Half-Blood Prince

Whenever I go to the movies, I always interrupt what I’m doing so I can write a review of the movie I saw. Today was no exception. I am a Potter fan and today was the day that my friends and I finally found to go and see the Half-Blood Prince. I have read all the books, of course, and I’ve seen the movies and own the rest of them, and I’ve read a number of books about the books.

The movie, of course, does differ in some way from the books. (And by the way, if you haven’t seen the movie yet and plan to or you don’t want to know what happens in the book if you plan to read it someday, then don’t read this post yet.) I was hoping it would include the scene where Dumbledore got to meet the Dursleys, but that wasn’t to be this time.

The movie does play out the relationships in the book very well, such as the growing love between Hermoine and Ron and the growing love between Harry and Ginny. It also catches the relationships of the heroes to the death eaters, such as Harry’s reaction to Bellatrix who is still chanting “I killed Sirius Black” and to seeing the death of Dumbledore at the hands of Snape and how Harry chases Snape in a rage.

Also, there’s the relationship between Draco and Harry, ending in a duel in the bathroom where Harry uses the sectumsempra spell on Draco with incredibly painful results. Harry describes to Hermoine that he doesn’t believe that Draco was capable of killing Dumbledore and Snape had to be the one to do that.

Of course, there’s the growing bond between Harry and Dumbledore as well as Dumbledore trusts Harry more than ever in this one asking him to go on a mission for him to retrieve a memory from Horace Slughorn and having Harry be the one to accompany him as he goes to get a horcrux that Voldemort has hidden.

One of my friends as we were leaving the theater is one who hasn’t read the books and noted that he thought that the movie was dark. I told him “Of course it was!” Rowling is dealing with a real subject. She’s dealing with evil and death. She’s a good writer and she doesn’t downplay evil as she writes about it. She shows evil in all of its horror.

Which is something that makes these stories so fascinating. The Potter books are fantasy that are in a way true to life. I’m not saying the magic in them is true, but in the world of Rowling, one knows that there is such a thing as good and such a thing as evil and good is what we ought to desire. The magic is simply an artifice to tell the story.

Now my favorite one is still Prisoner to Azkaban, but I wasn’t disappointed by this one. It is a dark one so you might not want to bring the youngest children to see it yet, but it would give a good chance to discuss good and evil and the notion of self-sacrifice, a thoroughly Christian notion.

Overall, I approve of Half-Blood Prince and I definitely look forward to the two parts of Deathly Hallows.

Review of Star Trek

To begin with, let me give a word of caution. I am not a big Star Trek fan. I’ve only seen two episodes in my life. However, we’d heard so much about this movie that myself, my roommate, and another friend all decided that we should go see this one. I can definitely say that it was worth it. This is a movie I never had to look at my watch once. If you haven’t seen the movie and plan to, you might want to read this blog later. Also, if I misspell any references to Star Trek characters, the fault is all mine and I ask Trek fans to please have mercy. I in no way mean to denigrate the series.

So the story begins with a starship flying through space approaching a lightning storm, an odd occurrence, and out of that storm comes a mammoth-sized ship that their ship seems like a speck to. After a battle, the captain orders everyone to leave, including his wife who is about to give birth to their new son. One of the last things the husband says before he dies in giving a colission course with the enemy ship is to name him James.

So later on, we see James Tyberius Kirk who lives a hedonistic lifestyle, but is stellar in his knowledge. After a bar fight, he is told that he should join the starfleet because he should realize he was meant for something more.

This need for adventure, this is a Christian idea. Other adventurers of the past adventured for some goal or sought to have the adventure come to an end. The Christian is the one who goes on an adventure purely for the sake of the adventure. We can think to the medieval writer Petrarch who would have us say that we ought to climb the mountain because the mountain is there.

Through a series of mishaps, Kirk winds up on the enterprise and realizes that they are about to engage the same ship that was responsible for the death of his father years ago, that of the Romulans with their emperor Nero. (And they do refer to an empire one time in the movie.) Kirk is there to see the planet Vulcan destroyed where Spock is from.

Spock deserves to be spoken of. He is half-human, a race that most of us have some understanding of, but half-Vulcan. The Vulcans are a race that tend to be unemotional and extremely logical. Spock is offered a chance to join the high council of science on Vulcan and is congratulated on his acceptance despite the downside he faced. When he asks what that is, they tell him his human mother. With that, Spock says he declines to join.

Spock reminds us of an important aspect of being human. There are times some of us might want to not be emotional and live purely by logic. Seeing the Vulcans, we realize that might not be the best for us. We do realize emotions can take control of us, as the Vulcans do, but the way to respond is not to eliminate emotions but to learn to control them instead. In fact, numerous times in the film, it’s hard to not see emotion even in the Vulcan race.

Kirk and Spock have their exchanges, but in the end they work together. Of course, I’m leaving a lot out, but I don’t want to spoil a lot of it and if I went into more detail, I would. Kirk is more interested in doing the right thing despite regulations. He’s interested in not just logical right but moral right also. Moral theory, of course, will be something discussed in future blogs. 

I definitely recommend seeing this one. If you’re not a Trekkie, worry not. You can follow along just fine, although I’m sure my fans who are Star Trek enthusiasts would have noticed a thousand things that I did not. 

Also, there will not be a new blog tomorrow night. I will be taking a short vacation and Lord willing, I will be back Sunday night. Enjoy this one for two nights then or go back and look through the archives. They’re always there!

Angels and Demons Review

Tonight, I went with a friend to see the movie “Angels and Demons” based on the novel by Dan Brown. If you remembr, Dan Brown is the same one who wrote the Da Vinci Code. That was a movie I thought was a snoozer. The book is good as a novel, but the information in it is not accurate to say the least. However, while I haven’t read the book this time, I must say that overall, the movie really wasn’t that bad. I think there were a number of nonsense claims made, but there were statements that were also commendable.

The overall idea of the movie, and if you want to see it you might want to wait to read this blog lest I leak out some spoilers, is that there is an organization that has been warring with the church for 400 years known as the Illuminati. The war has been over the debate between science and religion. These two are often pictured as mortal enemies, although there are a number of parts of the book where the position is stated that they are not enemies.

Consider the statement that is made by one character that religion is concerned because science is young and does not know that there are some areas where it ought not speak. Who is more ignorant? The one who does not know how lightning is produced or the one who denies its power?

I would hold of course that there is no quarrel between science and religion. That does not mean there is not a quarrel between some beliefs held in the area of science by people and beliefs held in the area of religion by people. There are religious truths and there are scientific truths. Truth cannot contradict truth. This was an idea Aquinas argued against called “The Double Theory of Truth.” 

There is also the point when the main protagonist, Robert Langdon, is asked if he believes in God. He says that he is an academic, which is one point in the movie I wanted to groan. It is as if if one is an intellectual, then that means it is harder for them to believe in God automatically. There’s this idea that the more educated someone is, the less likely it is they believe in God.

Well it depends on who’s doing the educating.

If we base it all on saying that there is no truth out there that can be discovered and we must look to ourselves and science alone, then I’m not surprised that most people don’t believe in God if they are considered “educated.” If education consists however of reading the ancients and the moderns both and learning both sides of many an issue, I think you will find that there are more believers. We’ve cut ourselves off from the past in our time.

At this point, Langdon was asked about his heart and how he thinks he just can’t find the faith. I wanted to say “Thank you Kant.” There again is the idea that religious truth is for the subjective realm and academic truth is for the intellectual realm. I consider all truth of the intellectual realm and the responses to such truths to be emotional.

One last point that concerned me was the electing of the new pope and this will definitely have some spoilers. They had someone in mind who had just done a heroic act, but it turns out this one was a major villain and it hadn’t been found out yet. The cardinals were together and saying that if they followed a certain procedure it would mean the voice of the Holy Spirit was speaking through them. Well, since that guy was found to be someone criminal, what would that mean? The cardinals obviously aren’t led by the Holy Spirit. Now I am not Catholic, so you can guess my stance on the matter as a whole, but I wonder if there is something saying that no church overall is guided by the Spirit. Of course, I could be over-analyzing, but that thought did occur to me.

What is Brown’s theology? I really don’t know. There is one point where YHWH and Allah are used side by side as if they’re really the same deity. That overall is my impression of Brown. He’s a religious pluralist. I don’t think he’s an atheist. He just wants all religions to get along. I’m not definitive on that, but that is how I see him now.

Overall however, I found this to be a rather enjoyable movie. If you have a few bucks and you want to see it, by all means. I really would like to see this movie get people started talking about the relationship between science and faith. It is my hope that those ideas which are intended to be attacks on the truth of Christ, will end up sparking a fire under the Christian church so that it will rise out of its ashes and change the world in the 21st century.

Perez Hilton and Miss California

We’re interrupting our regular Trinity series to talk about an event that has been the discussion on a number of blogs today and that’s the story of Perez Hilton and Miss California. Miss California was given a question from Perez Hilton on Vermont’s recent approval of same-sex “marriage.” In speaking of this he asked “Do you think every state should follow suit? Why or why not?” 

Miss California’s answer was that she was raised that a marriage was to be between a man and a woman. She did not want to offend, but that is how she was raised. 

A video of that can be seen here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1XScBKlv2E

First off, congratulations to this girl for standing up and truly saying what she believes in. Some might be tempted to say she it would be seen as highly unpopular, but it seems the audience didn’t think so. It seems even a liberal state like California in their recent elections don’t think so either. Perez may say she got booed, but I sure heard a lot of applause.

Perez Hilton put up a reply. I will warn you all. It has profanity in it so if the kiddies are around, don’t listen.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d_QhM3TK2UE

What was his answer? His answer was that she is a dumb….well…I won’t say that next word here. Perez described her as someone with half a brain. Now he may say it’s not because of her answer on the topic of homosexual marriage. Personally, I’m not buying it.

I have also heard that Perez has since apologized for what he said about her, but I wonder why? Did he apologize because he doesn’t think that’s what she is? Does he think then that it could be that she really does have a brain?

There’s something about this that amazes me. This is always the crowd that we’re told we should be tolerant of. Strangely enough, when you disagree with the tolerance crowd, they’re not so tolerant. If you present an idea that is contrary to theirs, they no longer want to listen to you.

Indeed, the comments I see about this lady on Hilton’s blog are hardly flattering. (To be fair, some from our side are saying a number of things about Hilton that I wouldn’t recommend. Biblically, I do believe that homosexuality is a sin and one the Bible mentions in saying that those who practice it will not inherit the kingdom of Heaven, but I don’t think telling him he’s going to Hell or calling him terminology other than homosexual is really going to make a difference.) I’m sitting here watching this and wondering “Where is the tolerance?”

True tolerance is not like this. In biblical tolerance, you disagree with the idea and you defend the person’s right to say it. You accept the person in fact as a person without accepting their behavior or ideas. Here’s a novel approach for the debate. If you disagree with your opponent, tell them why they’re wrong and then have them discuss why they disagree with you.

Some people might think some people are only against homosexuality for religious reasons. In fact, this is usually the assumption that is given today. However, does this excuse really work? For one thing, if the religion is true and it really does come from God, then I would say if he condemns homosexuality, we really ought to listen. It won’t work to write off the religion entirely just because it disagrees with you.

Second, while I do agree the Bible condemns homosexuality, I don’t think homosexuality is immoral because the Bible condemns it. I think the Bible condemns it because it is immoral and there’s all the difference in the world between those ideas. When I argue against it, I argue from natural law.

Perez also speaks of how he thinks Miss California should have answered. No Perez. Here’s how Miss California should have answered. She should have answered with her opinion like she did. She should not have given an answer you wanted to hear just because it would be PC or something you wanted to hear. When you ask someone for their opinion on something, you should expect to get their opinion on it and you should accept that it’s their opinion. Now you can debate them on that opinion, but it’s childish to ask their opinion and then whine because that’s what you got.

Perez has said that it should be left to the states to decide. Okay. Does that include California? The state recently spoke. Does that mean the homosexual activists are going to drop the idea of going to the courts instead? If you think it should be legal, then accept it for now and argue in the public square and maybe you can get another election on the topic.

However, that is also not the point. The question was asked if states SHOULD follow suit. It’s a moral question. Even if every state does follow suit, does that mean that every state should follow suit? The only reason they should allow it is if the people believe it to be moral or at least morally neutral. The only reason to disallow it is because it is immoral.

Miss California spoke her opinion. It’s what she was asked for. The homosexual community wants me to believe that I should be tolerant, but by their own definition of tolerance, many of them don’t follow suit. Now I hope there are some out there who are homosexual who while they disagree with Miss California, they have a greater problem with Perez Hilton for his response. 

Now some may ask if I’m tolerant. You bet I am. I just am not accepting of immorality. I will not look at immorality and call it morality just to please some people. If I think something is immoral, I will call it immoral. Now you have all right to debate me on that issue which is the way the system works, but I will still call it such. However, it won’t stop me from viewing the person as one who holds the image of God and someone Christ died for and who God loves and who I should also.

Do I expect the homosexual community to agree with my opinion on marriage? No. Of course, if some do and want out, great. There are a number of Christian groups out there who are delighted to help out. However, until then, we simply come together and discuss the issues. Perez may think Miss California is bringing division. She is not at all. It is those who refuse to go to the public square who are divisive.

Furthermore, let’s suppose she is causing division. So what? What is she causing division over? I would rather be divided with someone over the truth than united with them in lies. Is the idea of the unity one where all accept homosexual marriage as legitimate? If that’s the case, then count me out. I will be as divisionary as I can.

For Miss California, I say that I applaud her for not only saying her opinion, but also for saying one I believe to be right and one that she had to know would not be popular with some in the crowd. Cheers to you Miss California. I believe that in reality, most of America is on your side as well.

Susan Boyle: The 1:24 Critic

Yesterday, I blogged on Susan Boyle and in listening to her today on YouTube, I saw consistently remarks being made about the girl at 1:24 in the video. The term used often to describe her is one I will not use here as I prefer this to be a blog that is family-friendly. I’m sure my readers can use their imagination and realize what that term was. The girl at 1:24 can be seen here in this video of Susan Boyle’s performance on “Britain’s Got Talent” which you should see if you haven’t.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lp0IWv8QZY

The problem people have with this girl is that she was rolling her eyes at the thought of Susan being a great singer before she said anything. She had pre-judged her wrongly. Personally, I agree with that. I am not here to condone that. If something is wrong, there can be reasons why it was done but never justifying reasons why it was done. You cannot justify an evil action. God does not justify sin. He justifies sinners.

However, what sickens me about this is that I’m sure this girl is regretting the action that was done enough. There don’t need to be any reminders of that. What also sickens me is that while we sit here and condemn her for how she was acting, let’s be sure that many of us were in the exact same boat. There is a reason Susan Boyle was a surprise. No one was expecting it. This includes the judges. The judges made it clear that the audience had been internally laughing before she sang and that everyone there was against her.

This girl in the audience is just like the rest of us. We’re cynics today that are quite superficial. No one was willing to give Susan Boyle a shot for so long. Everyone had pre-judged her. Could it be that in wanting to go after the girl in the video, we’re instead really wanting to go after a scapegoat so we can excuse ourselves for having the exact same attitude?

Those of us who are Christians should be especially aware of this. How many of you all know your past sins? Do you really need to be reminded of them? Do you really want them put on display for everyone to see? This girl did something wrong and unfortunately, she happened to be the one the camera was on at the time. I seriously doubt the other people in the audience were much better. Does that excuse what she did? Again, it does not. It should make us realize that we could easily be caught under the microscope unawares and we don’t want our sins to be broadcast.

Instead of condemning this girl, which has already been done, maybe we should take some time to examine ourselves. Are we any better? Still call the sin wrong, but remember the sin is not the sinner. We don’t know this girl’s spiritual state. She could be a Christian. Let her know the forgiveness of Christ again. She might not be. Are we showing her the love of Christ?

Susan Boyle is to be honored, I agree. However, let us make sure that we are being real with how we deal with others. Are we any better?