Christianity Today: Alien vs. Predator
Faith and Philosophy
| September 22, 2004
| Tim
Okay, this movie review, in this context, verges on the surreal to me. Condensed incredibly:
Homer Simpson once declared that alcohol was the source of, and the solution to, all his problems....
In this pyramid, the explorers discover a sacrificial chamber, where human victims used to be "impregnated" with Alien embryos every hundred years so that the Predators could begin their ritual hunt (it's confusing; you'll have to see the film to fully understand). And amidst the runes, symbols, and artifacts, Weyland's team finds some rather high-tech weaponry, which prompts one man to exclaim, "This is like finding Moses' DVD collection!" ....
So in the end, we are left with a dull woman who is surrounded by puppets and voiceless actors covered in prosthetics—and it's never a good sign when the special effects give more memorable performances than the hero.
What would Jesus say about "Alien vs. Predator?"
How about Moses? David?
What about the creator of the universe?
Is He a fun-loving kind of creator who thinks it's just fine to watch movies in which acid-blooded aliens burst from people's stomach's and spray their opponents when cut?
Or is $8.50 a stupid waste in a world where people are starving to death, and is the two hours time poorly spent, time which won't bring us closer to other humans and our creator, watching stuff which only insults the viewer's intelligence, and dulls their moral senses?
Or does it vary from person to person, depending on motive and circumstances?
I found the review rather odd. Secular, pretty much -- no pondering of moral implications, no cautionary words about the potential impact on 5-year-olds, as are sometimes found in other Christian- or family-oriented film reviews.
But then, there were these discussion questions tacked onto the end, like an easter bonnet strapped on the family dog:
1. Why do you think the Predators treat some humans as prey while treating other humans as potential fellow hunters? How do you think Predators justify their inconsistent approach to what we might call "life issues"? Are there any parallels to this inconsistency in our own culture?
2. Some people would say there is a moral difference between Aliens, who are basically giant insects following their nature, and Predators, who are obviously intelligent creatures with some sort of moral, ethical or cultural code. Do you agree? Why or why not?
3. Is it possible that, if we found life on other planets (or if such life found us), those other species might bear the "image of God"? How would we tell?
Actually, once you get over the initial reactions (at least mine), they're actually pretty interesting questions.
But my first reaction, laughing, was: These seem odd, humorous, and surreal. And: I wonder who thinks these up for a living, and how often they recycle that last one. Probably for each sci-fi flick.
In answer to my questions above, about the applicability of movies like "Predator vs. Alien" to the Christian, I think the answer is "None of above." God, in my experience, is neither an indulgent father who gives his children anything they want, nor is he the cosmic killjoy, forcing you eat your moral vegetables.
Instead, my own experience is that over time, God changes your tastes so that you have different interests. He knows we come with many imperfections and is patient enough to help us change one or two areas at a time. At a certain point, if you let Him, He makes things like this seem like the cheap, hollow, and yes, probably pathetic productions they are, and helps you become more interested in things with are both more interesting and more healthy.
It's a bit like learning to give up (or cut down on) junk food in favor of salmon steaks, fresh vegetables, tropical fruits, and the occasional fine wine. Over time, you realize there's better fare, and begin to acquire a taste for things of substance.
I'm sorry but are you saying that God is the reason people change their tastes? Do you really believe this?
I apologise if this seems offensive but it pretty much destroys all concept of free will.
People mature because they face more responsibilities, a 15 year child would enjoy Alien vs Predetor most likely. However a single mother would most likely not enjoy this, becuase they have more important things to face then surreal hunts.
God isn't the answer to everything. Thats how he got started in the first place.
Me: Instead, my own experience is that over time, God changes your tastes so that you have different interests.
Adam: I'm sorry but are you saying that God is the reason people change their tastes? Do you really believe this?
I'm asserting that "God", and religious experience and contemplation in general, is able to change people's tastes, if one is willing.
You seem to think because I say "X can change Y" that I must be meaning "Only X can change Y" or even "All changes in Y must only be due to X." It's almost as if I had said: "Bob cooks hamburgers" and you came back and said: "Are you really saying Bob cooked every hamburger in the world?"
Is there something unclear about my writing, or are you just trying really hard to misunderstand what seems to have been a relatively straightforward statement?
I apologise if this seems offensive but it pretty much destroys all concept of free will.
Huh? It doesn't strike as offensive as much as simply wrong or illogical.
Imagine you'd eaten at McDonald's all your life -- not because you liked it, but because you'd had no choice. Ate a lot of french fries, and hot apple pies, drank a lot of Coke.
Then, imagine somebody paid for a couple years' worth of really good cooking, if you wanted it: healthy food, fresh fish, fresh, well-prepared vegetables, a variety of really cool fruit drinks, home-made pies and cakes, international foods, whatever. Imagine you decided to try that out.
Although mileage might vary, I suspect most people who tried that -- though they might get an occasional hankering for MickeyD's -- would probably find their tastes had changed. A hot apple pie or Chicken McNuggets probably wouldn't look quite as good. Given the choice, they'd probably choose something else.
And this violates free will how???
I mean, even if I give every consideration your argument, and assumed I had meant that God simply rewired everyone's tastes without asking them (a statement I'm clearly not making above), it still doesn't make a lick of sense. For example: I hate vegetables. Did I choose to hate vegetables? Of course not. I often wish I did like vegetables: Then I'd probably want to eat more things which were good for me.
Since I didn't get to choose what foods I liked in the first place, how could a change to that be any more related to free will than the first situation? Is it a "violation of free will" that we all have things about ourselves which are unchosen? Our eye color? Our body structure? Our IQ? Is our "free will" thus violated when our bodies change as we age? Or would that be more of a violation of "free will" if there was an intelligent design behind that?
Really, make some sense here.
Another problem with your argument: Free will is just that: The ability to make choices. ("Will.") It's the not the ability to be guaranteed particular results. But, like so many, you seem to be getting the two mixed up.
"Free will" doesn't mean the ability to absolutely control every aspect of one's world or the outcomes of one's wishes or intentions. If that were the case, it would be impossible to speak of, since we would have no experience of it.
Example: I can make a moral choice to decide whether or not to kill someone. That's free will. But that doesn't mean saving their life (by thwarting my evil plot) would be a violation of my ability to make choices, or "free will". The will is just that -- volition -- not a guarantee of complete control.
Except in your usage, apparently.
People mature because they face more responsibilities... a 15 year child would enjoy Alien vs Predetor most likely. However a single mother would most likely not enjoy this...
Let me see if I can get this straight: If "facing responsibilities" changes one's tastes, that's NOT a violation of one's free will. But if "God" changes one's tastes, that WOULD BE a violation of free will.
Yes, all very logical. Thank you for the lesson in clear thinking.
God isn't the answer to everything.
Err, ummm... not sure who said that he was. Apparently, what you mean is God isn't the answer to anything, since he was only suggested here as useful in one area. But perhaps that's just too hard to address directly, eh?
Better to change the topic, surely.
Even so -- to take on your argument directly (again note, it's yours, not mine): Really? Got a better answer? 42? Or, seriously: What, you look to "yourself" as the ultimate authority? Forgive me for not being impressed: You seem to think your own tastes were or are solely a matter of free will!
You see, nonsense like this is what put me off of atheism in the first place. I initially thought atheists must know something: after all, they seemed arrogant, so they must have had something going for them, logically or proof-wise. Imagine my shock at finding it was frequestly mere attitude layered upon some of the most illogical thinking I'd encountered to date.
But, when you're only allowed to come to one conclusion, logic must often be sacrified. I wasn't similarly constrained. I was looking at becoming an atheist. I rejected it because it was illogical, not because I couldn't. I would have become one in a second if I thought it was true.
As I've said elsewhere, given the illogical things so many atheists say -- cognitive mistakes I suspect they would never make if the topic weren't about God -- I gradually came to be persuaded there was often some other emotional or ego-related need driving the belief.
Free will isn't whether one likes or dislikes vegtables, free will is disliking the veggies and still eating them, or really enjoying the junk food, but abstaining from it. Free will has nothing to do with things like what you like or dislike, you don't choose those, as Tim said, what you do choose is how you respond to those likes and dislikes.
Excellent post! And by the way, thank you for nailing down that quality about most atheists that I just could never find words to express. So many of them come off like snuff-dipping elitest Louis XIV courtiers from a bad b-movie, looking down their noses at the illiterate peasantry.
The comment rules will apply. Please post only once.
« Oncoming Dirty Tricks? |
Front Page |
Page Two
| True Conservatives: Version 1 »
|
I'm sorry but are you saying that God is the reason people change their tastes? Do you really believe this?
I apologise if this seems offensive but it pretty much destroys all concept of free will.
People mature because they face more responsibilities, a 15 year child would enjoy Alien vs Predetor most likely. However a single mother would most likely not enjoy this, becuase they have more important things to face then surreal hunts.
God isn't the answer to everything. Thats how he got started in the first place.
Posted by: Adam Greer on April 24, 2005 04:38 AM